Gunter Senft

Publications

Displaying 1 - 17 of 17
  • Senft, G. (2006). Prolegomena to Kilivila grammar of space. In S. C. Levinson, & D. P. Wilkins (Eds.), Grammars of space: Explorations in cognitive diversity (pp. 206-229). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Abstract

    This paper presents preliminary remarks on some of the central linguistic means speakers of Kilivila use in expressing their conceptions of space and for referring to objects, persons, and events in space . After a brief characterisation of the language and its speakers, I sketch how specific topological relations are encoded, how motion events are described, and what frames of spatial reference are preferred in what contexts for what means and ends.
  • Senft, G. (2006). Völkerkunde und Linguistik: Ein Plädoyer für interdisziplinäre Kooperation. Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik, 34, 87-104.

    Abstract

    Starting with Hockett’s famous statement on the relationship between linguistics and anthropology - "Linguistics without anthropology is sterile; anthropology without linguistics is blind” - this paper first discusses the historic perspective of the topic. This discussion starts with Herder, Humboldt and Schleiermacher and ends with the present debate on the interrelationship of anthropology and linguistics. Then some excellent examples of interdisciplinary projects within anthropological linguistics (or linguistic anthropology) are presented. And finally it is illustrated why Hockett is still right.
  • Senft, G. (2006). A biography in the strict sense of the term [Review of the book Malinowski: Odyssee of an anthropologist 1884-1920, vol. 1 by Michael Young]. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(4), 610-637. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2005.06.012.
  • Senft, G. (2006). [Review of the book Bilder aus der Deutschen Südsee by Hermann Joseph Hiery]. Paideuma: Mitteilungen zur Kulturkunde, 52, 304-308.
  • Senft, G. (2006). [Review of the book Narrative as social practice: Anglo-Western and Australian Aboriginal oral traditions by Danièle M. Klapproth]. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(8), 1326-1331. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2005.11.001.
  • Senft, G. (2006). [Review of the book Pacific Pidgins and Creoles: Origins, growth and development by Darrell T. Tryon and Jean-Michel Charpentier]. Linguistics, 44(1), 195-200. doi:10.1515/LING.2006.006.
  • Levinson, S. C., Enfield, N. J., & Senft, G. (2001). Kinship domain for 'space in thinking' subproject. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (Eds.), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 85-88). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.874655.
  • Senft, G. (2001). Das Präsentieren des Forschers im Felde: Eine Einführung auf den Trobriand Inseln. In C. Sütterlin, & F. S. Salter (Eds.), Irenäus Eibl-Eibesfeldt: Zu Person und Werk, Festschrift zum 70. Geburtstag (pp. 188-197). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
  • Senft, G. (2001). [Review of the book Handbook of language and ethnic identity ed. by Joshua A. Fishman]. Linguistics, 39, 188-190. doi:10.1515/ling.2001.004.
  • Senft, G. (2001). [Review of the book Language Death by David Crystal]. Linguistics, 39, 815-822. doi:10.1515/ling.2001.032.
  • Senft, G. (2001). [Review of the book Malinowski's Kiriwina: Fieldwork photography 1915-1918 by Michael W. Young]. Paideuma, 47, 260-263.
  • Senft, G. (2001). [Review of the CD Betel Nuts by Christopher Roberts (1996)]. Kulele, 3, 115-122.

    Abstract

    (TMCD 9602). Taipei: Trees Music & Art, 12-1, Lane 10, Sec. 2, Hsin Yi Rd. Taipei, TAIWAN. Distributed by Sony Music Entertainment (Taiwan)Ltd.,6th fl. No 35 , Lane 11, Kwang-Fu N. Rd., Taipei TAIWAN (CD accompanied by a full color bucklet)
  • Senft, G. (2001). Frames of spatial reference in Kilivila. Studies in Language, 25(3), 521-555. doi:10.1075/sl.25.3.05sen.

    Abstract

    Members of the MPI for Psycholinguistics are researching the interrelationship between language, cognition and the conceptualization of space in various languages. Research results show that there are three frames of spatial reference, the absolute, the relative, and the intrinsic frame of reference. This study first presents results of this research in general and then discusses the results for Kilivila. Speakers of this Austronesian language prefer the intrinsic frame of reference for the location of objects with respect to each other in a given spatial configuration. But they prefer an absolute frame of reference system in referring to the spatial orientation of objects in a given
    spatial configuration. Moreover, the hypothesis is confirmed that languages seem to influence the choice and the kind of conceptual parameters their speakers use to solve non-verbal problems within the domain of space.
  • Senft, G. (2001). Kevalikuliku: Earthquake magic from the Tobriand Islands (for Unshakebles). In A. Pawley, M. Ross, & D. Tryon (Eds.), The boy from Bundaberg: Studies in Melanesian linguistics in honour of Tom Dutton (pp. 323-331). Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
  • Senft, G. (2001). Sprache, Kognition und Konzepte des Raumes in verschiedenen Kulturen: Affiziert sprachliche Relativität die Philosophie? In L. Salwiczek, & W. Wickler (Eds.), Wie wir die Welt erkennen: Erkenntnisweisen im interdisziplinären Diskurs (pp. 203-242). Freiburg: Karl Alber.
  • Senft, G. (2001). Ritual communication and linguistic ideology [Comment on Joel Robbins]. Current Anthropology, 42, 606.
  • Van Staden, M., Senft, G., Enfield, N. J., & Bohnemeyer, J. (2001). Staged events. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (Eds.), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 115-125). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.874668.

    Abstract

    The term “event” is a controversial concept, and the “same” activity or situation can be linguistically encoded in many different ways. The aim of this task is to explore features of event representation in the language of study, in particular, multi-verb constructions, event typicality, and event complexity. The task consists of a description and recollection task using film stimuli, and a subsequent re-enactment of certain scenes by other participants on the basis of these descriptions. The first part of the task collects elaborate and concise descriptions of complex events in order to examine how these are segmented into macro-events, what kind of information is expressed, and how the information is ordered. The re-enactment task is designed to examine what features of the scenes are stereotypically implied.

Share this page