Assessing and uplifting sustainable orality languages in Nepal

Assessing and uplifting sustainable orality languages in Nepal1 Prof. Dr. Dan Raj Regmi [email protected] Abstract: This paper briefly assesses the sustainable orality languages in Nepal and suggests some strategies for uplifting those languages to the sustainable literacy (basically incipient literacy) from the perspective of Sustainable Use Model (SUM) proposed by Lewis and Simons (2011). In terms of levels of sustainable use, the languages of Nepal ranging from national to dormant (Regmi, 2018:43-44) may be broadly categorized into four levels: sustainable history (i.e., lowest level), sustainable identity, sustainable orality and sustainable literacy (i.e., highest level). A language with a lower level requires being uplifted to a next upper level by framing a language development program equipped with effective strategies. Undoubtedly, languages with sustainable history and identity may as well be uplifted. However, uplifting such languages is not as crucial as uplifting languages with sustainable orality. Around one-fourth of the total languages roughly belong to the sustainable orality level. They are all preliterate; nevertheless, they are spoken somewhat vigorously by all generations in the family or local community. Such languages, mostly Tibeto-Burman, have to be uplifted to sustainable literacy for quality basic education and proper transmission of life crucial knowledge to the younger generations. Such task is not, indeed, straightforward. First and foremost, the level of orality has to be evaluated within the FAMED conditions. Secondly, strategies have to be framed in compatible with socio-cultural and economic situation of the speech communities. Such strategies may include developing orthography and primers with the consent of the community, socialization of languages, language empowerment, book signing/public reading, community consultation and theater anthropology. Such strategies have to be integrated into other development programs in the speech communities in Nepal. 1. Background There is a lack of an independent and scientific census of the languages spoken as mother tongues in Nepal. Till the date, enumeration of such languages and their speakers made in national censuses has been considered as the main source of data. The 2011 Census records more than 125 caste and ethnic groups with different social and cultural background and around 123 mother tongues of four language families, namely, Indo-Aryan, Tibeto-Burman, Austro-Asiatic and Dravidian. In Nepal, Kusunda is a language isolate (CBS, 2012 ).2 Ethnologue, another prominent source, provides 124 languages and dialects in Nepal (Eppele et al., 2012). Only around 44 % of the languages in Nepal are safe or vigorous. They are used orally by all generations and are being learnt by children as their first languages. Around 42% of the languages are threatened. Such languages are not being transmitted to the younger 1 This is a revised version of the paper presented at the International Seminar entitled Mother Languages: Promotion and Preservation organized by the International Mother Language Institute (IMLI), Dhaka, for the celebration of International Mother Language Day, 2019, 22 February 2019. 2 There are a number of discrepancies as to the number and name of the languages enumerated in the 2011 Census of Nepal. 1 generations by all the child bearing generations (Regmi, 2018:31). In Nepal, more than hundred languages have been socio-linguistically surveyed and around 25 languages have been documented. Additionally, dictionaries (including glossaries) have been prepared in more than 35 languages and grammars have been written for around fifty languages in Nepal. Besides, textbooks for basic levels have been prepared in more than 26 mother tongues. Language Commission has been set up for recommending on language related matters to the government. Some local communities are also involved in introducing their mother tongues as medium of instructions in the basic levels. Despite such efforts threatened language communities today are facing unprecedented pressure to abandon their local language and identity. They are gradually shifting to Nepali or other dominant languages of Nepal. Such languages may not be easily prevented from being fallen into severely endangered/ moribund languages. It demands a lot of resources as well as a very strong will power on the part of speech communities as well as the local government. However, the languages with sustainable orality may be easily uplifted to the sustainable literacy provided a language development program with effective strategies are framed and implemented integratively with other developmental programs in the speech communities. The traditional strategies such as language documentation, grammar writing, dictionary making and preparing textbooks in mother tongues for basic levels in Nepal have not been effective for encouraging the speakers to broaden the domains of language use. Such languages have to be uplifted for quality basic education and documentation of life-crucial knowledge. Such knowledge embodied in the language may be properly transmitted from generations to generations only in mother tongues. Keeping this reality in mind, this paper has set two main goals. The first goal is to discuss the processes of assessing the sustainable orality in the languages of Nepal. The second one is to explore some strategies for uplifting those languages into sustainable literacy (basically incipient literacy) with special reference to Magar Kaike and Athpariya, two Tibeto-Burman languages, from the perspective of Sustainable Use Model perspective proposed by Lewis and Simons (2011). This paper is organized into six sections. Section 2 briefly introduces basics of Sustainable Use Model for language development. In section 3, we briefly sketch out the current status of languages from sustainable use model perspective. Section 4 discusses the processes of assessing the sustainable orality in the languages of Nepal with particular reference to Magar Kaike and Athpariya. In section 5, we present some strategies for uplifting the languages with sustainable orality to sustainable literacy (basically incipient literacy) in Nepal. Section 6 summarizes the findings of the paper with conclusion. 2. Sustainable Use Model Sustainable Use Model (SUM), proposed by Lewis and Simons (2011), is a model for language assessment and development. It is mainly directed towards helping the local speech communities as well any individuals or organizations working with those speech communities reflect about the proper ways or strategies for getting life-crucial knowledge embodied in the languages transmitted to the younger generations. This model is rooted on ecological perspectives on language endangerment (linguistic ecology) and understanding language maintenance and shift. It categorizes the languages in terms of vitality into eleven major labels ranging from international (labeled as 0) to extinct (labeled as 10). Such labels are assigned after the assessment of a language by using the EGIDS (Expanded Graded Intergenerational Scale) (Lewis and Simons, 2010). An upward movement, which is always desirable, implies language development whereas a downward movement is language shift. Of these labeled categories, only four levels are relatively stable in terms of sustainable language use. Such levels include sustainable history, sustainable identity, sustainable orality 2 and sustainable literacy. The three levels are vulnerable except sustainable literacy. This model suggests some specific strategies for uplifting each level for language development. They have to be adapted in compatible with socio-cultural and economic situation of the speech communities. 3. Current language status The languages, enumerated by 2011 Census of Nepal, categorized in terms of vitality (Regmi, 2018: 31) may be broadly categorized into four levels: sustainable literacy, sustainable orality, sustainable identity and sustainable history. Table 1 presents the number of languages representing these four levels of sustainable use along with a short description of each level in Nepal.3 Table 1: Four levels of sustainable language use in Nepal 1. 2. 3. 4. Levels of Description sustainable use Sustainable Not only vigorous oral use but literacy widespread written use, supported (transmitted) by sustainable institutions for education Sustainable Strong identity rooted in the language, orality vigorous oral use by all generations for day-to-day communication and language transmission takes place in the family or local community Sustainable No fully proficient speakers, a identity community associates its identity with the language, not used for day-to-day communication; used ceremonially or symbolically Sustainable No remaining speakers, no one history associates their identity with the language and a permanent record (history) of the language is preserved No. of % languages 8 6.5% 30 24.4% 1 0.8% 1 0.8% Source: Regmi (2018:43-44) Table 1 shows that around one-fourth languages fall into the category of the sustainable orality in Nepal.4 Such category in Nepal has not been fully satisfactorily discussed. The languages with sustainable orality have been categorized as 6a (vigorous) and the languages with somewhat orality have been defined as 6b (threatened) ( Eppele et al., 2012). It is to be noted that both are used orally by all generations; however, threatened ones are transmitted to the younger generations only by some child bearing generations. In Nepal, 30 languages (i.e., 24.39%) have been labeled as 6a (vigorous) and 51 languages (i.e., 41.46%) are labeled as threatened (Regmi, 2018:43). Of sustainable orality category, around 46.7% languages belong to the Tibeto-Burman language family. They are spoken by marginalized communities located in different geographical regions. In Nepal, six languages, viz., Tamang, Tharu, Rajasthani (Marwari), Rajbansi, Lhomi and Sherpa are effectively used in written form in 3 4 It is to be clarified that there a lack of a detailed study of the vitality status of the languages in Nepal. See Annex 1 for detail 3 parts of the community (Regmi, 2018:43). Only in eight languages (i.e., 6.5%), literacy is being transmitted through a system of public education. The language which serves as a reminder of heritage identity for Hindu Brahmin communities is exclusively Sanskrit. It may be labeled as sustainable identity. Till the day, Waling, a Tibeto-Burman language, lacks any ethnic community associating their identity the language, even for symbolic purposes. 3. Assessing sustainable orality Sustainable Use Model is always goal-oriented. First of all, it identifies the speech community and life-crucial bodies of knowledge (viz., information, skills and values relating to all areas of life). Secondly, it identifies current status using EGIDS. Thirdly, it identifies the desired sustainable level of use by analyzing the situation within FAMED framework. In this section, first, we discuss the assessment criteria for identifying sustainable orality in the languages. Then we present the assessment of orality in Magar Kaike and Athpariya. They have been broadly categorized as vigorous and threatened languages, respectively (Eppele et al., 2012). 3.1 Assessment criteria Sustainable Use Model prescribes current level of language use (viz., vitality) to be identified for a community to determine a particular sustainable level of use in question. Such levels of the languages have been broadly identified by employing EGIDS (Regmi, 2018:43-44). In order to design a language development program (i.e., uplifting to a next upper level as the language in question desires) sustainable levels of use (i.e. sustainable history, sustainable identity, sustainable orality and sustainable literacy) have to be assessed. Lewis and Simons (2011) has prescribed five conditions (criteria): functions, acquisition, motivation, environment and differentiation, acronymed as FAMED conditions, to assess the sustainable orality of language. Table 2 presents FAMED conditions (with their short description of fundamental criteria) for assessing the sustainable orality of a language. Table 2: FAMED conditions for assessing the sustainable orality 1. Famed conditions Functions 2. Acquisition 3. Motivation 4. Environment 5. Differentiation Fundamental criteria Adequate oral use exists in every domain for which oral use is desired (but there is no written use). Full oral transmission of the vernacular language to all children in the home (literacy acquisition, if any, is in the second language). Members of the language community perceive the economic, social, religious, and identificational benefits of using their language orally, but they perceive no benefits in reading and writing it. Official government policy affirms the oral use of the language, but calls for this language to be left in its current state and not developed. Members of the language community have a set of shared norms as to when to use the local language orally versus when to use a more dominant language, but they never use the local language in written form. Sustainable Use Model has also specified procedures for evaluation of sustainable orality in a 4 language. While assessing sustainable orality, each condition is evaluated into absent, uncommon, common and sustainable. If a condition is absent, it is awarded zero. Likewise, uncommon, common and sustainable are awarded 1, 2 and 3 marks, respectively. 3.2 Assessment of orality in Magar Kaike Kaike [kzq], a preliterate Tibeto-Burman language, is mainly spoken by estimated 1000 speakers in four villages; namely, Sahartara, Tupatara, Tarakot and Belawa/Lingdu, at an elevation of 2738 meter in Dolpa. As mentioned already, it has been labeled as 6(a) vigorous in Ethnologue, 2012. It is believed to a language of fairy (kai meaning 'fairy' and ke meaning 'language'). Kaike is one of the members of West Bodish subsection of Bodish section under Bodic branch of Tibeto-Burman family. The speakers are Buddhist by religion. By profession, they are agriculturalists as well as traders (Regmi, 2013). They are also popularly known as trans-Himalayan traders. Magar Kaike is a multilingual speech community. In this community, three languages: Magar Kaike, Nepali and Poinke are spoken. Nepali is the language of wider communication. It is used primarily in public meeting and giving instruction in schools. Poinke is mostly used with Tibetan traders. Nepali is rarely used at home and small children do not understand the things taught in Nepali. Thus, non-Magar Kaike teachers have to use local language in lower classes. The absolute number of speakers is, indeed, very low. However, it is used by the speakers of all ages and children learn Magar Kaike as the first language. Except in singing, Kaike is used in counting, joking, bargaining/shopping/marketing, storytelling, discussing/debate, praying, quarrelling, abusing, telling stories to children, family gatherings and village meetings. Magar Kaike is overwhelmingly used by men and women (Regmi, 2013). This language has been labeled as 6(a) vigorous in Ethnologue, 2012. This language has not yet been used in writing. It has been suggested being written in Devanagari script. Magar Kaike does not fully satisfy all the FAMED conditions. Table 3 presents the scores received by Magar Kaike in the assessment of orality (Regmi et al., 2012). Table 3: Scores received by Magar Kaike in the assessment of orality FAMED conditions Functions Acquisition Motivation Environment Differentiation Total Full marks 3 3 3 3 3 15 Scores 2 3 3 2 3 13 (86.7%) Description Common Sustainable Sustainable Common Sustainable Table 3 shows that Magar Kaike has not been awarded equal marks for all the FAMED conditions. As mentioned already this language is not used in singing for which oral use is desired.5 For this domain, Nepali is exclusively used in this speech community. As there is not an adequate oral use in every domain for which oral use is desired, this language has been awarded only 2 marks for functions. No doubt, language policy of Nepal has failed to be effective on at the operational level. In Nepal, the official government policy does not only affirm the oral use of the language but also invites such languages to be used in basic 5 Some general domains in which oral use is desired may include counting, singing, joking, bargaining /shopping/marketing, storytelling, discussing/debate, praying, quarrelling, abusing (scolding/using taboo words), telling stories to children, singing at home, family gatherings and village meetings. 5 education, mass media and local government. It never intends to leave any minority languages like Magar Kaike to its current state of language vitality. Thus, this language has been awarded only 2 marks for environment. Such situation may be characterized as 'common' technically. The full marks have been awarded for acquisition, motivation and differentiation as this language has fully satisfied the criteria set for such conditions. As Magar Kaike has maintained sustainability in the majority of the conditions, it may be designated as having sustainable orality. Thus, this language desires to be uplifted to sustainable orality prior to pushing up to incipient orality. 3.2 Assessment of orality in Athpariya Athpariya [aph] is spoken by 5530 ethnic Athpariyas mainly in some villages in Dhankuta district of Nepal (CBS, 2012). It is a Tibeto-Burman language belonging to a member of the Eastern Himalayish languages of Himalayish section of the Bodic branch. In this speech community, none exclusively use their mother tongue in counting. In the domains like joking, bargaining, storytelling, storytelling to children, singing at home and village meetings, on the average, less than half of the speakers use their mother tongue. In such domains, they use either Nepali or both languages. Only in the domains of discussing, praying, quarrelling, abusing/scolding and family gatherings, on the average, more than two-third of the speakers use their mother tongue (Regmi, 2016). Table 4 presents the scores received by Athpariya in the assessment of orality. Table 4: Scores received by Athpariya in the assessment of orality FAMED Conditions Functions Acquisition Motivation Environment Differentiation Total Full Marks 3 3 3 3 3 15 Scores 1 1 2 2 3 9 (60%) Description Uncommon Uncommon Common Common Sustainable Table 4 shows that Athpariya has received the marks ranging from 1 (i.e., uncommon) and 3 (i.e., sustainable). Athpariya presents adequate oral use only for some domains for which oral use is desired. In addition, in this speech community only some of the child-bearing generations are transmitting the language to their children in the home. Thus, this language has been awarded only 1 mark for functions and acquisition each. This situation is generally taken as uncommon. Unlike Magar Kaike, Athpariya has been awarded 2 marks for motivation as only some members of the child-bearing generations perceive the benefit of using their language orally for some purposes. Other members, especially the young boys and girls find more benefit in shifting to a more dominant language, viz., Nepali. As environment is not hostile to use language orally as in Magar Kaike, this language has received 2 marks for environment. It is to be further noted that multilingual education was implemented in this language by the government as a pilot project. However, it did not sustain long after the project was terminated. As this language fully satisfies the criteria for differentiation, it has been awarded the full marks as in Magar Kaike. The marks obtained indicate that this language is neither fully threatened nor vigorous. Such languages may also be uplifted to incipient literacy by adapting the strategies framed for uplifting the languages with sustainable orality to sustainable literacy. 6 5. Some strategies Uplifting the languages with certain level of orality to literacy (both incipient and sustainable literacy) is not an easy task. Most of the minority languages are located in inhospitable geographical situations. Besides, such languages communities have divergent socio-economic and cultural settings. Language development programs which lack compatibility with such settings do not encourage the speech communities to broaden the domains of language use. So has happened in the past. Traditional settlements have not preserved and migration has not yet been planned. Minority languages are facing endangerment. Traditional strategies so far framed and implemented have been exclusively ineffective. Thus, to preserve the minority languages of Nepal specific strategies are required being framed from Sustainable Use Model perspective. Such strategies may be broadly categorized into strategies for language development and strategies for the community development. They are briefly discussed as follows: 5.1 Language development strategies Language development strategies are concerned with uplifting the languages with sustainable orality to incipient literacy in the minority languages of Nepal. Such strategies, some of which are required to be practically implemented in order, are briefly discussed as follows: (a) Developing orthography and primers The first strategy involves developing orthography and primers (viz., fundamental literacy) in languages with somewhat orality. Almost languages with such orality in Nepal lack native orthography.6 Thus, with the consent of the community a practical orthography suitable for widespread use in the community should be developed along with primers for the acquisition of literacy. Teacher making is the most important aspect. The literacy teachers have to be trained and literacy in the local languages must be addressed by the local government in the context of Nepal. Except for some Sino-spheric languages, Devenagari script with required adaptation may be inarguably proposed and followed in Nepal. (b) Socializing language through local literature Assimilation policy (both linguistic and cultural) circuitously imposed during Panchayat regime (1960-1990) has caused many minority communities to be assimilated to the dominant culture and languages. In Nepal, right now, such communities have partially or fully lost their traditional values which are crucial for their well-being. After developing orthography in compatible to the socio-cultural and religious setting of the speech community, local literature consisting of old proverbs and traditional stories have to be developed and taught them to the children in the class. In the context of Nepal, however, developing local language literature is not an easy task. The young people normally do not know the old proverbs and old stories. In order to collect such proverbs and stories and prepare materials for classroom, a workshop has to be organized by involving local teachers, local representatives, linguists and anthropologists in the speech community. Such proverbs have to be collected and be properly recorded from the old people. Proverbs have to be consolidated into a booklet of "Proverbs". Similarly, traditional stories have to be collected into a book of "Old stories" for use in the classroom. Besides, local teachers and local people 6 In Nepal, the Indo-Aryan languages normally pose any problem of orthography development. Such languages may be easily written in Devanagari script in which Nepali, the official language is written. Panjabi may be written in Gurumukhi. However, the Tibeto-Burman languages like Koyee, Kaike, Kagate, Kisan, Kuki, Kham, Khaling, Bahing, Byansi, Raute, Lhopa, Thulung, Yholmo and Wambule have choices for scripts. 7 may be encouraged to write new stories that teach cultural values of the speech communities. This strategy is highly feasible, required and acceptable in the minority speech communities in Nepal. (c) Providing technical support and computer training for on-site desktop publishing In the present context of Nepal, local governments have been made responsible for developing the local languages. Thus, local governments, may be, in collaboration with NGOs dedicated for language development, should provide computer training and technical support for on-site desktop publishing of the local language literature. Such training should be provided to the community members so that they would be encouraged to prepare culturefriendly pedagogical materials to be used for children of the community. (d) Training bilingual teachers using technology centers In the context of Nepal, a technology center may be simply equipped with a computer lab, digital cameras, video cameras, a scanner and a printer. After setting a technology centre, training has to be provided to bilingual teachers (mother language and Nepali) to profitably use such center first for editing local literature published digitally into a child-friendly format and secondly for eliciting and recording oral traditions for preparing textbooks and other materials to be used in the classes in bilingual setting. It may require a strong financial backing; notwithstanding, modern technology is unavoidable for preparing self-reliant teachers in producing classroom materials maintaining local language and culture in Nepal. (e) Running computer assisted language learning (CALL) In order to help the learners to learn mother tongues more effectively, teaching materials may be combined with online documentation of the language. Language data has to be documented into a pedagogically exploitable design. CALL is a courseware. It may be designed for different levels. Such course may include simple conversations, the alphabet, grammatical instruction and cultural information. This strategy is very effective; however, it is not easy to find unanimity as to the standard of the language used in online documentation. (f) Language empowerment In Nepal, all the mother languages are constitutionally the languages of the nation. Moreover, every speech community is entitled to use, promote and develop their language and script. However, linguistic empowerment is far away in Nepal. In operational level, there is a lack of government collaboration with the community to develop the language in real sense. It has been very difficult to foster a positive attitude in minority speech communities even to speak their languages. Most of the languages have lost instrumental attitudes towards their language. Thus, local governments, provincial governments and central government have to be ready to collaborate with the communities for language empowerment. (g) Book signing/public reading In order to inform the speech communities that a new book in local literature is published in the local language, book signing/public reading program is desired to be organized in the community. The writers or contributors are invited to read aloud from the book published. They are also requested to sign copies of the book for the people of the community. Such event, observed as a festival, may encourage minority speech communities to realize the significance of materials prepared in local languages. (h) Community consultation 8 In the present context of Nepal, a community consultation has to be made with the presence of the representatives of the local governments and language experts to assess the current situation regarding the local languages and prepare language development plan to uplift the languages to the desired levels. Such consultation is required to be held periodically. (i) Theater anthropology This is a very effective strategy to revitalize both language and culture in the minority speech communities in Nepal. In such communities, many oral traditions, which old people still remember or some specialists have already recorded, may be revitalized by theatre anthropology. A small group of people may be assigned to develop a usable script from the story. With the help of local artists, costumes are created. When drama is ready, it is performed to an audience of the minority community. It may further be performed to other areas and other linguistic communities as well. It will foster the understanding between the speech communities. Table 5 summarizes some specific strategies for lifting sustainable orality to sustainable literacy (basically incipient literacy) in the languages of Nepal. Table 5: Strategies for lifting sustainable orality to sustainable literacy Strategies Functions Acquisition Motivation Environment Developing orthography and primers Language socialization training bilingual teachers using technology centers language empowerment book signing /public reading community consultation theater anthropology Degree of Difficulty Acceptability level highly a little highly a little a little more very a little a little a little very a little acceptable 5.2 Community development strategies Most of the languages aspiring to be raised to literacy are spoken by marginalized people living in the hinter areas of Nepal. Such communities have to be socio-politically and economically empowered along with linguistic empowerment. They have to be assisted by the government in literacy and income generating activities. The languages development strategies so far enumerated in sub-section 5.1 may not be effectively implemented unless they are integrated with other socio-economic development programs. Sustainable Use Model proposes two types of literacies for the development of communities: inside and outside literacies. 9 5.2.1 Inside literacies Inside literacies include good sanitation (i.e., clean drinking water, toilets, well-ventilated kitchen), balanced diet and appropriate sense of work and rest. The local governments with the active involvement of the communities, such developmental programs have to be designed and immediately implemented in such speech communities. 5.2.2 Outside literacies Outside literacies include construction of roads, health posts, high schools and proper means of communication. Such communities have to be linked with roads. Besides, health posts and high schools with modern facility have to be set up. Proper means of communication, which is a backbone of development, should be provided in such communities. Such facilities may slow down the migration from such communities. 6. Conclusion In this paper, we briefly discussed the processes of assessing the orality in the languages of Nepal and attempted to suggest some strategies for uplifting such orality languages from the perspective of Sustainable Use Model. Around one-fourth of the total languages of Nepal enumerated by 2011 census may roughly be categorized as having sustainable orality. They are all preliterate; nevertheless, they are spoken vigorously by all generations in the family or local community. Magar Kaike evaluated within the FAMED conditions has confirmed the highest level of sustainable orality. Likewise, Athpariya has also stood as a language having somewhat orality. Both of these languages may be uplifted to desired levels of sustainable use by framing strategies in compatible with socio-cultural and economic situation of the speech communities. In order to uplift the languages of Nepal like Magar Kaike and Athpariya, first and foremost, orthography and primers have to be developed with the consent of the concerned speech community. Other strategies like socialization of language through literature, language empowerment, book signing/public reading, community consultation and theater anthropology may also be framed and implemented looking at the socio-economic and cultural settings of the community. The most noteworthy matter, in the present context marginalization of the minority communities, is to integrate language development strategies with other development programs such as inside literacies and outside literacies. To conclude, in Nepal, for assuring quality basic education in mother tongue and transmission of life-crucial knowledge, all the languages with sustainable or somewhat orality have to be uplifted to the sustainable literacy by framing sustainable strategies without any delay. References Central Bureau of Statistics. 2012. National Population and Housing Census 2011: National Report. Kathmandu: Central Bureau of Statistics. Eppele, John W., M. Paul Lewis, Dan Raj Regmi and Yogendra P. Yadava (eds). 2012. Ethnologue: Languages of Nepal. Kathmandu: Linguistic Survey of Nepal (LinSuN) and SIL International. Lewis, M. P. and G. F. Simons. 2010. Assessing Endangerment: Expanding Fishman’s GIDS. Revue Romaine de Linguistique 55:103-120. Lewis, M. Paul and Gary F. Simons. 2011. Sustainable Use Model for Language Development, https://scholars.sil.org/.../applying_the_sum... Regmi, Ambika; Holly Hilty; Barbara Law and Dan Raj Regmi. 2012. Sustainable Use Model (SUM) for Language Development in Nepalese Context : A Case Study of Kaike. A paper presented at Sustainable Use Model (SUM) for Language 10 Development seminar conducted by Central Department of Linguistics, Tribhuvan University, Nepal , 30 January to 10 February, 2012. Regmi, Ambika. 2013. A Sociolinguistic Survey of Magar Kaike: A Tibeto-Burman Language, A Report Submitted to Linguistic Survey of Nepal (LinSuN), Central Department of Linguistics, TU. Regmi, Ambika. 2016. A Sociolinguistic Survey of Athpariya: A Tibeto-Burman Language, A Report Submitted to Linguistic Survey of Nepal (LinSuN), Central Department of Linguistics, TU. Regmi, Dan Raj. 2018. Preserving and promoting the endangered languages of Nepal: Policy, practices and challenges, Mother Language Vol.2.1:24-44, December, 2018. Annex 1: Languages with sustainable orality in Nepal 1. 6a Vigorous 30(24.39%) 2. 6b Threatened 51(41.46%) Koyee, Kaike, Kagate, Kisan, Kuki, Kham, Khaling, Nepali Sign Language, Jumli, Gangai, Bahing, Byansi, Raute, Lhopa, Thulung, Yholmo, Wambule, Batadeli, Achhami, Bajhangi, Tajpuriya, Bajureli, Darchuleli, Dailekhi, Khas, Musalman, Panjabi, Dadeldhuri, Bajjika Angika, Uranw, Kulung, Khadiya, Gurung, Ghale, Chamling, Chepang, Chhntyal, Jirel, Jerong, Thanmi, Darai, Dungmali, Dhimal, Puma, Bantawa, Belhare, Bote, Magar (Magar Dhut), Manange, Majhi, Meche, Mewahang, Yakkha, Yamphu, Raji, Limbu, Lohorung, Sampang, Sunuwar, Nagami, Mijo,Banakariya, Surel, Dhuleli, Dolpali, Pahari, Chhintang, Athapahariya, Kisan, Hariyani, Oriya, Sindhi, Asami, Malpande, Kurmali, Gadhawali, Rai, Magahi and Koche 11