Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Not always about you: Prioritizing community needs when developing endangered language technology

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2204.05541 v1 pith:SLLOZ3QK submitted 2022-04-12 cs.CL

Not always about you: Prioritizing community needs when developing endangered language technology

classification cs.CL
keywords languagelanguagesspeakerscommunityendangeredlackresourcestechnology
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Languages are classified as low-resource when they lack the quantity of data necessary for training statistical and machine learning tools and models. Causes of resource scarcity vary but can include poor access to technology for developing these resources, a relatively small population of speakers, or a lack of urgency for collecting such resources in bilingual populations where the second language is high-resource. As a result, the languages described as low-resource in the literature are as different as Finnish on the one hand, with millions of speakers using it in every imaginable domain, and Seneca, with only a small-handful of fluent speakers using the language primarily in a restricted domain. While issues stemming from the lack of resources necessary to train models unite this disparate group of languages, many other issues cut across the divide between widely-spoken low resource languages and endangered languages. In this position paper, we discuss the unique technological, cultural, practical, and ethical challenges that researchers and indigenous speech community members face when working together to develop language technology to support endangered language documentation and revitalization. We report the perspectives of language teachers, Master Speakers and elders from indigenous communities, as well as the point of view of academics. We describe an ongoing fruitful collaboration and make recommendations for future partnerships between academic researchers and language community stakeholders.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.