**5. Training in the field**

Language, an essential element in the preservation of cultural heritage, must be transmitted in order to avoid its extinction. And to do this, training is needed. This training must take into account the field for the collection of data, if all African languages are not written. To carry out this work, the States must set up research structures, that is, laboratories and research centers, computer equipment, and financial resources, with the aim of training teachers in the training of learners and vice versa, a sort of chain, a collaborative work between teachers and taught. Clearly, either the teacher transmits to the learner the theoretical bases of the field, and once in the field, the learner applies it and reports back with possible difficulties and suggestions, or the teacher and the learner both go to the field and confront the realities of the latter so that they experience and transform together the field method to be adopted. This is because the field is a complex notion. It cannot be understood as a fixed object to be studied, and the researcher cannot claim to give an objective account of what he has collected. There will be an element of subjectivity that will be included especially when translating from unwritten local languages to written languages. The researcher has, as it were, an "intimate and subjective relationship with the field" ([8], p. 1).

One cannot rigidify the field by solidifying it and making it an object of research, comparable to the object of the hard sciences for example. The field pre-exists the one who analyses it and escapes the experimental procedures of the laboratory and therefore the production of stable evidence (quoted by [8], p. 1). In the same perspective, Bourdieu [9] speaks of "participatory objectification," which presupposes certain reflexivity. The researcher is therefore a victim of his or her emotions, which he or she uses in his or her analyses and interpretations. In addition to this difficulty, there is the difficulty of expressing the particular realities of a given culture.

The subjectivity in question is imposed from the moment that what is collected in the field is not fixed; everything is dynamic. It is information that is constantly being acquired from generation to generation, which is subject to modification, addition, and removal. This training requires enormous resources from (political) decision-makers. It is important to have a large and well-trained human resource. To do this, start by training trainers in the development of manuals for learning traditional knowledge and practices. These concern almost all areas since it is the cultural heritage that needs to be transmitted. They can be:


### **6. The difficulty in expressing realia**

Realia are those non-linguistic realities, whether objects or expressions, that are difficult to convey in words and for which one is obliged to use images or illustrations to express them.

Existing objects in the world perceived or considered independently of their relation with the sign`` [10]. Anyone who wishes not to sacrifice the inherent unruliness of the reality of facts soon finds themselves exposed to succumbing under the weight of documentation and, ultimately, in danger of producing work of little value. The solution lies first in a division of tasks: historians, sociologists, etc., are responsible for observing and describing the realia and their evolution, while grammarians are tasked with identifying the signifiers in their various aspects and presenting them clearly and orderly. (G. Antoine, L'Hist. de la lang., probl. et méth.ds Fr. mod.1981 t. 49, p. 146) ([11], p. 1).

The way of thinking, the culture, and the identity are specific to each language. Thus, without the field, it is almost impossible to transmit certain cultural knowledge; the way in which it is transmitted and those who transmit it must be in direct contact with those who gather the information:

What characterizes "fieldwork" above all […] is its human dimension; fieldwork necessarily involves a relationship with people: professionals, users, inhabitants… whom the researcher will regularly call "actors" or "subjects."

It is in this way that researchers will be able to construct a new epistemology.
