The revealing processes of interpretation: Translating human rights principles into Pintupi‐Luritja

Abstract

The global language of English has emerged over the centuries as the language of human rights. This language embodies many Anglo key cultural concepts that we take for granted, related to some of our most fundamental epistemologies -such concepts as freedom, dignity, respect, reason and conscience, equality, individuality and the concept of 'rights' itself. By making explicit the cultural workings of these English concepts, and by considering English itself as a cultural universe, we can also examine Anangu core cultural concepts from a new perspective. A first step toward this juxtaposition of Anangu and English key cultural concepts is through the process of translating the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) into Pintupi-Luritja. As Edward Sapir said in 1949, 'vocabulary is a very sensitive index of the culture of a people'. This article will principally examine the first Article of the UDHR to elaborate Anangu cultural forms of morality and conceptions of personhood. That there is no ready parallel of these concepts in this local vernacular, a Western Desert language, both reveals 'traditional' socio-moral priorities and elides contemporary dialogical processes, as conversations begin to explicate, if not to translate.

Counter-accounting and social transformation: Yaṉangu way

“…Speaking up against a person in a position of authority is considered shameful, such that differences in opinions are more likely to be resolved by a non-confrontational exchange of stories accompanied by deep listening and respectful resolution (Myers, 1991). This process is described as kulirra tjungungku wangkanyi, or “listening and talking together” (Holcombe, 2015, p. 435). Hence, Yaṉangu approaches to conflict resolution appear akin to agonistic pluralism.…”

“…Yan angu people lived largely uninterrupted within a "non-stratified, stateless society" (Myers, 1991, p. 5) until the 1950s, navigating a balance between individual freedom and collective responsibilities. Individuals were free to move and live alone or in small family groupings in pursuit of personal autonomy and freedom from interference (Holcombe, 2015;Myers, 1991). However, obligations to others, such as the responsibility to look after older family members and pass down spiritual knowledge, were also deeply entrenched within these communal kinship-based relationships (Myers, 1991).…”

“…5. The founders and members of Purple House are principally from the Pintupi Luritja language group. Yaṉangu is the word in the Pintupi Luritja language for “Aboriginal person” and is commonly used by Aboriginal Australians of the Western Desert to describe their cultural identity (Holcombe, 2015). …”

“…As such, this study responds to Safari and Parker's (2023) assertion that an alignment between cultural beliefs and governance practices must underline accountability relations. The Yaṉangu practice of kulirra tjungungku wangkanyi – “listening and talking together,” (Holcombe, 2015, p. 435) offers a perspective on consensual conflict and democratic accountability from the world's oldest living culture. Hence, this study extends the existing subaltern counter-accounting literature by introducing an Aboriginal cultural perspective on modes of democratic governance and accountability to sustain social transformation.…”