<i>Hula</i> as an embodied language practice: dancing with ancestral and indigenous Funds of Knowledge / <i>El</i> hula <i>como práctica lingüística corporizada: una danza con los Fondos de Conocimiento ancestrales</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This reflective and scholarly piece explores how hula embodies and activates Indigenous knowledge systems, serving as a vital site of resistance, resilience, cultural reclamation, language revitalization and education. The author traces her evolving engagement with the concept of Funds of Knowledge, first introduced during her university studies and later expanded and applied in educational settings focused on Indigenous language revitalization. This journey is further deepened through her participation in a roundtable discussion on dance ethnography, where hula emerged not just as a performative art but as a form of education that transmits generational knowledge, values and identity through an embodied practice. Centring Hawai‘i, the article highlights the centrality of ancestral and Indigenous knowledge in hula , illustrating how the cultural tradition and practice function as a vital vehicle for transmitting the Hawaiian language and reclaiming cultural identity. Through this lens, hula is examined as both a powerful pedagogical tool and a generative source of knowledge, essential to the documentation, preservation and revitalization of traditional practices, particularly in the context of historical colonization and ongoing occupation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".