Dell Hymes - Survivors and Renewers

7/27/2019 Dell Hymes - Survivors and Renewers

1/14

SURVIVORS AND RENEWERSDell Hymes

I am honored that the editors of Folklore Forum foun d stimulation forthis issue in my 1974 address, and glad to contribute to it.Th e address was a quarter-century ago, but I would not much changewhat I said then about a dialectic between tradition and situa tion, mediatedby re-creation, and spurred by a human need to traditionalize. Work such asthat in Feintuch (19 95) deepens such thoughts. I am struck particularly bythe felicity of Glassie's opening dictum, "tradition is the creation of the futureou t of the past," or, a s he rephrases it at the end , "tradition is the means forderiving the future from the past" (Glassie 1995:393,409).' I want to discussan exam ple of that, if one can rephrase yet further: "tradition offers meansfor facin g the future, having faced the past."

Sun's Nature

I have in mind the myth w ith which my 1974 address ended, "Sun'sNature" (to be exac t about the second word), told to Franz B oas more than acentury ago by Charles Cultee, the only person, so far as is known, thencapable of telling myths in Kathlamet Chinook, or indeed, its sister language,Chinook proper.W hat Cultee told Bo as is original, strikingly so. There is nothing elselike it known from the region. There is much that can no lon ger be know n,of course. Still, from what is known, this myth stands apart.Tho se who have read or heard the myth realize it is an account of thedestruction of the towns pertaining to a chief, destruction brought on by hisown hybris. Liv ing near the coast, he can not s ee the sun rise , and decides togo east toward it, despite cautioning from his wife. After days of travel,beyond an y people, he comes to a large house and a young girl. The house isfilled with wealth on either side. The girl explains that when she is ready tomarry (men arche), her mother w ill give the wealth away. He stays, and thereis a characteristic Chinookan scene for the union of a hero and a womanassociated with spiritual power. Each morning the mother (the Sun) goesout early (to carry the sun across the sky); each evening she returns withvarious kinds of wealth. Th e scene ends, "Every day like this."


2/14

Folklore Forum 3 1 :1 (2000) Dell Hymes

The chief becomes homesick (natural enough, in native terms). Themo ther offers him every kind of human goods, but he refuses. H e wants theshining thing she carries each day. W hen he looks at it, his eyes close, but h ewants only that. His wife tells him she will never give it to anyone, butfinally she does. One cannot forever refuse a relative. B ut sh e warns him,and gives him an axe as well.

H e com es to each town of his people in turn. Each time what he carriessays, "We two shall strike your town," he loses consciousness; when herecovers, there is blood, he has destroyed his people. Eac h time he tries torid himself of what he carries and cannot. He reaches his own town, he triesto stop, but ~ a n n o t . ~hen he recovers, the old woman is there.

He looked back.Now she is standing near him, that old wom an."You,"

she told him ,"You.

"In vain I try t o love you.In vain I try to love your relativ es."Why do you weep?It is you w ho choose.

Now you carried that 'blanket' of mine."Now she took it,she lifted off what he had taken.Now she left him,she went home.H e stayed there,

he went a little distance.The re he built a house,

a small house.If you know the history of the Pacific Northwest, you know no

European ship crossed the bar of the Colum bia river until 1792, and that atthe time Chinookan-speaking people dominated either side of the river'smouth. They were wealthy through local resources and trade, and sociallystratified, with slaves. A half-century later few were left. Most had diedthrough introduced diseases (cf. Boyd 1994; Rubin 1999, ch. 23, "Cole SikWaum Sik" August 1830).


3/14

SURVIVORS AND RENEWERS 5

"Sun's Nature" is a way of thinking that experience. Of cou rse Cult eewa s quite awa re of what we would consider history-steady encr oach me ntof whites a s traders and missionaries and settlers and eventually soldiers,new go ods, new weapons, another language, forced removal from the river.No ne of this appears in the myth. The myth addresses the nature of a pow erundersto od to susta in the world, and which in the myth, still does.'

At the very end, indeed, the myth changes form in expressing this.After a brief introdu ction, everything has been told in terms of relations ofthree and five (and in catalogs, ten). But after the old w om an's final speechto the chief, each o f the two has just a pair of verses, four in all. Four-partrelations in fact hav e been discovered within several western Native Americannarratives as a foregrounding of a woman or women, a s actors or as premise(see Hym es 1999).

Creativity of survivorsAgain and again, in coming to know better some of the tellings in the

region by survivors, I come to a sense of a mind w orking within the frameworkof a tradition, still wrestling with the nature of figures in the myths and relationsamong them. Thereby in their tellings carrying tradition further. Exercising akind of creativity inherent in the tradition, I would argue.

The traditions themselves, after all, were not closed, but open. Inprinciple the way things were w as explained in stories. One migh t not haveheard a story explaining this creature or that landscape or so me kind of humanconduct such as men marrying women and lying to them (see the Maidumyth in Hymes 1999), but someone else might have. And the stories oneknew could be extended or linked in good faith. No on e would have thoughtof themself as an "author." On e might think of oneself as com ing tounderstand m ore deeply.

This is not to say that there is nothing at all from which the mythCult ee told may have com e. There is a recurrent plot in the region in w hicha young man reaches a house, finds a young woman, and marries her, orwishes t o marry her, but has to overcome a hostile father or father-in-law.An d in fact suc h a story has com e to light upriver from am ong the W ishram,Chinookan speakers across f rom The Dal les , Oregon , a source fo rtransformation that Cultee could have known (Trafzer 1998 :44-46 , Hines1998:183-85).41f not this version, then so me other along the river seemslikely to have been a starting point for C ~ l t e e . ~


4/14


Biblical excursus

I am not suggesting that Cultee was the first Kathlamet speaker torevise a story, or to imagine a story ade quate to experience with a sense ofcontinuing a tradition. I assume that communities are like that, that theyalways have mem bers w ho are creative in that way. There is indeed a parallelclose to hand, on e whose refashionings of narratives in good faith are wellknown and continue to be studied. I am th nk in g, of course, of the recreationsove r the centuries of the Jewish and Christian traditions. (I don't discussIslamic and East and South Asian traditions because I barely know them).So m e associate these traditions of our own society with pedan tryand li teralism, dogma and inquisit ion. And of course there is much inh is to ry to g ive them a bad name. As Nat ive Amer icans wel l knew,religious pow er can be dangerous.

Yet both in Native American com munities and for many me mb ers ofJew ish and Christian comm unities, the point of having stories was for thosewho encounter them to make them their own. Therein, of course, is acontinuing sou rce of change. Let m e quote a study of the Dutch theologian,Edw ard Schillebeeckx:

telling stories properly also involved being caught up i n them .. .inthe end what we are concerned with is the fusing of two stories,the story of the gospel tradition of faith and the story of our ownpersonal and communal life. ... Tradition and its interpretation cantherefore be summed up in another of Schillebeeckx's formidablephrases, "the tradition of faith which discloses meaning withliberating force." (Bowden 1983: 134-35)N o rote learning there.

O r com pare a feminist scholar, concerned to avoid the faults of othe rfeminist scholars:

. .. heir ahistorical examination of the Bible, and their homogenizationof its diversity. My readings call for a consideration of the heterogeneticyof the Hebrew canon, for an appreciation of the variety of socio-ideologicalhorizons evident in this composite text. (Pardes 1992:3)The general truth is that these traditions have been questioned and

reconfigured from as early as we know them . To give two examples:1) The re are two accounts of the origin of man and woman in Ge nesis,

on e simu ltaneo us (1:27), one successive (2:21-24), acco mpa nied outsidethe canon by a story of Adam's first wife, Lilith.6


5/14


2) In Ex odu s 20:24 the Lord tells Moses "in every place where I causemy name to be remembered I will come to you and bless you," but inDeuteronom y 12: 1 -4 , M oses first says that the Lord told them to demolishall the places where the nations they are about to dispossess served theirgod s; then (125-1 4) the Israelites are told "you shall seek the place that theLord yo ur God will choose" (5) and that "only a t the place that the Lord w illchoo se in on e of your tribes-there you shall offer your burnt offerin gs an dthere you sha ll d o everything I command you."'

The re is much literature on these matters, and I can not claim morethan limited acquaintance with it. But I am draw n to it as I try t o imagine theinterpretative comm unities from which Cultee or other survivors cam e. Ofcourse the strength of centers of authority and regulation was different. Incomm unities of the Pacific N orthwest eac h family might have recognized adifferent center. De nis Demert, a Tlingit educator, once remarked that theTlingit knew there were different local versons of certain historical events,but that was not a problem until one version was written down, and as aresult taken as the true one.

Yet forces for diversity have been strong in both. It is well known that theseveral canons, Jewish and Christian, have existed within a large field of otherworks also representing part of what some thought should be authoritative.

If one recognizes "revisionism" (cf. Brisman 1998) and "interpretation"(Ku gel and Greer 1986 ; Ku gel 1997 ) as "creativity," then such creativ itywas in fac t an ordinary feature of both kinds of comm unity. All had storiesconsidered central to how they came to be as they are, and to what mightbecome of them, stories often instructive, sometimes amusing (NativeAm ericans se em to have a considerable edg e there), but in any cas e takenfor granted a s sources of orientation in the world. All experie nced a need forrenewal and reconciliation between stories and experience.

When Boas came to Bay Center, Washington, and met with Cultee,the only locus of myths in Kathlamet at the mom ent may have been in Cultee 'shead. B ut certainly Cultee did not think of himself as author or source ofany, but as som eon e for whom the enabling event of performance was stillpotentially possible, and for whom tradition was surely the enabling reference(to use term s of reference from Foley 1992). Despite his apparent day-to-day isolation, Cultee still was an embodiment of what G lassie has said folkloreseeks to capture: "the relation of individual will to collective process"(1994:241); in sum, a nexus of the need to interpret and recreate a part ofsomething not one's own.


6/14


I would like to suggest three terms for what would occu r when na rratorslike those in the Northwest, like those who transmitted Biblical tradition,wrestled w ith figures and events in thinking about and co nveying a narrative.Th ese are not learned or stylish term s, but terms akin to what Indian narratorsthemselves migh t have used:a) could have been

b) should have beenc) must h ave been

a) Could have been, of course, is part of bringing a story to life orclose to hom e by reimagining its details, as much for s om e historians (A lter1995:71 et passim) as for folk narrators. Indeed, when Hiram Smith tells"The N ews abou t Coyote," having just heard Louis Simpso n's telling astaken dow n by Sap ir a half-century before, there is no disagree me nt betweenthe two as to what happened, and where: Coyote did perform fellatio onhimself on the Washington side of the Columbia across from M osier. Th edifference is in how it happened.

Sim pson tells it as straightforward fact. Smith tells it with exten uatingcircumstances-the sun was hot, he was tired, he sat down, sitting, he becam earoused, then .... The two openings correlate with the two endings. ForSimpso n, Coyote is refused food by people, not once but twice. Each timethey say what he had done. For Smith, Coyote, hoping to keep the newsfrom getting out, first crea tes the rimrock that runs down to the river there,but can't prevent the news from getting out. Smith says that wherever hegoes, Coyote hears the people saying the news, but quotes what they sayonly once. Sim pson ends with Coyote adm itting, "Truly now I am known."Sm ith ends with Coy ote going off and leaving, a conventional start of a newadventure (see Hymes 1996 for more).Reading a recent title by two leaders in current questing for Jesus,Borg and W right (1998), both of whom I respect, I cannot help thinking of aparallel for a study I might w rite: The Meaning of Coyote: Two Visions, byHiram Smith and Louis Simpson.

The differences match other differences in treatment of Coyote'scharacter by the two m en (see Hym es 1996). Perhaps "should h ave been"and "must have been" flow together here with "could have been." But thestarting point would seem to be something like this: given that it did happen(everyone know s the story), how did it happen? There is room for creativityin answering that--creativity grounded in how on e has com e to conceivethat actor, what possibilities would be in character?

b) Should have been especially comes to mind when o ne finds a narratorwrestling with outcome. The Kathlamet Salmon myth has spring salmon,com ing up river, end ure insult from the plants alon g the river. "Without us,


7/14


your peop le wou ld have died" (in winter). Telling the myth a second tim e toBo as a few years later, Cultee revised both form and end ing s o that that thecomplem entary ascendancy in winter of the female domain (plants insteadof fish) is overcome forever (Hymes 1985).

Telling about the arrival of foods in spring to Melville Jacobs, VictoriaHow ard (in Clackamas) has some of the sam e formulaic words as Cultee, butturns a journey step by step upriver into appearance, one after the other, ofplants and others. The tone is pedagogic entirely. There is an announcer whoexplains what each new thlng is named and food for, probably a fish person(Jacobs reports), but as the end of the series approaches, Mrs. H oward breaksoff. She has been treating each kind of food in sets of three. Now she is at theend of fish, and having treated sturgeon, has only salmon left as the culmination.But how can salmon be both announcer and announced? She breaks off, andsays that her grandm other said that it was Coyote who provided for all the thingsgood to eat. That seems "should have been" for sure. Salmon (a male hero parexcellence) as ordainer of foods is dismissed for good.

c) Must have been is how I place Victoria Howard's telling of "Sealand her younger brother lived there," the first of her myths I interpretedthoroughly, and one which I still perform (Hym es 1 968, 1977, 1981 ). I ammoved by th e daughter, the expressive heart of the telling. Th e telling has itsorigin in a story of revenge. On the Pacific Coast various versions are know nof a plot in which a man (or two men) travel to another place to take revengeon its headman. To gain access, he disguises himself as a woman of theman's house. He m ay be alm ost discovered several times. At night, when h eclim bs up to the man 's bed (still disguised as his wife), a young child callsout that he has a penis (or a knife), but is shushed. Th e "wife" goes un caught,kills the man d uring the night, and escapes. All this to the satisfaction of theaudie nce, presumably, the story having been told from the stand point of theone w ho seeks revenge.

Am ong eastern Chinookans a version came to be know n in which thechild is a girl on w hose face blood drips during the night. Victoria How ardtold Melville Jacobs a version in which the entire story is told from thestandpoint of that girl. She notices something odd about the "woman" whocom es to her uncle and tries to warn, but is shushed. Wh en at night som ethingdrips on her face, she tells her mother, but is told to shu sh. Whe n she hearssomething dripping, she tells her mother, and is told again to shush . She g etsup, raises a torch, and sees her uncle dead. S he reproaches her mother. Hermo ther begins a form al lament. Again the girl reproaches and weeps. U ntilnow the word "to say" has been transitive. Now the word "to say" isintransitive. Th e two w omen no longer address each other.


8/14


In his useful accoun t of canonical interpretation (takin g the Bible as awhole), Sanders uses the term dynamic analogy for "re-presenting thetradition, consciously identifying with the character or characters in thetradition most representative of the new hearers or readers" (1984:70-71).

Surely this is how we co me to have what M rs. Howard sa id. Th e "wife"and the husband slain in revenge are little more than props. All the dialogueis between the tw o wom en. And it is the girl who sp eaks last, to the audienc e,i f not to her mother, in the place Chinookan myths provide for f inalevaluations . To account for the telling one must infer that some one, perha psthe mother-in-law from whom she heard the story, perhaps Mrs. Howard,aske d herself, what was it like for that child?

Th e three attitudes may be d if ic ul t to distinguish, m ay overlap. Allthree may come together in Cultee's envisioning of the destruction of hispeople, transforming a plot with the Sun as hostile father-in-law to be ableto say so. To dramatize what might have been, then what became, was tokeep the people still heroes of their own story, though tragic heroes, br oughtlow by hybris of one of their own. It is hard to understand the existence ofthe story excep t in such terms. It is hard to accou nt for it except a s a creativeact, true to the tradition, new to the tr a d i t i ~ n . ~What I suggest is that the three attitudes make sense of continuingrecreatio n and creativity conducted in good faith. Recognition of narrative sas traditionally organized throughout (durchcomponiert),sometimes in tellingdetails, gives further confidence. Such texts, though taken down at or nearthe end of a tradition, are not merely remembered, much less haltingly so.Louis Simpson's "The Deserted Boy," for example, as told to Sapir, in itsmiddle act is a bravura display of identification with the guardian-spirit questthat it in effect becomes (see Hymes 1994).In these cases, then, we are dealing with minds w hich tradition continuedto inhabit, for whom a tradition continued to be "good to think." They w eresustained in this by command of a tradition's technical resources of form.

Oral, Aural, and AnalH ow can this be, som e might seem to say. Karl K roeber has recently

written, "Because the Trickster story is oral, it exists solely in terms of itsaffects [sic] on a participating audience" (1998:233). Others have depreciatedtexts which exist only in writing in other ways. I hope to have shown, inrelation to Cultee's "Sun's Nature" and other texts, that such an attitudedism isses verbal art of value. It turns its back on materials of im portan ce tothose whose heritage they are. And it ignores that analysis of the form ofsuch texts is possible, and can "liberate" them. (On this, see the final chapter


9/14

SURVIVORS AND RENEWERS 1 1

of Chappell and B ringhurst (forthcoming)). Wh ether or not Cultee told the"Sun's Nature" to anyone before telling it to Boas, it would be ludicrous tosuppose that until then it did not exist, being only in his mind . An d did notexist in terms of its effect on Cultee h i m ~ e l f . ~

If we are to adequately respect and understand such narratives, wemust think in terms of thoughtful, motivated minds, seeking narrativeadequate to their experience, surviving and renewing.

My turning away here from speech events may seem surprising, givenmy effort to develop ethnography of speaking. Texts, I know, force m e to it. Andrespect. Again and again people whom some whites would have seen only asimpoverished and uneducated, have been found to be creative and articulate. Tohave rich minds, minds both retaining stories and continuing to think them.

To say that stories exixt only in performance is to say that betweenperformances narrators do not think. That they are prisoners of presence of anaudience. That they go about in their daily lives, encountering nothing that makesthem rem ember a story. Or think of how a story might or ought to have gone.That the stories they know never pose them problems, from perceivedincompleteness to contradictions, with one another or with their own experience.That in short, they have very limited minds. We should be embarrassed todenigrate them so. To do s o seems to me intellectually constipated.

The s am e is true of views that only what can be heard (and perhapsseen) through recordings is worth attention. All this adds a final coup degrace to the destruction of tradition through disease , disrup tion, and war.Moreover, as we com e to understand more clearly that the stories arenot prose, not paragrap hs, but lines, organizations of lines, we can recapturesomething of the actual artistry and creativity of the originals (cf. Hymes1994, 1998a, b, 1999; Bringhurst 1999), and on occasion, given respect andunderstanding, sp eak them again.Astar t has been mad e, but only a start. We are not yet able, for exam ple,to speak with confidence about the perspective and style of any one narrator,groun ding wh at is said in terms of that narrator's own lang uage, and thekinds of organization we can assume to be present. No r can w e com pare andcontrast the styles of different narrators, and different traditions, in such away. That can only be done when all of a body of narratives has been ana lyzedethnopoetically. Eve n if materials are limited, as for many traditions, thereis much that can be learned.


10/14

Folklore Forum 31 1 (2000) Dell Hymes

Herder, Chom sky and othersW hat can be learned, indeed, speaks to an old tradition of our ow n,

associated with such nam es as Herder. I t is a tradit ion which sees languag esan d cultures a s at least in part a result of creativity on the part of those w hoshare them. Any one w ho has taken delight in the particulars and patterns ofano ther language will have a sen se of this.

A dom inant force in contem porary study of language an d min d, to besure, dismisses such delight:

The primary one [task at hand] is to show that the apparentrichness and diversity of linguistic phenomena is illusory andepiphenomenal, the result of interaction of fixed principles underslightly varying cond itions. (Chomsky 1995:8)A different view w ould w elcome e stablishm ent of fixed principles in

the organization of verbal art (such as may prove true in ethnopoetics), butsee such principles, not as an en d in them selves, but as an aid in discoveringrichness and diversity. Those of us who have such a view welcome suchevidence of community and personal creativity. I happen to be reading abook that delves deeply into what can stil l be seen of the App alachian worldthe Ch erok ee once knew. One part recounts the return of peregrine falcons.Let me end with two quotations, taking them as analogous to narrativeswhose form we d o not yet know:

when I stop here, to savor an old edge of the Cherokee country, I watchthe sky bordered by this table mountain pine and replay the flight of falconsin my mind as 1know i t to be,a sight I could not have imagined if I had notseen it, no more than I could haveimagined red wolves or a rock-lovingpine that needed fire. (Camuto 1997:3 18)

Earlier, watching birds but recently released:After they learn to hitch rides of m idday thermals, which takethem to new heights and load their wings with possibilities thevultures and ravens cannot imagine, they begin to exercise thefreedom of their wildness and create a fabulous order in the air noone would have imagined without them. (315)


11/14

SURVIVORS AN D RENEWERS

Notes

1 I broached some of the thoughts in this essay in a letter to Glassie (9January 1996).2 I give the rest of the myth in its poetic form , as lines and groups of lines, so

as to be ab le to com ment o n form later.3 In the 1970s the typographer and poet Charles Bigelow and I talked withHiram Sm ith, one of the last fluent speake rs of Wasco Ch inook, about an account he

told us of the demise of real Indian doc tors (with spirit power). The powers they hadgathered at the coast and held a contest as to which was strongest, and the strongestkilled off the others. Chuck m entioned such factors as white domination, missionaries,com pulsory schoo ling, and the like. Hiram acknowledged them . But there was alsoan account in terms of native forces alone.4 Both Trafze r and Hines reproduce a story told on June 7, 1926 to L ucullus

McW horter by O wl Ch ild, and likely learned by him from his wife. At least he sayshe doesn't know know the details of the ending and will ask her. (See notes in eachbook ). On e does not have to accept every interpretation offered by LC vi-Strauss torealize that his principle of transformational relationships, an d hi s u n p a ra ll e le dscouring of the literature of New World mythology, are lasting con tributions.

5 Note that Chinookans on the eastern side of the Cascades did not suffernearly a s much from introduced disease as those to the west.6 See Graves and Patai (1966), ch. 10, "Adam's Helpmeets."

7 I quote the New Revised S tandard Version from The HarperCollins StudyBible (M eeks et al., 1989). This anticipation of Jerusa lem is an exam ple of revisionin terms of "what should be" ((b) above).8 In his valuable account of dynam ics of canonical interpretation (the Biblebeing taken as a whole) Sanders (1986:70) distinguishes two basic hermeneutic

axioms, constitutive and prophetic. The first emphasizes God saving and com fortinghis people, the second God judging them. Certainly "Sun's Nature" is prophetic,warning and making possible (the axe) destruction. The final verses in which theSun is shown as still continuing and in charge, seem constitutive, an image of anultimate order not destroyed.

9 Let me note that Kroeber's book is valuable, and I am glad to find that hehas include d a study of my ow n. As to imagination as distinct from perform ance , letme quote the stage director Herbert Blau, in the course of a marvelously rich accountof the difficulty of encomp assing King Le ar:


12/14

Folklore F o r m 31 1 (2000) Dell Hymes

In the years I have sp ent in the theater (n early forty) I directed a lot ofplays, but have alw ays had a tendency to believe that a staging in themind (like that by Edgar on the cliffs of Dover) can exceed by faranythin g realizable on stage, which is why 1 ell my students--c ontraryto esta blishe d pedag ogy in dram atic literature-that, no , it is notnecessary to go to the theatre to really se e the play; that, in fact, seeinga performance there, even if it is brilliantly acted, especially if it isbrilliantly acted (however you determine that), often gets in the wayof imagining it for yourself, though to do so w ith Lear ...will if you seeit cut to the brain. (19 98:269 )

References CitedAlter, Robert. 1995. Imagining History in the Bible. In History and Histories with

the Human Sciences, eds. Ralph Cohen and Michael S. Roth, pp. 53-72.Charlo ttesville: University Press of Virginia.Blau, He rbert. 1998. "Set Me Where You Stand": R evising the Abyss. New Literary

Histon, 29(2):247-72.Boas, Franz. 1901. Kathlamet Texts. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 26.Washington, D. C.: Srnithsonian Institution.. 1894. Chinook Texts. Bureau ofA me rican Ethnology, Bulletin 20. Washington,D.C.: Smithsonian Institution.Borg, Marcus J. and N. T. Wright. 1998. The Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions. SanFrancisco: HarperSan Francisco. (Cf. review by William Brosend, Christian

Century 116(11) (April 7, 1999):394-95).Boyd, Robert. 1994. The Pacific Northwest Measles Epidemic of 1847-1 848. Oregon

Historical Quarterly 95:6-47.Bringhurst; Robert. 1999. A Story as Sharp as a Knife: The Classical Haida

Mythtellers and T heir World. Vancouver and Toronto: Dou glas & McIntyre.Brism an, Leslie. 1998 . Biblical Revisionism . New Literary H istory 29(2):247-72.Camuto, Christopher. 1997. Anothe r Co untry: Journeying toward the Chero kee

Mountains. New York: Henry Holt.


13/14

SURVIVORS AN D RENEWERS 15

Chappell, Warren and Robert Bringhurst. (forthcoming). A Short History of rhePrinted Word.

Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, Massachusetts andLondon: Massachusetts Institute of technology Press.

Feintuch, Burt, ed. 1995. Common Ground: Keywords for the Study of ExpressiveCulture, a spec ial issue of the Journal ofAmerica11 Folklore 108 (430).Foley, John Miles. 1992. Word-Power, Performance, and Tradition. Journal of

American Folklore 105 (417):275-301.Glass ie, Henry. 1995. Tradition . Journal of American Folklore 108:395-412. 1994. On Identity. Journal ofAmerican Folklore 107 (424):238-41.Graves, Robert and Raphael Patai. 196 6. Hebrew Myths: The Book of Genesis. New

York: McGraw-Hill.

Hines, Donald M. 1998. Where the River Roared: The Wishom Tales. Issaquah,Washington: Great Eagle Publishing Co.Hym es, Dell. 1999. Variation and Narrative Competence. Paper presented at Folklore

Fellows S umm er School, Turku, August 1999.. 1998,. Reading Takelma Texts: Frances Johnson's "C oyo te and Frog."Bloomington, Indiana: Trickster Press.. 1998b. Wh en is Oral Narrative Poetry? Generative Form and its PragmaticConditions. Pragmatics 8(4):475-500.. 1996. Coy ote, the thinking (wo)man's trickster. In Monsters, T ricksters, andSacred Cows. Animal Tales and American Identities (New World Studies),ed. A. James Arnold, pp. 108-37. Charlottesville: U niversity of Virginia Press.. 1994. Ethno poetics, oral form ulaic theory, and editing texts. Oral Tradition9(2):330-70.. 1986. A discourse contradiction in Clackam as Chinook. V ictoria How ard's"Coyote made the land good." In 21st International Conference of Salish

and Neighboring Languages (Aug ust 14-16, 1986, Seattle, Washing ton),ed.Eug ene Hunn, pp. 147-213. Seattle: University of Washington, Dept. ofAnthropology.


14/14

Folklore F o r m 3 1 1 (2000) Dell Hymes

. 1985. Language, memory, and selective performance: Cultee's "Salmon'smyth" as twice told to Boas. Journal ofAmerican Folklore 98:391-434.

. 1981. "I n Vain I Tried to Tell You:" Essays in Native Am erican E thnopoetics.Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. (see pp. 274-308, 309-41).

. 1977 . Discovering O ral Performance and M easured Verse in American IndianNarrative. New Literary History 7:43 1-57.

. 1975. Folklore's Nature and the Sun's My th. Journal ofAmericatz Folklore88:345-69.

, 1 9 6 8 . he "wife" who goes out like a man . Rein te rp re ta tion of a C lackamasChinook myth. Social Science InformatiodStudies in Semiotics 7(30): 173-99. (Cf. Clackam as text in 19 77. Both reprinted in 1981).Jacobs, M elville. 1 958. Clackam as Chinook texts. Part 1. (Indiana UniversityResearch Center in Anthropology, Folklore, and Linguistics, Publication 8) .International Journal of American Linguistics 24(1), Part 2. Bloomington,Indiana.. 1959. Clackamas Chinook texts. Part 2. (Indiana University Research C enterin Anthropology, Folklore, and Linguistics, Publication 11). InternationalJourtzal of American Linguistics 24(1), Part 2. Bloom ington, Indiana.Kroeber, Karl. 1998. Artistry in Native American Myths. Lincoln: University ofNebraska Press.Kugel, James L. 1997. The Bible As It Was. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Kugel, James L. and Rowan A. Greer. 1986. Early Biblical Interpretation.Philadelphia: Westminster Press.Meek s, Wayne A., general ed . 1987. The HarperCollins Study Bible. London: HarperCollins Publishers.Pardes, Ilana. 1992. Countertraditions in the B ible: A Feminist Approach. Cambridge:Harvard University Press.Sanders, James A. 1984. Canon and Co mm unity: A Guide to Canonical Criticism.Philadelphia: Fortress Press.Trafzer, Clifford E., ed. 1998. Grandmother, Grandfather, and Old W olf: TarnanwitKu Sukat and Traditional Native American Narrative from the Columbia

Plateau. Lansing: Michigan State University Press.

Dell Hymes - Survivors and Renewers

Documents

Transcript of Dell Hymes - Survivors and Renewers