Publications

Abstract

This paper describes how the Trobriand Islanders of Papua New Guinea used to construct their big seagoing masawa canoes and how they used to make their sails, what forms of different knowledge and expertise they needed to do this during various stages of the construction processes, how this knowledge was socially distributed, and the social implications of all the joint communal activities that were necessary until a new canoe could be launched. Then it tries to answer the question why the complex distributed knowledge of how to make a masawa has been gradually getting lost in most of the village communities on the Trobriand Islands; and finally it outlines and discusses the implications of this loss for the Trobriand Islanders' culture, for their social construction of reality, and for their indigenous cognitive capacities.

Abstract

This entry takes an interdisciplinary approach to linguistic pragmatics. It discusses how the meaning of utterances can only be understood in relation to overall cultural, social, and interpersonal contexts, as well as to culture-specific conventions and the speech events in which they are embedded. The entry discusses core issues of pragmatics such as speech act theory, conversational implicature, deixis, gesture, interaction strategies, ritual communication, phatic communion, linguistic relativity, ethnography of speaking, ethnomethodology, and conversation analysis. It takes a transdisciplinary view of the field, showing that linguistic pragmatics has its predecessors in other disciplines such as philosophy, psychology, ethology, ethnology, and sociology.

Abstract

Some Trobriand Islands string figures by Stephan Claassen, Best, the Netherlands, and Joseph D'Antoni, Queens, New York, USA, in cooperation with Gunter Senft, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen, Netherlands (pages 72-128) - The construction and execution of fourteen string figures from the Trobriand Islands is given, along with accompanying chants (in the original, and in translation) and comparative notes. The figures were made during a 1984 string figure performance by two ladies in the village of Tauwema, on the island of Kaile’una. The performance was filmed by a team of German researchers. One of the figures appears to be not recorded before, and the construction method of another figure was hitherto unknown. Some of the other figures have their own peculiarities.

Abstract

Seit 1982 erforsche ich die Sprache und die Kultur der Trobriand-Insulaner in Papua-Neuguinea. Nach inzwischen 15 Reisen zu den Trobriand-Inseln, die sich bis heute zu nahezu vier Jahren Leben und Arbeit im Dorf Tauwema auf der Insel Kaile'una addieren, wurde ich von Markus Schindlbeck und Alix Hänsel dazu eingeladen, den Mitgliedern der „Berliner Gesellschaft für Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte“ über meine Feldforschungen zu berichten. Das werde ich im Folgenden tun. Zunächst beschreibe ich, wie ich zu den Trobriand-Inseln kam, wie ich mich dort zurechtgefunden habe und berichte dann, welche Art von Forschung ich all die Jahre betrieben, welche Formen von Sprach- und Kulturwandel ich dabei beobachtet und welche Erwartungen ich auf der Basis meiner bisherigen Erfahrungen für die Zukunft der Trobriander und für ihre Sprache und ihre Kultur habe.

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.

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.