The Hawai‘i Board on Geographic Name hosted the 35th Annual Geographic Names Conference of Council of Geographic Names Authorities

addressing
Geographic Names of Indigenous Peoples
and other
Geographic Names Issues

Renee Pualani Louis & Naomi Losch, Conference Co-Chairs

October 25-29, 2011
Ala Moana Hotel
Honolulu, HI

The links below provide additional information about the conference
 

Letter of Support from Senators Inouye & Akaka

Invitation

    Aloha,
    The Hawai‘i Board on Geographic Names (HBGN) is pleased to be hosting and cordially invites you to the next Council of Geographic Names Authorities (COGNA) conference on October 25-29, 2011 at the Ala Moana Hotel in Honolulu, Hawai‘i.  The HBGN is a proactive Board having diacritically corrected over 8,000 Hawaiian place names found on the 1980 and 1990 series of US Geological Survey 1:24,000 topographic maps and are currently poised to address several other issues including reviewing and diacritically correcting the remaining, unresolved place names in the Geographic Names Information System (GNIS), launching our new website on Hawaiian place names modeled after the Coeur d‘Alene Native Names project, and beginning to process several new name applications as a result of the research completed for the website.
    Since nearly 80% of the place names in Hawai‘i have a Hawaiian specific name component derived from the Indigenous population in these Islands, we are well aware of the issues confronting the US Board on Geographic Names with regard to Native Names Policy.  We look forward to having an opportunity to share our lessons learned while gaining insights from the different perspectives of the COGNA membership on this and other issues.
    We along with the COGNA Executive Committee are very much aware that many government agencies frown upon out-of-state travel to begin with, let alone to Hawai‘i.  Nonetheless, we would like to emphasize that this will be a unique opportunity to provide the combined knowledge and expertise shared at COGNA conferences with the American interests in the Pacific including American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands and the Federated States of Micronesia all of whom have a vested interest in the inner workings of the USBGN and are generally unable to travel to the continental US for annual conferences.  We would also like to inform you that air travel to Honolulu is less expensive than some of the previous conference destinations. 
    While we understand that the economy is still in a recovery phase, we hope that you will be able to justify your valuable participation and be able to join us at this once-in-a-career event.  As you prepare your justification to attend the conference, please keep in mind that maintaining an accurate registry of place names is an essential element in our society, particularly for emergency professionals, mapping practitioners, and tourism officials because of place name recognition.  We hope you will strongly consider submitting your travel requests or do whatever is necessary to attend COGNA in 2011.

Return to Links

Conference Overview

We expect the conference to be both enjoyable and beneficial to anyone involved with geographic names.  The program for COGNA 2011 will have much to offer, both of local interest and practical interest to those who work with geographic names.
Description
Indigenous people around the world are discussing the value of their place naming practices.  Central to these discussions are the concerns of having their place names recognized as “official”.  However, this topic usually creates as much tension as it does questions.  Who is the authority that decides what is recognized as “official”? Does the process change if the Indigenous place names are within federally recognized Indigenous lands?  (How) does government sanctioned naming standardization marginalize Indigenous naming practices?  How can people pronounce printed characters with which they are not familiar? How does this impact emergency rescue personnel? This conference hopes to provide answers to many of these questions.
Goal
The goal of the conference this year is to facilitate a discussion with the COGNA membership, the Indigenous Peoples within the U.S. and in the Pacific Region in regard to the standardization practices of the U.S. Board on Geographic Names (USBGN).
Opportunity
The conference this year will be a unique opportunity to provide the combined knowledge and expertise shared during COGNA conferences with the American interests in the Pacific including American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands and the Federated States of Micronesia all of whom have a vested interest in the inner workings of the USBGN and are generally unable to travel to the continental U.S.
Program Highlights
The conference is open to the public for registration fees.  The registration fee includes all conference materials, Welcome Reception, and admission to all daytime conference sessions.  The optional activities include the Friday evening Banquet and Saturday Toponymic Tour and require separate fees.  Each year the conference hosts a State-Federal Roundtable Discussion, a meeting of the USBGN Domestic Names Committee, and several paper presentations.  This year we will be including an Indigenous Names workshop on the U.S. place names policy and process.  We hope to have a wide range of attendees from those local to Hawaii to those from distant shores.

Return to Links

Program
COGNA 2011
October 25 - 29, 2011

“Geographic Names of Indigenous People”

Ala Moana Hotel, Honolulu, Hawaii

Note: The underlined titles are linkes to the abstract

Return to Links

COGNA Hawai’i Toponymic Tour Highlights

Abstracts

THESE NAMES THEY’VE PASSED DOWN

Bobbie Conner, Director of Tamástslikt Cultural Institute and a Cayese-Umatill-Nez Perce decendent
Timothy Nitz, Oregon/Washington Unit Manager of Nez Perce National Historical Park

The names of locations and features in NE Oregon have existed since before man’s earliest memories. These indigenous placenames codify ancient communal knowledge and the relationships of place, resources, and community – critical relationships not carried by modern placenames. Drawing upon personal and professional experience, Roberta Conner, Director of Tamástslikt Cultural Institute and a Cayuse-Umatilla-Nez Perce descendent, and Timothy Nitz, Oregon/Washington Unit Manager of Nez Perce National Historical Park, will explore the responsibility intrinsic in perpetuating traditional tribal names. Transitioning from a spoken language to a written language; from traditional naming ceremonies to tribally adopted orthographies; from common tribal use to adoption by non-tribal authorities – that’s complex enough, but these challenges are compounded by debates over orthography, ease of pronunciation, and simple change.

Panel Discussion

Research and Applied Issues on Alaska Native Place Names

     Since the 1970s there has been considerable place name research in most of Alaska’s Native languages.  We will provide a brief summary of the status of place name research for each Alaska Native language. Also during the past four decades we have seen increasing public appreciation of place names in the 21 Alaska Native languages. Alaska’s geography is truly spectacular, and many people are memorizing sets of place names in areas of Alaska that they hold dear. There has been official recognition of numerous Native-language place names in spelling systems used by the Alaska Native Language Center. There have been a few cases of name changes involving Alaska Native place names. The 2011 3^rd edition of the ANLC language map has a selection of 270 Native place names in all of the Alaskan languages. Also there is a proliferation of Native place names for businesses, non-profit groups, websites, some prominent buildings (e.g., six rooms have Dena’ina place names at the Dena’ina Convention Center in Anchorage), and on roadside signs (in the Anchorage Borough, in Chugach State Park, along highways in Copper River).

Alaska Native Place Names:  Beyond “It’s the Right Thing to Do”

Joan (Jo) Antonson
Alaska Dept of Natural Resources

The Alaska Historical Commission has been the state’s geographic names review board since 1993.  The review board has addressed a number of Alaska Native name proposals in the last 20 years.  The board and staff have encouraged individuals and groups to formally propose Native names for consideration.  How successful have the proposals and initiatives to get Native names “official” been?  Can insights be gleaned from the discussions of proposals?  Do policies and procedures need to be changed?  Are there viable alternatives to the official listing for record Native names for geographic features?  Why should more be done, by all Alaskans, to record and know Native names for places in the state?     

Joan (Jo) Antonson is the coordinator for the state geographic names program and staff to the Alaska Historical Commission.

Vision: Recapture the Ancient View from Troth Yeddha’ at the University of Alaska Fairbanks

Robert Charlie
UAF Geophysical Institute Educational Outreach Office & Minto Athabascan Elder

     When the University of Alaska Fairbanks was founded in 1917 on this ridge five miles west of the town of Fairbanks, the founders failed to consider that the ridge already had a name and a purpose. Known to the Athabascans as Troth Yeddha’, the hill was an important place for many reasons. Families went to the hill each spring to gather troth, wild sweet potato (Hedysarum alpinum), a valuable root vegetable that used to be abundant below this ridge. When you stand at the top of the tallest buildings at the University of Alaska Fairbanks, the surrounding view is the land of my ancestors. Take away the modern buildings and focus on the rivers and foothills. Mt. Hayes sits in the distance to the southeast, known to the Athabascans as Khosrotl’odi or “Headwaters of the Upward Sun”. Now imagine a small village to the west. The Chena River Indians lived along a small creek that fed into the Tanana River at the upstream end of Ch’eno’ Khwdochaget Ddhela’ “mountain of the mouth of game stream” now known as Chena Ridge. The Indians would climb Chena Ridge and see Dinadhi, Denali, “The Tall One”. North of Denali was a small mountain Ch’edraya’, or “The Heart”. Further to the northwest is Seth Jeda’, or “Old Ridge”, Sawtooth Mountain. Another ridge, Kholoya Ddhela’, or “Upward End Point Mountain” is now known as Murphy Dome. Turn your eyes back to Troth Yeddha’ and you’ve come full circle. This is the land of my ancestors.

Return to Program

Restoring and standardizing San (Bushman) toponyms in South Africa

Peter E. Raper
Department of Language Management and Language Practice
University of the Free State, South Africa
Address: 1198 Dunwoodie Avenue, Waverley, Pretoria 0186, South Africa
e-mail: raperpe2@gmail.co; raperpe@ufs.ac.za
Telephone and fax: 27 12 332 1518

Abstract:
     The indigenous San or Bushmen languages are virtually extinct in South Africa. Toponyms bestowed by these peoples over the past 70,000 years or more are unrecognizable due to phonological and orthographic adaptation by African (Bantu) peoples over the past two thousand years, and by Europeans since the 15^th century. However, current research is uncovering a wealth of disguised San toponyms and their component elements. This accords with the stipulations of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa encouraging the preservation and use of the Khoikhoi and San languages, as evidenced in the San motto in the South African Coat of Arms, and implements United Nations resolutions recommending the collection and preservation of indigenous geographical names as cultural heritage and identity. The restoration and standardization of San (and Khoikhoi) toponyms presents a number of political and linguistic challenges. These include establishing uniform orthographic rules for all Khoikhoi and San languages; determining and restoring correct names including click consonants, diacritics, etc.; the feasibility of dual naming in conflicting instances, and formulating and implementing policies and principles regarding status, precedence or priority, and the circumstances governing these; investigating the desirability and feasibility of a simplified or typographically applicable system, as has been suggested; education and training; liaison and cooperation with geographical name scholars in other countries facing similar challenges, etc..

Return to Program

Preserving geo-linguistic data for Alaska Native languages

Gary Holton
Director, Alaska Native Language Archives
Professor of Linguistics
University of Alaska Fairbanks

Abstract:
     The linguistic record is rich which examples of geo-linguistic data—such as toponyms, isoglosses, and travel narratives—which combine linguistic information with location. Because of their hybrid nature geo-linguistic data are among the most fragile of linguistic data, often defying traditional approaches to preservation. While location data tends to be stored on maps, linguistic data are stored as a text documents. The link between these two is easily lost, even in contemporary digital mapping environments. Lacking suitable preservation solutions, much geo-linguistic data have remained inaccessible, leading to multiple research projects in the same region. In a recent pilot project with the Lower Tanana Athabaskan language we identified at least seven different generations of place name mapping projects, each producing overlapping and sometimes conflicting results.
     This presentation begins by outlining some of the pitfalls associated with the preservation of geo-linguistic data. We then propose a preservation solution employing a robust geographic information system (GIS) database structure. The cornerstone of our approach is to preserve each documentary iteration as a distinct layer prior to any attempt at synthesis. By separating the individual documentation efforts from the ensuing analyses we hope to create a more robust geo-linguistic record. We conclude with a discussion of the results of the Lower Tanana pilot project.

Return to Program

Shared Geographic Knowledge and Athabascan Prehistory

James Kari
james.kari@alaska.edu
Alaska Native Language Center
University of Alaska Fairbanks

Abstract:
     For forty years I have assembled place names lists in Alaska Athabascan languages, and I have been making generalizations about recurrent patterns in Athabascan geographic names. A) There are transparent principles that govern the content, structure, and distribution of Athabascan geographic names; B) Memorization of the geography and travel are facilitated by rules whereby a specific name-sign can combine with an array of generic terms or with riverine directional terms to create sets of names.  C) Across Athabascan language boundaries the same place names are used for mutually known features. D) There are some regional patterns (esp. hydronym distributions and recurrent ethnonyms) that demonstrate long-term Northern Athabascan macro-regional awareness and tenure of drainage systems.  E) We find that place name patterns similar to those in Alaska can be seen among Athabascan languages in very different environmental settings such as Navajo in the Southwest and Hupa in Northern California. Shared geographic knowledge has played a central role in how Athabascan–over a great span of time–came to be the largest Native language territory in North America.

Return to Program

Matching Names from National Inventory of Dams (NID) and the Geographic Names Information System (GNIS)

Doug Caldwell
US Army Engineer Research & Development Center
7701 Telegraph Road
Alexandria, VA 22315
Phone: 703-428-3594
FAX: 703-428-3732
EMail: Douglas.R.Caldwell@usace.army.mil

Abstract:
     The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) provided a list of official names for dams to the US Board on Geographic Names (BGN) in the 1980s. Since that time, changes to both databases have occurred in an uncoordinated and unsystematic fashion. Due to an increasing number of dam name change proposals, there has been interest in synchronizing the databases once again.
     As part of a research effort, the US Army Topographic Engineering Center (TEC) matched the contents of the NID and the GNIS for dams in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
     This presentation describes the results of that study, including data on the number and type of changes since the 1980s. Issues of different names, spelling variations, word order differences, as well as inconsistent use of numbers, abbreviations, and punctuation were discovered.
     The study highlighted the benefits of the matching process, including: the development of concordance tables to link databases, the identification of additional variant names, and errors in the databases. To reduce matching differences in the future, rules for naming should be propagated from the BGN to Federal agencies.

Return to Program

La carte géographique de la Louisiane, An Atlas of French Place Names in Louisiana

Craig Johnson, Director
Louisiana Geographic Information Center
(225) 578-379 office
cjohnson@lsu.edu

Abstract:
     The Louisiana Geographic Information Center has been the recipient of two USGS Cooperative Agreements for conducting Geographic Names Workshops throughout Louisiana.  One of our early workshops took place in Lafayette, the heart of Cajun culture in Louisiana.  Among the participants at our Workshop was a man named Mike LeBlanc, whose hobby is the collection of historic French Names.  He attended the workshop because he wanted to know if the GNIS would be a good tool for preserving these names for future generations.
     Mike contacted us again recently to let us know he had made substantial progress on his Atlas of French Place Names and would like to enter the names he had collected in the GNIS.   Mr. LeBlanc has been in contact with an organization entitled CODOFIL, which stands for Council for the Development of French in Louisiana.  They have agreed to assist Mr. LeBlanc in finding sources for these geographic names.  We have proposed a WebEx where Mr. LeBlanc, CODOFIL staff, LAGIC and GNIS staff could discuss these topics in more depth. We are prepared to offer additional training in the use of the GNIS.
     We feel that this work could be aided by the use of GIS collaboration tools that allow organizations to view aerial imagery online with the GNIS Overlay and make edits to the data.  Mr. LeBlanc agreed and felt that that might be an efficient way to review the data that resides in local sources scattered throughout the state. 

Return to Program

Patterns of Stream Naming in the Coterminous United States

Janet Gritzner

South Dakota State University

Place names are perhaps the most commonly and widely used form of geospatial

information and are required to meet many levels of service expectation.

Place naming in the United States (US) undoubtedly began with the first Americans, but it was with European explorers, their map-makers, and later map-making organizations such as the United States Geological Survey (USGS) that we see the progress of naming landscapes captured on maps and in databases. With completion of 1:24,000 USGS mapping, advent of the Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) and the coming of age of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) technologies, abilities to explore naming practices in the US have been substantially extended and enhanced. Streams are the most named feature in the US, but are all streams named, if not how many and where? Evaluation of medium resolution National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) show a disproportionately large number of streams in medium resolution NHD are not named, exceeding 75 percent in some incidences. Conversely there are areas where an exceptionally high percentage of streams are named. Concentrations of named streams - so called statistical hot spots occur in the far northern and southern Appalachian Highlands, the east Texas portion of Atlantic Plain, and northern sections of Pacific Mountain System. This paper investigates the naming characteristics of these regions. In a comparative study, it uses GIS analytical techniques to look at named segments of drainage networks, the distribution and diversity of stream generic place names, physical geographies, settlement history, and naming practices.

Title: New Mexico’s Experience with the GNIS Update Process

Presenter: Denise Bleakly, NM GNIS Update Project Chair, New Mexico Geographic Information Council

Abstract:
     New Mexico has received three USGS grants for the update of geographic names in the GNIS for New Mexico. We will be sharing our experience with the update of GNIS for New Mexico. We had multiple strategies for our update project. We updated quads adjacent to US Forest Service lands, and reviewed and updated names in fast growing urban areas. We also worked to verify and update names of mines in New Mexico. Our largest effort to date has been with a graduate student from the University of New Mexico, Roberto Valdez. He has been compiling Pueblo Indian place names in the Tewa language, Hispanic place names and American place names in northern New Mexico. Our talk will cover some of the interesting names he has compiled and give a sense of the geographic name scape of northern New Mexico.

Return to Program

Return to Links

For additional information contact

Return to Top of Page

Home | Boards & Authorities | Conferences | Documents & Newsletters

For problems or questions regarding this web site contact the webmaster
Copyright © 2003 [COGNA]. All rights reserved. Last updated: 02/07/12.