Contracolonial Practices in Salish Sea Namescapes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This portfolio dissertation emerges from the observation that Indigenous and settler toponyms are fundamentally unequal in the Salish Sea’s diverse namescape. To explore these toponymic inequities, I ask the following question: if settlers and their toponymic systems fail to make space for or to acknowledge Indigenous toponymies in the Salish Sea, particularly in W̱SÁNEĆ territories, what do these failures say about the settler state’s approaches to attendant questions around land and, ultimately, space for Indigenous worldviews? To answer this question, I examine toponymic justice and Indigenous/settler toponymic equity through thematically linked but separate articles, a public-facing blog, and an interactive art installation. The prologue situates me as a settler scholar attempting to do anticolonial scholarship and art. The introduction frames my academic perspectives on toponyms and settler approaches to understanding Indigenous toponymic resurgence. In the first article, I discuss the PKOLS/Mount Douglas toponym(s) and renaming ceremony and explore “decolonization” through toponymic means. In the second article, I analyze toponymic power dynamics in the Salish Sea, by conceptualizing a “panoptoponymy”—a toponymic version of a panopticon—and describing its toponymic-power functions through the example of the British Columbia Geographical Names Office. In the third article—through a skateboarding lens and the voices of some Indigenous skaters, artists, and writers—I conceive of and define a “skatescape”: a geospatial awareness particular to skateboarders. The fourth article is a manifesto that details the theory and practice involved in building the first prototype of a “haptic map,” an interactive art-map installation the features audio recordings of both SENĆOŦEN (a language spoken by W̱SÁNEĆ Peoples) and English toponyms. The final article is a collection of the public-facing blog posts that discuss the construction of the first haptic map prototype, the Untitled ṮEṮÁĆES map, and provide thoughts and resources on toponyms. I contend that the Untitled ṮEṮÁĆES map, and the way in which it was conceived and constructed, can serve as a model for future academic and artistic collaborations; it is one answer to the question of how to address Indigenous/settler toponymic inequities in the Salish Sea. Built with TEMOSEṈ (Charles “Chazz” Elliott), a professional artist and carver from W̱JOȽEȽP (Tsartlip) First Nation, this unique map offers new ways to represent and combine Indigenous and settler spatial literacies and represents new methodologies for Indigenous/settler cartographic collaborations.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".