|
|
|
|
|
|
by Mediterraneo10
2927 days ago
|
|
|
Concern over the "intellectual property" of indigenous people within linguistics is mainly a North American thing, and the bureaucracy put in place to ensure that you follow all these guidelines is astounding. Unfortunately, North American academics have been pushing for these ethics rules to extend to all parts of the globe, even in places where the relationship between foreign scholars and local people is not the same as for parts of native North America. I have done linguistics fieldwork among some indigenous people elsewhere in the world under a European university. There was no requirement to appear before an ethics board before or after. There was no requirement to credit my native informants at all costs – considering that the country in question was rather repressive of these minority peoples, my informants generally did not want it to be publicly known that they were interacting with foreigners. Once I had the data, it was straightforward to publish it. I would hate to see that ease in my particular subfield disappear because of historical-political disputes elsewhere. |
|
|
Not that you're making an argument here against native secrecy and privacy traditions being written into law, but you seem to be saying that you don't feel any obligation to follow them.