Journal of Education and Development in the Caribbean, Vol. 18 No. 2 2019 • ISSN 0799-5180
© 2019 by the School of Education, The University of the West Indies, Mona. All rights reserved.
Liming as Research Methodology,
Ole Talk as Research Method -
A Caribbean Methodology
Auckland University of Technology
While western qualitative research methodologies have been
embraced in their efforts to explore various worldviews including
those of Caribbean people, the reception from academia for culturally
relevant ways of knowing has been subdued. In recent publications,
liming and ole talk has been presented as an appropriate approach
to researching and understanding how people from the Caribbean
region and diaspora see and interpret the world. The discussion now
centres on distinguishing liming as a research methodology and ole
talk as a research method. Through an exploration and analysis of
three limes we argue that the philosophical and cultural basis of liming
aptly positions it as a research methodology. Similarly, the practice
of storytelling as exemplied through ole talk identies the latter as
a uniquely Caribbean research method for sharing knowledge. This
paper hopes to contribute to the literature and debate on research
approaches that ought to include Caribbean epistemologies.
Keywords: liming; ole talk; research methodology; Caribbean
Received 28 January 2019; accepted 27 April 2019; electronically published 19 September 2019
NAKHID ET AL.2
Liming and ole talk (Trinidad and Tobago) has traditionally
been regarded primarily as a recreational activity and
conversational space where those partaking in a “lime” meet to
share stories and interact with one another, while often sharing
food and drink. Most recently, however, authors have proposed
liming and ole talk as a culturally relevant way to share knowledge
and undertake research with Caribbean people and in Caribbean
contexts (Nakhid-Chatoor, Nakhid, Wilson & Fernandez Santana,
2018; Wilson, Nakhid, Fernandez Santana & Nakhid-Chatoor,
2018). One of the more fundamental and immediate discussions
that has taken place is whether liming and ole talk are research
methods or a research methodology. This paper aims to contribute
to this debate. We argue that liming can be considered a research
methodology as it guides research and provides the philosophical
basis for the way in which research is carried out. Ole talk is
proposed as a research method in that it allows knowledge to
be gathered and shared, while at the same time providing an
opportunity within the lime for knowledge and information to be
analysed by the limers and owners of the knowledge themselves.
The first part of this paper introduces conventional
definitions of methodology and method and explains why it is
necessary to rely on these definitions. The second part of the
paper defines liming and ole talk and discusses the relevance
of and need for local and indigenous research methodologies.
In the third part of the paper, we explain why liming is framed
as a research methodology and ole talk as a research method.
The final part of the paper illustrates the characteristics of liming
and ole talk through three limes that took place in Aotearoa New
Zealand; Canada; and Trinidad and Tobago to support the proposal
of liming and ole talk as methodology and method respectively.
The paper concludes with a discussion.
LIMING AS RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3
Methodology and Method - Claiming the
space for Indigenous Ways of Knowing
Harewood (2009) claims that it is important in cultural studies
research to know the aims and consequences when developing
research practices, and to be aware of how moving between
methodology and method affects the research process. Saukko
(2003) defines method as the tools necessary for empirical
work, whereas methodology is seen as both the tools and the
justification or reason for why we use these tools. Defining
the difference between methodology and method is essential
as the same methods can be used in different methodologies
and for different purposes, but deciding to use a particular
methodology clarifies and highlights our philosophical and political
approach and standpoint (Harewood, 2009). Johnson, Chambers,
Raghuram and Ticknell (2004) reject the word “methodology”
and use instead “practice”, which they argue more appropriately
reflects the dynamic and political nature of research.
According to Schwandt (2007), a definition of methodology
would show it positioned in the middle between method as process
and technique, and methodology as the thinking involved in and
the reasoning for the design, conduct, and analysis of the study
and its data. The choice of a methodology is tied to the outcomes
desired of the study (Mills, 2014). Determining a methodology
to use in research helps us in our selection of participants, and
in how knowledge will be gathered, shared, and analysed. The
decision to use a methodology depends on the result we expect,
but there should be transparency about why the methodology was
chosen and about the methodology itself. The methodology guides
the process of what we want to achieve and shows our knowledge,
insight, and the path to where we want to go. However, it does not
tell us what to do or the techniques to use. This is the method – the
steps we take to arrive at a result or to gather and share knowledge.
A research methodology is informed by a research paradigm
or theoretical framework (Jonker and Pennink, 2010) which
influences the way that knowledge is studied (Mackenzie
NAKHID ET AL.4
and Knipe, 2006). Cohen and Mannion (1994) describe this
framework as the philosophical basis for undertaking a study.
Somekh and Lewin (2005) state that methodology comprises the
principles, theories and values that underpin the research, while
Walter (2006) says it is a frame of reference for the research and
is influenced by the theoretical perspective. On the other hand,
method is seen as the systematic procedure for collecting data
(Somekh and Lewin, 2005). Thus, the methodology cannot derive
from the research, as it is the theoretical knowledge or philosophy
that grounds the research and guides the research methods
that we use in the field of study.
Attention has turned towards nonconventional research
methods in the social sciences and the need to look at more
authentic ways of gathering information about people and
situations in ways that represent more accurately the phenomena
we seek to understand. Research methodologies that have long
existed in indigenous and local contexts but were either not valued
or dismissed are being explored and employed in research settings
(Eisner, 1997). An indigenous research methodology is framed
within an indigenous worldview and epistemology (Getty, 2010).
Indigenous methods involve the protocols, values, and beliefs
important to the community and incorporate experiential learning
whereby the participant is fully engaged (Restoule, 2004). Wilson
(2001), however, advises caution when seeking to decolonize
research methods, arguing that we cannot do so without first
decolonizing the underlying beliefs of those methods.
Caribbean intellectuals have noted that unfavourable and
hostile aspects of colonization remain within our educational
and research institutions in the region. Beckford (1971) and Best
(1977) have emphasized the need for frameworks of independent
Caribbean thinking arising from our own experiences. Lewis and
Simmons (2010) argue that universities are crucial in making
the move towards a more indigenous approach that has not been
fomented in imported cultural assumptions.
LIMING AS RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 5
Mills (2014) suggests that the themes of knowledge which
would more appropriately encompass a Caribbean methodology
would be critical race theory, constructivism or interpretivism, or
participatory research. Wilson et al (2018) claim that Caribbean
feminism appears to be the only theoretical framework posited
within a Caribbean context, though it is itself largely derived
from Western feminism. The paradigms that seem to be
most closely related to liming and ole talk are constructivist,
transformative, interpretivist, and emancipatory. The outcomes
expected from these frameworks would be knowledge in general
as well as knowledge of process and history, illumination, and
change. A research methodology employing regionally-relevant
theoretical frameworks intrinsic to Caribbean social and historical
authenticities allows us to gain a more accurate knowledge of the
world of limers. Research that utilizes methodologies reflecting
“who we be” as Caribbean peoples and in Caribbean contexts
is argued to be a more effective approach to understanding and
addressing our issues and perspectives (Wilson et al. 2018).
Inherent within an indigenous methodology is the relationship
that we have with those who share their knowledge with us.
Wilson (2001) states that we are accountable for our role in a
research relationship. With a Caribbean research methodology,
this relationship extends beyond the research as we sustain and
continue to develop the relationships that were created, or which
we maintain as we gain understandings of each other and of the
issues to be addressed, and in which we should retain an interest
in order to ensure that the knowledge gained has been beneficial
to those affected.
Wilson (2001) sees positivistic research methods as not
coinciding with an indigenous research approach and suggests
that storytelling and narratives better align with an indigenous
paradigm because of the sharing of stories among the listeners
and the caring for the storyteller. Eisner (1997) observes that
storytelling is among the most useful means for sharing what
one has experienced. With stories, we share our lives and our
NAKHID ET AL.6
experiences of our lives with others when our stories are about
those with whom we share our lives. In the storytelling that
comes with liming and ole talk are the potential and opportunity
for collaborating, sharing solutions and empathising with the
situations of others, and a way of truly understanding each other.
A Caribbean research methodology implies that we will employ
our ways of thinking, knowing, and learning to understand and
gain more knowledge about our own reality.
Definitions and Characteristics
of Liming and Ole Talk
Liming is a core activity in the lives of Caribbean peoples
and is particularly associated with the residents of Trinidad and
Tobago (Fernandez Santana et al., 2019). Liming is a common
occurrence and can take place at any time, for example, after a
sports game, following a work meeting or a funeral, or it can be
an event in itself. It is a Caribbean practice that provides a space
where people come together not only for relaxation and leisure
but for gathering and sharing information, advice, and food.
At a lime (where the liming happens), limers (people doing
the liming) indulge in a variety of conversations related to
a situation, or any number of situations, or meet for any reason
that will sustain the lime.
In the environment of a lime, meaning is negotiated, social
and political discourses are elucidated and debated, and cultural
products and spaces are collectively used. Importantly, liming
is crucial to community building and networking (Fernandez
Santana et al., 2019). A number of authors (Clarke & Charles,
2012; Corbin, Punnett, & Onifa, 2012) have observed how liming
has spread across the Caribbean. Corbin, Punnett, and Onifa
claim that people everywhere in the Caribbean seem to understand
the term and the images of socializing, storytelling, and joking that
it invokes while sharing food and drink in a relaxing environment.
LIMING AS RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 7
Fernandez Santana et al (2019) note that there are certain
characteristics associated with liming, for example, the specific
use of communicative competencies (e.g., talking over one
another, gesticulating, chorusing agreement) which lends itself to
improvisation and creativity; the largely spontaneous, inclusive,
and non-hierarchical nature of a lime; and the teasing and humour
which are common and expected when liming.
We use ole talk to understand each other’s lives and it occurs
in relation to ourselves or the situation being discussed (Nakhid-
Chatoor et al., 2018). Ole talk is an important component of
liming, although it can occur outside of it and “transcends idle
conversations, exaggeration … It can involve talk on current
events, politics, culture and school days, as well as trends in
behavior and fashion. Ole Talk … can take place in any setting …
follows no rules of engagement. Talkers move with ease back and
forth between topics” (Wendell DeRiggs, 2009).
Selvon’s writings (1990, 2004) provide an interesting take on
ole talk in a migrant context of Caribbean experiences in the UK.
According to Chamberlain (2008), Selvon notes some important
features of ole talk in the narratives of his characters – ole talk is
seemingly open and unplanned; people commonly and frequently
talk over each other when offering their different perspectives;
and, with its unplanned and open structure, multiple narrators,
and seemingly scandalous humour, the manner of conversation is
distinctly different from that of Europeans.
Making the Distinction between Liming
as Research Methodology and Ole Talk as
In a research context, liming involves the “framing of the
research” and the incorporation of Caribbean thought and practices.
Liming provides an avenue for devising and designing a Caribbean
NAKHID ET AL.8
approach to sharing, rejecting, questioning, extending, curtailing,
and analyzing information. Ole talk provides opportunities and
ways to share knowledge and to sustain relationships through
this shared knowledge (Nakhid-Chatoor et al., 2018). In their
relationship with, and in conjunction with the limers, researchers
observe different perspectives, identify moments of conflict,
consensus or reflection, new learnings, the introduction of new
topics or deviation from current conversations and those that hold
the limers’ attention (Fernandez Santana et al., 2019).
It is important to distinguish between liming and ole talk as
research methodology and research method respectively, because
we see liming as more than just a means of collecting data or
sharing knowledge. Liming is an integral part of how we interact
in the Caribbean. It is a composition of our heritage and history,
and of how we organize politically and socially. It is the way we
meet to solve problems, commiserate, relax, enjoy, share, and
remember who we are. Most importantly, it helps to ground us
and to understand us as Caribbean Islanders. Liming is more than
an activity, it is our way of identifying who we are, not for the
purpose of ethnocentrism but for claiming a forged identity out
of a harrowing past. It speaks of resilience and camaraderie, of
companionship and solidarity. Its uniqueness, whether derived
from the linguistically Spanish version, the French influenced
component, the Dutch flavoured adaptation or the dominant
English language that was forced upon our Carib, African,
Indian, Chinese, and other peoples, signals that we have defined
ourselves for our benefit and withstood being defined by others.
Whether the words used to describe our coming together are
bemberria (Dominican Republic), jangueo (Puerto Rico), par or
lyme (Jamaica), loisir or reunion (Haiti – depending on whether
it is an informal or formal affair), comidita, descarga or compartir
(Cuba – depending on whether food is shared or people get together
to sing accompanied by a guitar, or just coming together to relax)
(Wilson et al., 2018), we know that when we come together over
food and drink to lime and ole talk we own that space, a space that
LIMING AS RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 9
is uniquely ours and is, for that time, a space absent of hierarchies,
class, and social distinctions.
Liming frames our lives and so it should our research. Liming
explains the way we share knowledge and answers why we ought
to share knowledge the way that we do. It reflects our thinking and
our experiences, values and principles. It speaks to and answers
those definitions of methodologies. Within cultural studies, some
authors have moved away from the term “methodology” to the word
“practice” as it portrays an active sense of what we are doing when
we carry out research (Johnson, Chambers, Raghuram & Ticknell,
2004). While liming is dynamic in its own way, it is more than
practice. The philosophy that guides and underpins our motivation
for research and for sharing knowledge is the methodology of
liming. How do we share knowledge within that methodology?
We have used ole talk as the way in which knowledge is shared or
gathered. Ole talk is defined as the conversations that take place.
It is not a synonym for gossip, though it has been seen in that way.
Ole talk can be reminiscences or problem solving; it is a phrase
that encompasses many different types, formats, and contents of
conversations – from intense to funny, from vivacious to solemn,
from cerebral to trivial. Ole talk is not only what knowledge
we share but how we share that knowledge, and it is somewhat
determined by how we feel about sharing that knowledge with
those we have met in a lime. Liming and ole talk are not dependent
on each other in order to take place. We can lime without ole
talking. We can ole talk without liming, particularly (though not
necessarily), if we are ole talking on the phone or via the internet.
While we claim liming as a research methodology, we
are simultaneously saying that ole talk must be seen as an
acceptable method for gathering knowledge in a research context.
Ole talk, our way of conversing in a manner that allows us to
speak as our authentic selves, is arguably the most accurate way
for us to share knowledge and for the most accurate and truthful
knowledge to be elicited.
NAKHID ET AL.10
An Empirical Account of Liming
as Research Methodology and Ole Talk as
In a series of papers based on empirical research, some
researchers have detailed how liming and ole talk could function
as a research methodology and research method respectively
(Fernandez Santana et al., 2019; Nakhid-Chatoor et al., 2018).
The research was based on the authors’ personal experience with
liming as Caribbean islanders as well as the experiences shared by
the other limers that took part in the research. The study involved
two research projects with data drawn from 16 limes carried out
in Cuba, Trinidad and Tobago, Jamaica, Canada, USA, and New
Zealand. The first project focused on “liming about liming”.
The second research project sought to “understand expressions of
Caribbean cultural identity in Aotearoa, New Zealand through a
culturally relevant Caribbean methodology”.
Within liming, there are a number of features which commonly
comprise the overall methodology and structure of a qualitative
Caribbean research setting. These include: people, ole talking
as a form of oral tradition, open-ended time frames, and the
inclusion of food and drink. Liming and ole talk is a regional
cultural practice that helps to build, sustain and reclaim the norms,
behaviours and values within a system of shared meaning vital
to Caribbean peoples’ cultural existence. Our observations of
three limes showed a number of practices and characteristics that
illustrate how Caribbean peoples manage their engagements with
each other and the interactions that are symbolic of their realities
and histories. These observations, along with the researchers’
summary of the limers’ comments, are described below under the
following themes – liming and ole talking in the company of food;
liming for the sake of living; time for liming; learning through ole
talking. They are derived from a series of limes that took place in
Aotearoa New Zealand, Canada, and Trinidad and Tobago.
LIMING AS RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 11
Liming and Ole Talking in the Company of Food
Food is not neutral – it acts as a source of reclamation,
knowledge building, and sharing. Many of the limers said that
eating and drinking are requirements for a lime. The presence
of food and drink (involving, but not limited to, alcohol) in
a lime is not just an arbitrary function that serves a biological
need. An analysis of the limes suggests that food is political and
emancipatory, as it helps limers to construct and reconstruct
identities that were largely displaced by Western habits and
practices. Burke (2005, p. 106) maintains that “cultural change is
one-way, that subordinate cultures imitate dominant ones; and in
the second place, that change took the form of imitation rather than
adaptation.” However, people do not necessarily copy the cultures
of so-called “dominant” social groups. To claim that they do is
to displace agency and to take the individual out of the process.
Caribbean people are not passive receivers of a culture inherited
from a dominant social group; yet this Western-ethnocentric
perception remains a part of mainstream thinking today.
The creolization of the Caribbean resulted from the politico-
economic realities of conquest, slavery, and indentureship
involving the indigenous inhabitants of the Caribbean region,
Africans, East Indians, Chinese, and Europeans. The cultural
forms including food that resulted from these encounters are
continually evolving (Allahar and Varadarajan 1994). Indeed, we
can see these processes of adaptation and invention in Caribbean
cuisine itself. “Food customs and traditions have altered (and been
altered by) the customs and traditions of other ethnic groups in the
Caribbean’, losing their individual flavour ‘to create a new distinct
flavour’ (Houston, 2005, p. xv). As cultural artefact, Caribbean
cuisine reflects a history of colonial oppression and resistance
to it. It speaks to the creativity and the processes of adaptation
rather than imitation and submission. Thus, for limers, food adds
authenticity to the lime, helping to reclaim memory through
historic practice, and allowing the participants to remain in touch
with their origins through the sight, sound, taste, smell, and touch
of the food. Food helps to construct and reconstruct a historical
NAKHID ET AL.12
space and therefore a past that can be witnessed, tasted, and felt,
and a place in which Caribbean communities can construct their
Liming for the Sake of Living
Caribbean people lime for the sake of living as it enables them
to socially engage, share their experiences and stories, and to
learn about their community and their daily lives. In the limes that
took place, interrupting and talking over one another – a cultural
habit that was consistently on display – allowed for knowledge
to be constructed, and showed that limes provided a political
and emancipatory space and were not simply a pastime designed
for idle chatter. The observation by a participant that their non-
Caribbean friends had noticed the engaging, fun, and unique
atmosphere of Caribbean people liming reinforces that liming is
an integral part of Caribbean life, a custom that enables members
of the diaspora and local communities to present and understand a
world that is germane to them.
Time for Liming
In Western society, the introduction of clocks and thus the
concept of time itself changed drastically during the Industrial
Revolution. Time is perceived differently by those in the Caribbean.
Caribbean people appear to live unbridled by time. One of the
limers claimed that a lime can start off with one drink and then
go “all the way through until Carnival”, implying that time is of
little importance when compared to social engagement. Another
limer recognized that a lime begins and starts whenever people get
together, and that there is no time-oriented structure. A closed and
regimented timeframe is likely to miss the customs, norms, and
values of conversations, whereas a more authentic and culturally
relevant time-approach to research has the benefit of opening up
new avenues for investigation. It allows the lime to flow naturally,
so that the possibilities and opportunities that can be gleaned from
an open-ended qualitative research setting remain available.
LIMING AS RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 13
Learning Through Ole Talking
Oral communication is the primary way in which limers engage
with one another. Thus, ole talk as a method aligns with liming
as a methodology as it is an integral part of life for Caribbean
people and a medium for sharing and reclaiming the cultural
knowledge of the community. Burke (2005, p. 109) maintains that
“in the course of oral transmission, messages are adapted to the
needs of the receivers in a process which involves simplification,
selection and the assimilation of the unknown to the known.” Ole
talk within a lime is typically non-hierarchical, and any top-down
organization of power is generally frowned upon. The absence of
hierarchy favours the equal sharing of knowledge and information
among members and demonstrates that knowledge is indeed social
– it does not emanate from a single point, but is relational in that
the cultural knowledge of the community is built by all.
One easily observes the nature and style of these interactions
in a lime as we hear time and again the kinds of interactions that
animate ole talk – interrupting, jesting, joking, teasing, agreement,
and disagreement. One of the limers stated that ole talk is not
negative gossip in the Western sense. Rather, ole talk and the type
of gossip which takes place within it are more about a concern for
other members of the community.
The research methods emphasized in mainstream theory and
practice fail to take local and indigenous cultural practices into
account. In mainstream social science, for example, surveys,
questionnaires, and other quantitative forms of field-work usually
dominate, potentially leading to inaccurate conclusions. With
liming and ole talk, researchers are themselves part of the lime
and can deduce from a discursive analysis information that would
otherwise be missed by surveys, questionnaires, and the like.
Limers have also observed that with their non-Caribbean friends,
they tend to focus on using proper English or at least terms which
correspond to the linguistic norms of that community.
The shift in research approaches to include different cultural
perspectives has opened up new horizons for social scientists.
NAKHID ET AL.14
The characteristics described above should be noted by
researchers who seek to understand Caribbean communities. If
educators and researchers wish to understand Caribbean culture,
utilizing liming and ole talk as research methodology and research
method is one way to capture those cultural norms, customs, and
practices that cannot be obtained from western forms of research.
This paper seeks to elucidate liming and ole talk as research
methodology and research method respectively which speak to
and recognize the epistemological practices of Caribbean people,
centralizing their voices to help explore their sensemaking of the
world in which they live. Liming and ole talk seek to uncover
nuances and contextual differences in the lived experiences of
Caribbean people. Through disconnecting from western practices,
we foster a culturally relevant process of understanding and
researching that is indigenous to Caribbean people and their
forged histories and experiences. From the study of three limes,
we have sought to distinguish liming as a research methodology
and ole talk as a research method.
Liming as a methodology recognizes the uniqueness in which
research can be carried out using a Caribbean approach, distinctly
acknowledging the cultural relevance of, and construction by
Caribbean peoples. The characteristics of food and time are pivotal
to the liming process, as it allows for Caribbean communities to
utilize their existing spaces to help foster a better understanding of
Caribbean practices, and further enables the reconstruction of their
colonized spaces and the recognition of their reality. Through the
coming together over food and drink, with imprecise limitations on
time, liming and ole talk provide an authentic research approach
that is reflective of Caribbean culture and divergent from traditional
western practices. The minimizing of hierarchy and power from a
lime is a distinctive feature that is not only evident within a lime
but also in the positionality of the researcher. Liming and ole talk
invite inclusivity and their core values rest upon the sharing and
emancipatory power of knowledge.
LIMING AS RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 15
Authors have noted the dismissal or lack of acceptance of
local research methodologies in academia and other settings.
However, the presence and use of such methodologies in the
research setting is invaluable. Liming and ole talk provide an
indigenous methodology and method not derived from Western
interpretations, but grounded within a Caribbean context. Liming
offers a philosophical framework that actively incorporates
Caribbean worldviews in the research making process. As
Harewood (2009) claims, methodology is often framed through
a particular standpoint, and liming presents a standpoint that
acknowledges Caribbean people and culture which, for too long,
has been “researched” through Western practices. Recognizing
the spaces and characteristics that Caribbean people use to make
meaning of their realities, and using settings which have been
organized for and by Caribbean peoples themselves, can help to
better get at the questions they may ask and the solutions they
seek. Through ole talk as method, communal discussions occur that
are not limited by time and this draws on a feature often counter
to traditional methods. Expectedly free of time constraints, ole
talk offers up genuine conversations and interactions that are not
hampered by stringent measures of time associated with methods
such as interviews and surveys.
This paper sought to outline the characteristics of liming and
ole talk in order to distinguish them as research methodology
and research method. Liming and ole talk are not intended to
negate western methodologies and methods but to acknowledge,
incorporate, and actively engage in other forms of identity and
knowledge construction that are truthful to Caribbean communities.
Liming and ole talk illustrate a local approach to researching with
local communities, and foster adaptability to learn and understand
in a different way. It paves the way for different methodologies
and methods to be recognized and appreciated as beneficial.
By recognizing the value in Caribbean peoples’ experiential
knowledge and culture using liming and ole talk, we acknowledge
the importance of including and understanding the world from
different research approaches.
NAKHID ET AL.16
Allahar, A., & Varadarajan, T. (1994). Differential creolization: East
Indians in Trinidad and Guyana. Indo Caribbean Review, 1(2),
Beckford, G. (1971). Persistent poverty: Underdevelopment in
plantation economies of the Third World. New York: Oxford
Best, L. (1977). Independent thought and Caribbean freedom. In N.
Girvan & O. Jefferson (Eds.), Readings in the political economy
of the Caribbean (pp. 7–28). Kingston, Jamaica: New World
Burke, P. (2005). History and social theory. New York: Cornell
Chamberlain, K. M. (2008). The Caribbean without frames: Narrative
structure on Samuel Selvon’s London novels. In D. Smith & R.
Puig (Eds.), Caribbean without borders: Literature, language
and culture (pp. 3–16). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge
Clarke, R., & Charles, R. (2012). Caribbean liming: A metaphor
for building social capital. International Journal of Cross
Cultural Management, 12(3), 299–313.
Cohen, L., & Manion, L. (1994). Research methods in education.
(4th ed.). London: Routledge.
Corbin, A., Punnett, B., & Onifa, N. (2012). Using cultural metaphors
to understand management in the Caribbean. International
Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 269–275.
Eisner, E. W. (1997). The new frontier in qualitative research
methodology. Qualitative Inquiry, 3(3), 259–273.
Fernandez Santana, A., Nakhid, C., Nakhid-Chatoor, M.,
& Wilson, S. (2019). Liming and ole talk: Foundation for a
culturally relevant Caribbean methodology. Caribbean
Studies Journal, 47(1), 99–123.
Getty, G. A. (2010). The journey between Western and Indigenous
research paradigms. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 21(1),
LIMING AS RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 17
Harewood, S. (2009). Metaphor and the work of cultural studies.
Policy Futures in Education, 7(2), 161–171.
Houston, L. M. (2005). Food culture in the Caribbean. Westport, CT:
Greenwood Publishing Group.
Johnson, R., Chambers, D., Raghuram, P., & Ticknell, E. (2004).
The practice of cultural studies. London: Sage.
Jonker, J., & Pennink, B. W. (2010). The Essence of Research
Methodology: A concise guide for master and PhD students in
management science. Berlin: Springer Science and Business
Lewis, T., & Simmons, L. (2010). Creating research culture in
Caribbean universities. International Journal of Educational
Development, 30(4), 337–344.
Mackenzie, N., & Knipe, S. (2006). Research dilemmas: Paradigms,
methods and methodology. Issues in Educational Research,
Marcuse, H. (2000). Reason and revolution. (2nd Ed.). New York:
Mills, J. (2014). Methodology and methods. In J. Mills
& M. Birks (Eds.), Qualitative methodology (pp. 31–
47). London: SAGE Publications. doi: https://dx.doi.
Nakhid-Chatoor, M., Nakhid, C., Wilson, S., Fernandez Santana, A.
(2018). Exploring liming and ole talk as a culturally relevant
methodology for researching with Caribbean people.
International Journal of Qualitative Methods.
Restoule, J. P. (2004). Male aboriginal identity formation in urban
areas: A focus on process and context. (Doctoral dissertation).
Retrieved from Dissertations & Theses: Full Text Database.
(Publication No. AAT NQ94516).
Saukko, P. (2003). Doing research in cultural studies: An introduction
to classical and new methodological approaches. London: Sage.
Selvon, S. (1990). The housing lark. Washington: Three Continents
Selvon, S. (2004). The lonely londoners. London: Longman.
NAKHID ET AL.18
Schwandt, T. (2007). The Sage Dictionary of Qualitative Inquiry.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications
Somekh, B., & Lewin, C. (2005). Research methods in social sciences.
Walter, M. (2006). Social science methods: An Australian perspective.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wendell DeRiggs, A. (2009). Reflections and ole talk. London:
Wilson, S. (2001). What is an Indigenous research methodology?
Canadian Journal of Native Education, 25(2), 175–179.
Wilson, S., Nakhid, C., Fernandez Santana, A., & Nakhid-Chatoor,
M. (2018). An interrogation of research on Caribbean social
issues: Establishing the need for an indigenous Caribbean
research approach. AlterNative: An International Journal of
Indigenous Peoples. https://doi.org/10.1177/1177180118803692
Camille Nakhid is an Associate Professor at Auckland University of
Technology, Aotearoa New Zealand. She is a native of Trinidad and Tobago
and her research lies both in the Caribbean and the Pacic. Her main areas of
research are on indigenous, migrant and refugee communities with a focus on
culturally relevant methodologies.
Josh Mosca is a former student of McMaster University, 2009-13 (BA)
where he studied history and political theory. His interests include social and
cultural history, human rights, education, inequality and economics.
Shani Nakhid-Schuster graduated from Teachers College, Columbia
University, with an M.A. in Sociology and Education. As a native of Aotearoa,
New Zealand with Samoan and Trinidadian heritage, her studies in New York
City has led her to pursue a career in urban education, with a research interest
in civic youth engagement. She is currently a research assistant for the Public
Good project at Teachers College and the Children Environments Research
Group at the CUNY Graduate Center. Shani is currently pursuing a teaching
certication in the hope of teaching ethnic studies within New York City