from whom we learned a great deal, who still command our respect. But we were not taught anything about the original peoples in all these universities...
The Tojolabal accepted us and taught us their language and culture during three weeks. They did so without books, without prepared teachers, for neither was available. In fact our teachers were illiterate..."
>>"You are the first to come amongst us to learn about ourselves. All those who come here want to teach us, as if we knew nothing. They are teachers, doctors, politicians, officials, field workers. Everyone wants to teach us.<<
They added another comment. They realized that we tried to write down what we heard from them. They saw something they had not previously seen: their written language. This observation refuted what others had told them: "your dialect cannot be written due to lack of letters". Both observations emphasized the unbalanced relationship between the dominant society and the indigenous peoples, the Tojolabal, for the case in point. The group remained without writing and was disregarded, because "nothing could be learned from them". The two comments changed our course. For us, the Tojolabal were teachers and not merely ignorant Indians. They taught us what they knew and we ignored. The classes, in addition, were dialogic; we learned their language and they learned how to write it. The relationship to which the Tojolabal were accustomed, transformed. They became educators, and thankfully, we became learners. A change that had not occurred in 500 years, with a few exceptions… (Lenkersdorf, Carlos. "Aprender a Escuchar" "Learning to Listen", PyV. Méx. 2008, p. 14).[1]
8.- The fact that recent texts, written by domestic researchers continue to repeat and take as a base for departure, the errors of foreigners and, most importantly, they pretend to delve into our past based on "objects" (archaeological and documentary remnants) and do not venture into the "subjects" (the historical memory of the
____________________
- ↑ Anthropologist Carlos Lenkersdorf has claimed several linguistic and cultural features of the Tojolabal primarily the language's ergativity, show that they do not give cognitive weight to the distinctions subject/object, active/passive. This interprets as being evidence in favor of the controversial Sapir-Worf hypothesis.
 | This page was originally published in Spanish, and is translated by Wikisource editors. It does not use the proofread page system traditionally; it is used to verify translation. Proofreading and validation must be done by editors who are fluent in both the original and the translated language. Follow the interwiki link under In other languages to view this page in Spanish. |  |
