100 Questions / 38
How should we deal with local accents and dialects in the final compilation of oral history?Machine Translation edited by Mandana Karimi
2026-07-15
We asked several researchers and activists in the field of oral history to express their views on oral history questions. The names of each participant are listed at the beginning of their answers, and the text of all the answers will be published on this portal by the end of the week. The goal of this project is to open new doors to an issue and promote scientific discussions in the field of oral history.
In this project, a question is asked every Saturday, and we ask experts to present their views in the form of a short text (about 100 words) by the end of the week. All the answers will be published together so that the audience can compare and analyze the views.
The content is the opinions of the senders and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Oral History website. Although the answers are supposed to be about 100 words, in order to be polite and not to leave the discussion incomplete, in some cases, more than this amount of answers will be accepted.
This time, we asked the experts to send their answers by Sunday night so that all the answers can be published on Tuesday.
From the intertwining of these answers, using artificial intelligence, we have arrived at theories about oral history that will be published in the near future.
Question 38:
How should we deal with local dialects and accents in the final compilation of oral history?
____________________________________________
Answer to Question 38:
Gholamreza Azari Khakster
Dialects and accents are an inseparable part of oral history, and recording narratives in the local language, in addition to preserving the authenticity of the narrative helps to preserve and revive native dialects and accents. However, in the final editing, which aims to present a fluent text that is consistent with the standard language, the continued use of the local dialect may make it difficult for the audience to understand the text. Therefore, it is appropriate to adjust the original text based on the standard language, but to narrate parts of the narrative that are of particular conceptual, emotional, or cultural importance while preserving the narrator's accent and dialect. In addition, directly narrating emphatic phrases, vernacular terms, and index sentences in the narrator's original language, while preserving the identity of the narrative, helps to convey the atmosphere of the conversation and familiarize the audience with the narrator's way of speaking.
Jafar Golshan
It seems that those who reflect on theoretical issues of history, especially oral history, have not yet been able to reach a single answer to this question. Some believe that local dialects and accents should be preserved and disseminated in oral history texts so that the narrator’s mood and his intellectual, cultural, and social atmosphere are reflected through accented words. On the other hand, many believe that what is important is the content of the narrator’s information and that the text should be organized in a way that is easily understandable to the public; therefore, any factor such as accents and dialects that interfere with understanding the content should be discarded. Therefore, each of these two views has its supporters and opponents, and various reasons are put forward for them. As a result, it is still not possible to speak with certainty about this.
Hassan Beheshtipour
In response to your important question, I should write that resolving this paradox requires implementing an important principle in local oral history: “Try to preserve the narrator with his language, but accompany the final reader with his language. »
This principle is the core of balance in compiling oral history. The first part of this principle refers to the fidelity of the document: the dialect, tone, and mental structure of the narrator are part of the identity of the narrative and are essential for future research (linguistic, anthropological, and historical). Therefore, the archival copy must be preserved exactly with phonetic signs.
The second part of this principle is aimed at the general audience, who gets bored with repeated footnotes. Therefore, in publishing, we preserve the dialect in proverbs and emotional expressions, but we make the descriptive narrative close to fluent Persian and explain key words with a glossary at the end of the book or an in-text translation (without detracting from the narrator's dignity).
So two separate copies (archival and general); the first for the researcher, the second for the reader. In the introduction, we explicitly state the policy so that methodological transparency is maintained and the narrator does not feel that his linguistic identity has been transformed. In this way, both the authenticity of the document is maintained and the mission of transmitting meaning to the audience of oral history is achieved.
Abolfat’h Mo’men
In oral history, it is very important to correctly understand the meanings of words and the meaning of sentences in the language of the interviewee. Language, dialect, and accent reflect part of individual and collective identity and play a fundamental role in the accurate transmission of experiences. Ignorance of the dialect or professional language of different groups can lead to misinterpretation and incorrect judgment. One of the principles of oral history is that the words of the interviewee should be implemented exactly, even while maintaining a colloquial tone, dialect, and accent. Of course, the use of accent and dialect is permitted to the extent that it does not hinder communication and understanding of the audience. Therefore, in the final compilation, while observing the standard language, the authenticity of the dialect should be preserved as much as possible and, if necessary, by explaining in the footnotes, the understanding of the text should be facilitated for the audience.
Abolfazl Hassanabadi
The decision about the local dialect and accent depends on the method chosen for editing the text. If the basis for choosing to edit is based on the local dialect, the interview text is usually published without changes and with formal editing rather than content editing by clarifying the local terms; however, if the decision is to publish in the standard language, the editor must be more careful and consider issues such as preserving the authenticity of the speech, explaining local words and terms, preventing exaggeration in representing the dialect, and observing uniformity. Finally, the narrator's linguistic identity must be preserved in the final editing of the interview, while at the same time not sacrificing the readability of the text.
Seyyed Mohammad Sadeq Feyz
There are several approaches to dealing with local dialect and accent:
1- If the text is published in a specific geographical area, it can be used in its entirety or with a high percentage of local dialect.2- If the narrator speaks in a particular dialect and is known for that dialect, special and specific sentences can be published in his dialect.
3- If the narrator has specific and specific points or accents in his narration that distinguish him, here too his special dialect can be used, and perhaps should definitely be used in those parts, and if it is not understandable to everyone, it should be clarified with an explanation.
In any case, it is better to use standard language throughout the text and leave dialect and accent in the middle of the text as a hint and emphasis.
Gholamreza Azizi
In the classical or modern approach to oral history (as opposed to the historical narrative precedent before Alan Nevins), in the three methods of “revised interview editing”, “rewritten interview” and “oral history writing”, local dialect and accent can be changed in favor of the official written dialect; of course, it is better for the editor not to go to extremes in this way and to preserve elements of the narrator’s dialect and accent in the text so as not to create a new linguistic personality from him.
The editor’s freedom of intervention in the interview text is much less in the transcription method and in the postmodern approach.
Finally, it seems better to inform the reader of any changes in the original interview text in the technical introduction.
Artificial Intelligence
In the final editing, consider the local dialect and accent as a cultural asset. For authenticity, record the speech verbatim, but for readability, equate very strange words with footnotes. Avoid instructing the narrator to change dialect. When editing, only correct grammatical ambiguities and maintain the tone of the text. Remember that this dialect is the identity of the work; do not distort it or make it so heavy that the text is beyond the reach of the general audience. The balance between “authenticity” and “communication” with the audience is the key to success. (deepseek)
***
In the final editing of an oral history, local dialects and dialects should be treated with care and respect. The important principle is to preserve the authenticity of the narrator’s speech; therefore, local dialects or vocabulary should not be completely transformed into standard Persian. It is better to preserve the text as it is spoken, and if necessary, difficult words should be explained in a footnote or brief explanation. Editing should only be done to improve readability, not to eliminate linguistic identity. There should also be consistency in writing style throughout the text. The ultimate goal is to accurately convey lived experience and local culture, not to completely standardize the narrator’s language. By maintaining the integrity of the narration. (chatgpt)
Number of Visits: 13
http://oral-history.ir/?page=post&id=13375