Statement

“Those who are under 40 and 50, 90 out of 100 don’t speak our language, that’s why our language will be lost, in other words its life is not long, it’s in danger, it’s dying”. Our first informant, Yessayi, used the word mahamertz (meaning moribund) to describe the state of his dialect. Similar thoughts have always worried the Armenians of Anjar. One would accustom to the topic of the loss of the dialect through a couple of visits to the village, some connections with the locals and conversations in both formal and informal settings. This is a recurrent topic among the Armenians of Anjar (Anjartsis), who express their fear on the endangerment of the dialect and use different forms of resistance to fight against its loss.

“I have heard the dialect growing up in a semi-Anjartsi household (mother’s side). Even though my mom didn’t use to speak the dialect with my grandfather, they would use words and expressions sometimes which have always interested me. I remember using “Anjartsi” words at school instead of standard Armenian which have made my friends laugh at me. I have heard grown men in Anjar swearing in the dialect with pride, elders speaking it when playing narti (backgammon) on the street, Anjartsi kids using some strange expressions when communicating… This dialect has caught my attention and made me feel dearer to my maternal side. It has always interested me, Narod Seroujian, a descendant of of Musalertsi/Anjartsis”.

“As an Armenian who grew up in various American schools across the region, I always want to make up for my lack in the Armenian community in other ways. In attempt to shed light on its realties, I knew I wanted to start a project regarding the huge but highly stereotyped Armenian community in Lebanon. Hearing about Anjar’s unique history and dialect, brought to my interest the multiplicity of Armenian culture which is often understood as homogeneous and cohesive. The mere fact of an Armenian community with a different story of commute from “turkey” and an isolation from the general Armenian community itself sparked my interests. I knew that this is a community that deserves to be heard and taken interest in. The amount of joy and gratefulness of the informants after an interview proved my earlier judgement correct as their reactions illustrated their longing to be heard”, says Cynthia Nahhas.

Both of us having taken an Anthropology/Media Communications and Studies course together and having similar interests, we joined “our forces”. The access to our field was made possible through Narod, who also contacted the informants. The latter were chosen based on familiarity and acquaintanceship. They were contacted before the visit to the “field” and asked for their consent. The data was collected through two whole-day visits to Anjar. We had three in-depth interviews with Yessayi, Hagop and Tamar on the first day, based on a set of questions. On the second visit, we had a semi-formal interview with Armen and another in-depth one with Movses based on the same set of questions. Armen being the principal of the Harach Calouste Gulbenkian college, he called four students who had a more or less proficiency in the language and who had won the annual school dialect competition. Hence, we had a conversation with Raffi, Bedo, Garen and Meghri. The interviews and conversations were all recorded on video and taken notes of. While Cynthia took care of filming and editing, Narod managed the fieldnotes.

After interviewing and visiting our fellow informants and having spoken to Anjartsis from different generations, we worked on answering the following questions:

How does the relationship of Anjartsis to their dialect reveal notions of belonging and identity among various generations? Moreover, how do Anjartsis express their fear of losing the dialect? What does it mean to live in Anjar and not know/understand/talk the Musaler/Anjar dialect? How is the dialect being replaced by other languages? How is the dialect treated among children? Finally, how can we link these shifts and changes to larger socio-cultural phenomena such as the influence of Modernity, standardization of education and language, and even nationalism on the cultural integrity of small communities such as Anjar?

Importance of the Dialect

Multiplicity and variety give different speaking styles of a certain language, hence, the origin of dialects. The latter are often perceived as geographically specific languages. However, what happens when a certain dialect is forced out from its native locus and space and settled on new foreign grounds? This is the case of the Musaler dialect. It is spoken outside of its land. That is why some of our informants find it an integral part of their customs and traditions, more than a means of communication.

“I feel more attached to it than to Armenian, it is a daily feeling” – Tamar

Some of our informants, specifically those who belong to the older generations and who grew up immersed in the dialect expressed about a state of belonging when speaking the dialect. Even though this sense of belonging is usually felt towards the Musaler cultural heritage, a state of comfort and dearness is emerged when speaking the dialect.

“There are people who cannot express their genuine feelings in [Standard] Armenian, they have to use the dialect” - Hagop.

“My generation, my friends, all speak our language [Musaler dialect] very well. And when I speak our language, I speak it better than Armenian because my tongue has blossomed in this language" – Yessayi.

The dialect is also a “tool” to create amity between its speakers and springs during moments of intimacy. Our third informant, Hagop, told us that next time we go to Anjar we should inform them way in advance to gather the friends, do a small kef (feast, party); “They [the friends] would not speak, unless there is food and alcohol”. Armen notes a similar idea:

“During social gatherings, the parpar (dialect) is a special spice. The feast will be more garnished, ornamented and richer when it is parparayin (involves the parpar, the main language being the dialect). Of course, when surrounded by fellow Musalertsis”- Armen

While this gives the dialect a special value and importance in creating cordiality among the compatriots, it also bounds it in informal states. The dialect is not used in formal meetings, business, education. When formal moments appear, standard Armenian kicks in. This might divest the parpar from its power.

“Just like [Standard] Armenian’s case, the language is not a mere means of communication, but also a culture, civilization, memory, the parpar (dialect) is not just a language, it’s also an origin, a collective memory” – Armen

Perhaps the above quote from Armen summarizes the importance of the dialect for the middle-aged Musaler/Anjartsis who have spoken it since childhood. Moreover, this idea is well diffused among those who do not fluently speak the dialect. This means that the dialect is used as a device to bolster the cohesion of the community, even though the dialect itself is divided into sub-dialects which are unique to the specific villages of Musaler.

Garen, a 7^th-grade student at Harach C. Gulbenkian spoke to us in the dialect and said the following: "When I speak [the dialect] I think about my grandfathers, they had a difficult life under the tents when they came to Anjar in 1939. The French have helped them to come here". This shows how he feels connected to the history of his ancestors and feels closer to them. His way of feeling a belongingness might differ from the older men who have spoken the dialect since their birth. Nonetheless, Garen feels the impact of this dialect on him personally; the dialect is history.

“It’s the indispensability of preserving the culture, and more importantly, the indispensability of protecting a cause”- Armen

Protecting the cause for Armen, an Armenian of Musaler/Anjar, is the preservation of Armenian culture and heritage through the preservation of the dialect. Being the descendant of Musaler freedom fighters, who have fought against the Turkish troops during the Armenian Genocide, the cause is about getting back the lost lands, and the Genocide recognition on behalf of Turkey, the state which inherited the crimes of the Ottoman Empire. The preservation of the Musaler dialect means preserving Musaler cultural heritage and fighting against the initial goal of the Ottoman Turks: “the annihilation of Armenians”; something which Armen’s ancestors have fought a battle against.

Problems and Obstacles

The role of the cause to unite the dialect speakers has been established above, however, this comes with a price. In tandem to the protection of the Musaler dialect cause, there was also an aim at protecting the larger cause, which is Genocide recognition and continuation of the Armenian culture. Unification around a huge cause required a spread of nationalism across the Armenian communities. This resulted in giving a large preference to the standard Armenian language, which took over the dialect’s throne in the village. Protecting the larger cause assumes a homogeneity and brings out intercultural clashes. Hence, the spread of standard Armenian and the preservation of the dialect are in tension with each other. Ironically, one of the major causes of the endangerment of the dialect, is the preference given to standard Armenian. This below excerpt is a proof that this struggle has been present since the 1980s.

Tamar read us the introduction of Tovmas Habeshian’s book “Paternal Echoes of Musa Dagh” from 1986 (in standard Armenian):

“The Musaler dialect, which has been a means of communication for the centuries-old Armenian life of our plateau, is now seriously endangered. [Standard] Armenian has occupied the public space of Anjar and has also entered the domestic (familial) spaces. Very few families are left, which still obstinately cling to the dialect; in a few years, they too will give in and The Marvellous [Standard Armenian] will prevail in Anjar. This preference given to the [standard] Armenian language is a positive phenomenon of progress and “Armenianization” without any doubt, but the loss of the dialect is a heart aching and painful reality, before which it is impossible to stay careless and indifferent”.

Standard languages convey a certain authority which is rooted in the emergence of Nation-states. “It is in the process of state formation that the conditions for the unification of an official language are created” (Bourdieu, 1991, 45). Maintaining standard languages results in the marginalization of the other varieties. Hence, Standard Armenian occupies the pinnacle, being the #1 choice of education, business, interaction in professional settings, etc.

One of our informants, Tamar, was a teacher of Armenian language and literature in Harach Calouste Gulbenkian college of Anjar. She told us how once at class she had spoken the dialect and the students got interested in it. They have encouraged her to speak the dialect even more. Later, the school administration assigned two periods of dialect teaching each month. This led the students to get more interested in the dialect. However, when Tamar leaves her job, the school doesn’t continue the dialect classes having not found any substitute. When we met with the principal of the school and our fourth informant, Armen, he told us that as an academic institution, there isn’t any specific way to teach the dialect: “The necessary literature is few”.

“The students are overloaded with so many materials, it is hard to have a special course dedicated to the dialect” - Armen

On one hand teaching the dialect requires academic textbooks and methods, on the other hand, the school program does not allow the existence of special dialect classes because the students get prepared for official exams and have to complete other “important” courses. Hence, standardization of education and the academic scene has become a problem for the preservation of the dialect. Moreover, most of our informants talked about a school law which has emerged few years later after the settlement of Musalertsis in Anjar. It consists of punishing those who speak the dialect at school and force the kids to learn and speak [standard] Armenian. That is how the standard language replaces other varieties in academic institutions which adopt “official” and standardized languages. Forcing the children to speak Standard Armenian at school also highlights the importance given to Standard Armenian and the huge effort to safeguard it. Here, the Musaler dialect sacrificed for the larger Armenian cause.

It is interesting to note that Tamar has never forced all of her students to participate and speak the dialect during her in-class activities. She was aware that this would intimidate them and not all of them are comfortable expressing themselves in the dialect, not to mention their ability. Hence, this might have a positive aspect as it will not other the students and bound them in an imposed identity. It should not be assumed that all of them speak, know how to speak, or want to learn the dialect.

The strong bond between the older generation (around 50 and up) and the dialect is not found among younger generations. Interviewing high school students revealed intercultural variations among the new generation. The students whose parents speak with them in the dialect show a stronger connection to the dialect than those whose parents do not. Armen, the principal of the school, told us that an objective cause of this reality would be mixed marriages. By mixed marriage, he meant Musaler/Anjartsis marrying non Musaler/Anjartsis. Having a parent who does not speak the dialect at home influences greatly on the feelings and emotions of the children concerning the dialect. Some children of these mixed marriages did not show a big interest when asked if they want to learn more; “It’s hard to speak it”.

However, while having conversations with some high school students, one of them told us that he still loves the dialect even if he does not use it daily and cannot speak it fluently. Moreover, another one told us that when speaking [Standard] Armenian, he integrates some dialect words into his speech. This integration has created an Anjartsi subjectivity for these kids, which is constantly shaped by various actions and behavior. This subjectivity also includes an accent when speaking Standard Armenian. At this point, there seems to be a constant mingling between standard Armenian and the dialect rather than a complete takeover of one at the expense of the other. This makes us question whether the mingling feeds the loss of the dialect or creates a new form of preservation of a dialect speech.

“I would want the dialect to continue to exist but I don’t want to be high-sounding and insist on its preservation… This is a natural process; life has obligations on us…” – Movses

Resistance

In the face of the various problems and obstacles, many members of the Anjar community have resorted to various modes of resistance, be it on micro, meso or macro levels, to protect the dialect of Musaler. On micro levels, the mingling of the dialect along with the “Anjarsti” accent itself could act as a form of perseverance in the face of this standardization. Also, the mere extensive knowledge carried by various members of the community sheds light on the importance and richness of the dialect; implicating the importance of its preservation. On a meso-level, the members of the community have engaged in very different activities forming a shield of protection around the Musaler cause:

Yessayi has now embarked on a linguistic journey to find the various Arabic words within the dialect. By doing so, Yessayi is attempting to shed light on the richness of the dialect along with its long historical background. Yessayi claims that the dialect is similar to an “undug mine”; by tracing where its words come from, we come one step closer to understanding histories which lay beyond the dialect. Moreover, the dialect has become a space of fusion between multiple languages and cultures, indicating a history of migration, mobility, and invasion.

With the large growth of social media, Hagop uses his Facebook page to share stories and sayings in the dialect as a way to encourage its use. By doing so, Hagop not only illustrates the flexibility of the dialect but integrates it in the digitality of our Modern times. This might be debatable whether it is on a meso or a micro level, considering the vastness of digital platforms.

On a macro-level, what started as Tamar speaking the dialect to her student, turned into an actual class where the dialect was taught instead of standard Armenian (twice a month). By engaging in this activity, Tamar was directly encouraging the youth to take on the dialect and thus prevent its demise. On the other hand, Armen, the principle of the school continues to stress on the importance of the dialect by preserving the yearly dialect competition encouraging the students to get involved in speaking the dialect of Musaler. However, he claims this is not enough of an effort. Additionally, after leaving her job at the school, Tamar is still actively engaged in the annual competition; she even translates works from standard Armenian to the dialect, a micro-level resistance.

Concluding Marks

It is hard to conclude our findings for two reasons. First, having started this big project, we would not want to end it here and bring the discussion to an end. Second, the number of our informants is limited and having conversations with other people might reveal more intricate intercultural differences. However, we have a solid answer to “why have we used the digital platform to diffuse an ethnography on the dialect of Musaler”. Digital platforms have been accessible to many around the world for quite some time now. Having written a paper would not have had its impact on the diffusion of this knowledge; not to forget the limited capabilities of a paper, one of them being the absence of the audio-visual component to highlight the dialect and its beauty. In the past, people have created archives through material objects (documents, books, letters). Today, in the age of digitality, multi-media tools are provided to us to create digital archives. Our website aims at building a “fluid” archive, which will constantly be shaped by new data and knowledge. We do not want to “museumify” the endangered dialect by restoring it in access-restricted archives. We do this work in the hope that a digital archive would be a window to a more accessible understanding of one of the many puzzle pieces of our humanity.

References :

Bourdieu, P., & Thompson, J. B. (1991). Language and Symbolic Power: Edited and introduced by John B. Thompson. Translated by Gino Raymond and Matthew Adamson. Cambridge, MA: Polity.