AC57 Schedule – Friday, October 17

Event Time: 9:00 a.m.–9:30 a.m.

Presenters: TBA

Event Time: 9:30–10:30 a.m.

Presenter:

• Dr. Bernard Perley

Abstract:

Species suicide. It will not happen overnight but the prospect of human extinction should not be dismissed.  In this extinction scenario, all human knowledge will exist only in the artifacts and detritus we leave behind. We have been witnessing the first stage of human extinction though the acceleration of Indigenous language silence around the globe. Documenting millennia of accrued knowledges and experiences to save what’s left before it’s gone has created countless artifacts of silent and dismembered worlds. But documentation as preservation can only do so much.  Instead, documentation as a catalyst for worldmaking offers strategies for emergent vitalities for language, landscape, and community.  Rather than preserve the past for the present, shifting our stance toward the future invites opportunities for bringing diverse knowledge systems and ways of being-in-the-world together.  In doing so, mutually respectful and empowering coalescences can contribute to ensuring species survival.  As a modest example, I share my current (in progress) cartographic imaginarium as my unauthorized worldmaking catalyst for Wolastokwi futures.

Event Time: 10:45–11:30 a.m.

Presenters: 

• M. Rice
• K. Anderson
• B. Alexander
• D. Dumphy
• C. Omand
• H. Souter, Moderator

Event Time: 11:30 a.m.–12:00 p.m.

Presenters: 

• Richard Littlebear
• Wayne Leman
• Sarah Murray

Event Time: 12:00 p.m.–12:30 p.m.

Presenters

• Antti Arppe
• Inge Genee
• Alexandra Smith: Oki, kitsiiksimatsimmohpoaawa. Niistowakao'ka Iinisskimakii. Nitsiksikaitsitapi, nimohto'too Apatohsipiikani. My Blackfoot name is Buffalo Stone Woman, I am Blackfoot and from the (northern) Piikani Nation. I recently completed my Master of Arts at Iniskim (University of Lethbridge) in August 2025. I currently work at the Peigan Board of Education Society in Piikani as the Blackfoot Curriculum Editor. I also started working at Iniskim in September as the co-instructor of the Blackfoot Language classes. I am deeply invested in the revitalization of Niitsi'powahsini (Blackfoot language) and in discovering the best ways to teach and learn the language as well.
• Conor Snoek am an anthropological linguist studying Indigenous languages of the Americas. I have worked on Plains Cree and Blackfoot, as well as Cerro Xinolatepétl, a Totonacan language spoken in Puebla State. I am interested in language histories and the evolution of meanings, as well as how languages are taught and learned.

Abstract

Niitsi’powahsini (Blackfoot) is an Algonquian language spoken by four nations within Alberta, Canada and Montana, USA, including Piikani (Brocket, AB), Kainai (Standoff, AB), Siksika (Blackfoot Nation, AB), and Aamsskaapipiikani (Blackfeet Nation, USA). The language is critically endangered, but many efforts are under way to help support, revitalize and sustain it. One gap in the available resources that can support both pedagogical and research goals is the lack of textual materials. Several Blackfoot corpora exist (Dunham 2013; Kadlec 2023; Weber 2022; Weber et al. 2023) but all of these have issues relating to accessibility and content.

This paper describes the process of curating the Blackfoot Narrative Text Corpus (BNTC) (Smith forthcoming). The BNTC is a partially linguistically analyzed corpus of Blackfoot narrative texts to support the revitalization and documentation of the language. The corpus was compiled from published Blackfoot texts. 29 texts are fully morphologically analyzed and glossed to a single list of gloss abbreviations, and 32 texts are transliterated into the modern standard orthography. After their analysis and/or transliteration the texts were integrated into the Korp corpus platform (Borin, Forsberg & Roxendal 2012). The BNTC is an open-ended, flexible, orthographically homogenous and searchable open access corpus containing more than 10,000 Blackfoot words. This corpus contributes to the broader field of Indigenous language documentation and revitalization providing a corpus of Blackfoot narrative texts with partial linguistic analysis, an accessible resource for learners, teachers and researchers of Blackfoot.

References

Borin, Lars, Markus Forsberg & Johan Roxendal. 2012. Korp - the corpus infrastructure of Språkbanken.

In Proceedings of LREC 2012, 474–478. Istanbul: ELRA.
Dunham, Joel Robert William. 2013. The Blackfoot Language Database. In Papers of the 41st

Algonquian Conference, 75–80. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Kadlec, Dominik M. 2023. A computational model of Blackfoot noun and verb morphology. Lethbridge,

AB: University of Lethbridge Master’s Thesis. https://hdl.handle.net/10133/6635.

Smith, Alexandra B. Forthcoming. Curating a corpus of Blackfoot narrative texts. Lethbridge, AB: University of Lethbridge Master’s Thesis.

Weber, Natalie. 2022. Blackfoot Words. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10. 5281/zenodo. 5774980.

Weber, Natalie, Tyler Brown, Joshua Celli, McKenzie Denham, Hailey Dykstra, Rodrigo Hernandez- Merlin, Evan Hochstein, et al. 2023. Blackfoot Words: a database of Blackfoot lexical forms. Language Resources and Evaluation 57(3). 1207–1262. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-022- 09631-2.

Event Time: 1:30–2:00 p.m.

Presenters: 

• Todd Mondor, President and Vice-Chancellor
• Pavlina Radia, Provost and Vice-President, Academic
• Chantal Fiola, Assoicate Vice-President, Indigenous Engagement
• Shelley Tulloch, Chair, Anthropology

Event Time: 2–2:30 p.m.

Presenters: Robert Shubinski

Event Time: 3–3:30 p.m.

Presenters

• Irene Appelbaum is a professor of linguistics at the University of Montana in Missoula. She received a PhD in philosophy and an MA in linguistics from the University of Chicago. Her research focuses on Ktunaxa language documentation and linguistics.

Abstract

Ktunaxa, like Algonquian languages, exhibits obviation. A question arising for languages exhibiting obviation is what its syntactic domain is - that is, what is the domain within which two NPs cannot both be proximate. It seems to be true for all languages exhibiting obviation that possessed nouns are obligatorily obviative and that the arguments of a transitive verb cannot both be proximate. But beyond these two domains, languages seem to differ. For example, Dahlstrom has argued for Meskwaki that obligatory obviation extends to the subject, but not the object of a complement clause, and not to the subject of adjunct clauses or into a coordinate clause (Dahlstrom, ms, pp. 3-12 – 3-18). For Ktunaxa, Dryer (1998) has argued that the whole sentence is the domain of obligatory obviation. In this talk, I re-investigate the domain of obligatory obviation in Ktunaxa, examining the framework that Dahlstrom uses for Meskwaki. Using evidence from elicitations and previously published narratives (Boas 2005), I argue that the domain of obligatory obviation in Ktunaxa patterns more closely with Dahlstrom's Meskwaki than with Dryer's Ktunaxa. I show that while obligatory obviation in Ktunaxa extends to the subject and object of a complement clause, in all other sentential contexts examined, obviation is not obligatory. In addition to showing the similarity between obviation in Ktunaxa and Meskwaki, this talk highlights the importance of investigating obviation in multiple complex sentence types to gain a better understanding of how obviation functions across the Algonquian language family.

References

Boas, Franz (2005). Kutenai Tales together with texts collected by Alexander Francis Chamberlain. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Library, Digital General Collection. Originally published (1918). Bureau of American Ethnology Bull 59. D.C.

Dahlstrom, Amy. ms. Meskwaki Syntax, Chapter 3. https://lucian.uchicago.edu/blogs/adahlstrom/publications-2/selected-manuscripts/meskwaki-syntax-book/.

Dryer, Matthew. 1998. Obviation Across Clause Boundaries in Kutenai. In Studies in Native American Linguistics IX. John Kytle, Hangyoo Khym, and Supath Kookiattikoon, eds. Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics 22:2:33-51.

Event Time: 3:30–4 p.m.

Presenters

• Hope Trischuk is an emerging Settler-scholar and recent graduate from the University of British Columbia. She undertook a BA in linguistics, where her research focused on how linguistic research can support Indigenous language revitalization. In particular, she is passionate about bridging the gap between research and the educators and students who benefit from it. Over the past year, she has been honoured to work on the documentation of Border Lakes Ojibwe with consultant Nancy Jones. As part of ELF lab at UBC, she has been excited to develop a study exploring how to teach obviation to L2 speakers.

Abstract

The distinction between proximate and obviative nouns is an active area of investigation in the study of Algonquian languages. The obviation status of a noun is fluid and can change throughout a sentence or discourse (1; 3; 7). Many connections between semantics and obviation have been posited; particularly, research has previously suggested a relationship between obviation status and point of view (2; 5; 6). To investigate this relationship, my research tested the acceptability of obviative subjects and obviative agents of attitude verbs like ‘want’,‘think’, and ‘believe’. If proximate nouns are the preferred subject or agent of attitude verbs, it suggests that revealing the internal mental state of the subject or agent is associated with obviation status. Further, it may imply a connection between a noun’s obviation status and its status as the point of view referent — the character in a given clause with whom we are expected to empathize (4). Results from elicitations with Nancy Jones, a fluent speaker of Border Lakes Ojibwe, show a slight preference for proximate subjects of VAI and VTI attitude verbs, while both proximate and obviative agents were acceptable with VTAs. While these preferences are not definitive, the speaker's comments suggest an aversion to using an obviative subject when discussing said character’s internal mental state. As a meaning distinction is worked towards, the goal of this research is to bridge the gap between linguists and instructors to help learners understand the fundamental topic of obviation and consequently encourage confidence and natural fluency.

Event Time: 4:00 p.m.–4:30 p.m.

Presenters:

• Stéphane Goyette

Event Time: 4:30 p.m.–5:00 p.m.

Presenters:

• Agnes Sauvane

Event Time: 11:30–12 p.m.

Featuring: 

• Samantha Prins is a PhD candidate in Linguistics at the University of Arizona. Their training is in language revitalization and morphosyntactic theory with a focus on North American languages and linguistics. Her current work focuses on nominal morphology in Algonquian and the intersections of linguistics and community language work.

Abstract:

Algonquian languages are notable for their abundant nominal syncretisms, where suffixes realize distinct features without corresponding distinctions in form. While these languages share a core set of inflectional features (animacy, number, and obviation), language-specific syncretisms yield varying paradigm shapes across the family (Bliss & Oxford 2017). Here, I investigate the underlying organization of nominal features and how it captures this spectrum of variation.

Figure 1. Selected Algonquian nominal paradigms (adapted from Bliss & Oxford 2017)

Comparing Blackfoot, Meskwaki, and Lenape (Fig. 1), for example, syncretisms vary in both scope and complexity. Nearly all Algonquian languages have an obviation syncretism for inanimates; Blackfoot extends this to animate obviative nouns, and has an additional obviation syncretism for animate plurals. Meskwaki has a diagonal syncretism, crosscutting both number and animacy categories. Lenape’s number-animacy syncretism is even more complex, extending multidirectionally across the paradigm.

Building on prior work (Bliss & Oxford 2015, 2017), these paradigms are reexamined within a Distributed Morphology framework (Halle & Marantz 1993, 1994), where syncretisms arise from underspecification and/or impoverishment of features. Following e.g., Noyer 1998, Béjar & Hall 1999, and Nevins 2011, the role of markedness is also explored. I hypothesize that variation results from language-specific relationships among features, while recurrent patterns point to deeper facts about Algonquian as a whole.

This analysis contributes to broader discussions of syncretism in Algonquian and other languages. Beyond the theorization of inflection, paradigms, and features more generally, this work is necessarily also in conversation with community-based revitalization and maintenance efforts, where analysis can be leveraged to support grounded documentation and pedagogy.

References

Béjar, Susana & Daniel Currie Hall. 1999. Marking Markedness: The Underlying Order of Diagonal Syncretisms. In Proceedings of the 1999 Eastern States Conference on Linguistics. Cornell Linguistic Circle Publications.

Bliss, Heather, & Oxford, Will. 2015. A Microparametric Approach to Syncretisms in Nominal Inflection. In Proceedings of the 33rd West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 67–76.

Bliss, Heather & Will Oxford. 2017. Patterns of Syncretism in Nominal Paradigms: A Pan-Algonquian Perspective. In Papers of the Forty-Sixth Algonquian Conference. Michigan State University Press.

Frantz, Donald. 2017. Blackfoot Grammar. 3rd ed. University of Toronto Press.

Goddard, Ives. 1979. Delaware verbal morphology: a descriptive and comparative study. New York: Garland.

Goddard, Ives. 1994. Leonard Bloomfield’s Fox lexicon. Algonquian and Iroquoian Linguistics.

Halle, Morris & Alec Marantz. 1993. Distributed Morphology and the Pieces of Inflection. In The View from Building 20, ed. Kenneth Hale and S. Jay Keyser, 111–176.

Halle, Morris & Alec Marantz. 1994. Some Key Features of Distributed Morphology. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 21:275–288.

Nevins, Andrew. 2011. Marked Targets versus Marked Triggers and Impoverishment of the Dual. Linguistic Inquiry, 42(3):413–444.

Noyer, Rolf. 1998. Impoverishment theory and morphosyntactic markedness. In Morphology and Its Syntax, ed. Steven G. Lapointe, Diane K. Brentari, and Patrick M. Farrell, 264-285.

Event Time: 12:00 p.m.–12:30 p.m.

Presenters: 

• Will Oxford (Professor of Linguistics, University of Manitoba) studies morphology and syntax from descriptive, historical, and theoretical perspectives, often with a focus on the Algonquian languages.

Abstract:

A syncretism is an instance of neutralization in a morphological paradigm. In English, for example, regular verbs with 1sg and 3sg subjects take different inflectional suffixes in the present tense (-Ø vs. -s), but in the past tense there is a syncretism: the same suffix -ed appears either way. Some syncretisms are a quirk of a particular paradigm, but our English example holds not only for regular verbs like walk, as in (1a), but also for irregular verbs like go and be, as in (1b–c). A syncretism that holds across formally distinct morphemes in this way is called a metasyncretism (Williams 1994; Bobaljik 2001; Harley 2008).

Metasyncretisms are notable because their analysis must be neither too shallow nor too deep. The English syncretism in (1a) cannot be given a shallow analysis in which it is simply a property of the suffix -ed, since this would not explain why the same syncretism recurs across formally unrelated items such as went and was. But it also cannot be given a deep analysis in which the language’s verb inflection lacks a contrast between 1sg and 3sg altogether, since that contrast is robustly manifested in present-tense forms.

This presentation will discuss the following four patterns in Algonquian inflection, each of which poses difficulties for a morphological analysis:

Central agreement inflection does not distinguish number for obviatives, even in languages that do  make this distinction in peripheral agreement.

In TA forms with a 1pl argument and a second-person argument, most of the languages do not express the number of the second-person argument.

In some varieties of Ojibwe and Potawatomi, 1pl→2 forms are homophonous with X→2 forms.

The same morphology expresses animate obviative (singular) and inanimate plural in most of the languages.

It will be shown that each of these patterns is in fact a metasyncretism, a conclusion that disentangles these patterns from the hierarchy effects that occur elsewhere in the inflectional system and helps to point the way toward a more adequate analysis. While this research does not directly address community-identified needs, it is hoped that the distinction between syncretisms and hierarchy effects will be useful to anyone who is interested in more deeply understanding the internal logic of the morphological system, including researchers, teachers, and advanced learners.

References

Bobaljik, Jonathan David. 2001. Syncretism without paradigms: Remarks on Williams 1981, 1994. Yearbook of Morphology 2001: 53–85.

Harley, Heidi. 2008. When is a syncretism more than a syncretism? Impoverishment, metasyncretism, and underspecification. In Phi theory: Phi-features across modules and interfaces, ed. by Daniel Harbour, David Adger, and Susana Bejar, 251–294. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Williams, Edwin. 1994. Remarks on lexical knowledge. Lingua 92: 7–34.

Event Time: 3:00 p.m.–3:30 p.m.

Presenters: 

• David Costa is a tribal linguist supported by the Miami Tribe of Oklahoma to work in the Myaamia Center at Miami University (Ohio), the Miami Tribe’s research and development center, where he serves as the Program Director for the Language Research Office. The Myaamia Center is a tribally funded and directed research center embedded within a 52-year relationship between the sovereign Miami Tribe of Oklahoma and Miami University. Costa has been studying the Miami-Illinois language since 1988. Originally from the San Francisco Bay Area, he now resides in Oxford, Ohio.

Abstract

All Algonquian languages have what are traditionally called ‘verbs of being’ and ‘verbs of possession’. These are verb stems, productively derived from noun stems, which are used to express general concepts of being or becoming, and of having or possessing. ‘Verbs of being’ are usually AI stems but occasionally II stems, while ‘verbs of possession’ can be either AI stems, TA stems, or occasionally TI stems. In this talk I will discuss how verbs of being and possession are formed and used in Miami-Illinois, with some discussion (as time permits) of analogous constructions in other Algonquian languages.

Event Time: 3:30 p.m.–4:00 p.m.

Presenters:

• Jack Crabb is a recent graduate of the University of Wisconsin-Madison. His research interests include morphology, language reclamation, and sociophonetics. He is a non-Indigenous Linguist. 

Event Time: 4:00 p.m.–4:30 p.m.

Presenters:

• Lucy Thomason

Event Time: 4:30 p.m.–5:00 p.m.

Presenters:

• Jack Crabb is a recent graduate of the University of Wisconsin-Madison. His research interests include morphology, language reclamation, and sociophonetics. He is a non-Indigenous Linguist. 
• Monica Macaulay is the Ada Deer Professor of Language Sciences at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and is soon to step down as a co-editor of the Papers of the Algonquian Conference. She is a non-Indigenous researcher who has worked with the Menominee Tribe of Wisconsin for over 25 years.
• Vivian Nash is a member of the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians and a Linguistics PhD student at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
• Yolanda Pushetonequa is a fourth year PhD student in Linguistics at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and a Meskwaki tribal member. She is interested in applying linguistic theory to practice in support of language revitalization in Native communities. Her focus includes using phonology, morphology, and syntax to inform language teaching and learning.
• Gavin Redding is a 3rd year PhD student at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. His research interests include linguistic change and comparative Algonquian linguistics. He identifies as non-indigenous.

Positionality statement: Two of the authors are linguists and members of federally recognized tribes. The other three authors are non-Indigenous linguists. All are at the University of Wisconsin-Madison or (in the case of the first author), recently graduated from there.

Abstract:

This paper provides a preliminary exploration of transitive psych verbs (PVs) in a set of five central Algonquian languages. PVs are “verbs which make reference to an individual being in, or getting into a certain mental state” (Hirsch 2018:1). Data was collected from dictionaries/databases of Southwestern Ojibwe, Nishnaabemwin, Meskwaki, Plains Cree, and Menominee.

Much of the literature on PVs focuses on “alternations” (Levin 1993), especially between transitives and intransitives with PP complements. Verbs in Algonquian languages do not show these types of alternations because of the centrality of transitivity to the grammar, so we focused on the internal composition of transitive experiencer subject and experiencer object verbs.

We found great diversity of initials in the two sets of verbs, but stronger patterns in the finals. For experiencer subject verbs, the most common final by far is ‘act by thought’; e.g. kwêtawêýihtam ‘s/he yearns for something’ (Plains Cree); initial kwêtaw- ‘impatiently’. In the experiencer object set, there were two finals that predominated: (1) ‘act by speech’; e.g. zegim ‘scare, frighten, intimidate, alarm him/her (verbally)’ (Southwestern Ojibwe); initial zeg- ‘fear’; (2) ‘causative’; e.g. sa͞ekehaew ‘s/he frightens, scares him, her, it’ (Menominee); initial sa͞ekeh- ‘fright’. The latter is consistent with what’s found cross-linguistically (Croft 1993:56).

We hope that recognition of these patterns will help students learn PVs more easily and could provide language programs with an approach to word formation. Future work with fluent speakers might be able to get at more subtle distinctions among the set of verbs.

References

Croft, William. 1993. Case marking and the semantics of mental verbs. In J. Pustejovsky (Ed.), Semantics and the lexicon (pp. 55-77). Dodrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Hirsch, Nils. 2018. German Psych Verbs: Insights from a Decompositional Perspective. PhD dissertation. Humboldt University, Berlin.

Levin, Beth. 1993. English Verb Classes and Alternations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Event Time: 11:30 a.m.–12:00 p.m.

Presenters:

• Cherry Meyer
• Lior Cooper
• Kylie Rice
• Neomi Tehauno
• Iris Ruffing
• Teddy Shindo

Event Time: 12:00 p.m.–12:30 p.m.

Presenters:

• C. Kasper

Event Time: 3:00 p.m.–3:30 p.m.

Presenters

• Dr. Keith Cunningham is a historical linguist who earned his PhD in linguistics from Georgetown University in 2024. His research focuses on the phonology and reconstruction of the Nanticoke language through colonial-era documentation and comparative work across related Algonquian languages. Dr. Karelle Hall is a cultural and linguistic anthropologist who earned her PhD from Rutgers University in 2025. Her research focuses on Nanticoke and Lenape sovereignties asserted through care-based practices and relationality. Karelle and Keith are actively working on Nanticoke language revitalization including teaching community classes, publishing a children’s language book, and collaborating with Native Roots Farm Foundation to create an Indigenous plants poster in Nanticoke and Lenape.
• Karelle Hall

Abstract

Indigenous ecological knowledge is mobilized by many Indigenous communities, including our own, to assert sovereignties and relationalities with our homelands. So often we hear about binary oppositions between Indigenous knowledge and scientific research but less about successful integrations of these methodologies. In this paper we will discuss the ways in which our work weaves together knowledge of ecologies, language, history, and all the relationships formed through these connections. We will explore how language revitalization and reconstruction work that traces the etymologies of words have helped us to deepen our relationship with plant relatives that we have become disconnected from due to the lingering impacts of colonialism. The linguistic work to reconstruct lost plant names often leads to several descriptive possibilities and the final decisions are made in conversation with community members. These community members can contribute physical knowledge about the plants themselves and their uses in community, building relationships and trust between non-Indigenous academic researchers and Indigenous researchers and Indigenous community members. Our work draws together linguists, anthropologists, storytellers, biologists, ecologists, artists, and other scholars and social and cultural activists from both Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities. As we reconnect with plant relatives and relearn their names in our languages, we are learning more about the plants themselves, how they grow, the environments they grow in, and how they are cultivated and used by our ancestors. We are relearning practices of care that are embedded in our languages and within our plant relatives.

Event Time: 3:30 p.m.–4:00 p.m.

Presenters:

• Dr. Patricia Harms
• Dr. Serena Petrella
• Gerald Neufeld

Event Time: 4:00 p.m.–5:00 p.m.

Presenters:

• Bri Alexander (Shawnee Tribe, Cherokee Nation) is a Ph.D. candidate in Linguistic Anthropology at the City University of New York, Graduate Center, and has an M.A. in Native American Linguistics from the University of Arizona. Her dissertation research, funded by the Wenner-Gren Foundation and Spencer Foundation, reimagines Shawnee land and language reclamation projects in Shawnee terms: as cycles of ceremonial renewal and relationality. She has also been developing language curriculum for both her tribal Nations for almost a decade. Outside of language activism, she enjoys beadworking, communing with plant kin, trying new food, and visiting with community.

Abstract:

This talking circle will ask participants to think about how their communities would define reciprocal and transitive relationships and responsibilities, particularly within their language movements and as revealed by our languages. In my language, there is an affix that denotes reciprocity and a prefix-suffix combination that denotes transitivity. Our language structure reveals that reciprocal and transitive relationships are different; the first is a relationship where all parties are working together simultaneously towards the same goal(s), whereas the latter is a relationship where each party is acting individually on or towards the other party and towards the same or different goal(s). In my context, defining these relationships is important as some language workers (e.g., community members) are naturally reciprocal while others (e.g., non-Native linguists) might be transitive. Knowing the differences can help communities set work expectations and boundaries, outline appropriate knowledge to be shared, and honor community protocols of language and cultural transmission. Participants in the talking circle will be asked to share how these concepts might emerge from their linguistic and/or cultural contexts, as well as other types of relationalities, and how these relationalities can influence the language work being done. The talking circle will close with actions to take once back in community to establish correct relationalities according to community protocols.

Event Time: 11:30 a.m.–12:30 p.m.

Presenters:

• Payton Whitehead
• Sarah Hourie
• Hope Ace
• Ashley Wacanta Daniels

Event Time: 3:00 p.m.–4:00 p.m.

Presenters:

• Emma Breslow
• Annika Topelian
• N. Haʻalilio Solomon
• Heather Souter
• Mskwaankwad Rice is a recent Linguistics PhD graduate of the University of Minnesota and is currently a Banting postdoctoral researcher at Lac Courte Oreilles Ojibwe University. He is from Waasaaksing First Nation and is a learner/new speaker of Nishnaabemwin (Ojibwe language) whose language reclamation work includes in-depth documentation of L1 speech. Claire Halpert is Associate Professor and Director of the Institute of Linguistics at the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. Since 2020, she has been involved in research efforts focused on Ojibwemowin, including 2 NSF-funded projects, and works closely with the Ojibwe People’s Dictionary.

Event Time: 4:00 p.m.–4:30 p.m.

Presenters:

• Jackie Dormer
• Draco Dunphy
• Mira Kolodka

Event Time: 4:30 p.m.–5:00 p.m.

Presenters:

• Shelley Tulloch
• Heather Souter