In response to Shush Gupta's sketch 7
Thank you for speaking to the importance of language. In my research I am thinking about how different ways of knowing (including how to scope problems and solutions) is so embodied in expression and the basic structures of living which language floats us through. It's not enough to just speak a language. I think many would argue one has to use language, act and understand through language to really reap the benefits of its long history. Although I would want to make clear that I align myself with TallBear (2000), LaPier (2017) and Krech (1999) in the idea that knowledge is not genetic but rather practice centric. Language is a very significant part of that historical knowledge.
Some things I've recently read to help me think through this idea: Cajete's Native Science; Kimmerer's "grammer of animacy" Braiding Sweetgrass; Federico Marcon's The Knowledge of Nature "chp 3 knowledge in translation"; Sandra Harding's Sciences from Below; Gyan Prakash's Another Reason: Science and the Imagination of Modern India; Shepard Krech's Ecological Indian and TallBear's critique; Rosalyn LaPier's Invisible Reality; and imaginative works such as Louise Erdrich's fiction writing The Night Watchman, The Round House
