Advertisement

Common Knowledge in Conversation of Bilinguals and the Ecology of Pressures. The Complex Processes of Using Language and Learning to Coordinate Actions with Other Speakers

  • Roland TerborgEmail author
  • Virna Velázquez
Chapter

Abstract

There seems to be nothing unusual about a conversation between two people who have never been in contact. These people understand each other because they speak the same language. That is commonly believed because the notion of ‘langue’ has always been there when we think about German, Spanish or Catalan languages. The concept seems useful but may be problematic at times. We cannot avoid using this notion to write a language test; nevertheless, the idea limits us, in understanding the process that is taking place in the interaction. The aim of this text is to discuss how individuals develop a physical and social history together with others. By doing it, some pressures involved lead to common actions that modifies the state of the world to which they belong. All the way to seek less effort in their social actions should be coordinated with other actions of the other speakers involved. These pressures are the product of what is called: Upmost Common Routine (UCR) that is in permanent change in relation to the amendments of Direct Common Knowledge (DCK) and Indirect Common Knowledge (ICK). Each common action causes mental changes related, but not identical, to the knowledge of the individuals involved. Their stories are partly shared and partly individual, so a complex network of shared knowledge that gives the illusion that there is a fixed and unchanging knowledge as a real representation of the world is built. These illusions are reinforced by pressures that emerge from the ideologies, values and beliefs.

Notes

Aknowledgments

The article was supported by a research project grant on the vitality of indigenous languages in México (PAPIIT IN404313) Situaciones y prácticas bilingües que contribuyen al mantenimiento-desplazamiento de lenguas. Análisis del ‘conocimiento’ y de la ‘máxima facilidad compartida’ como sistemas complejos funded by the National Autonomous University of Mexico, Department of Applied Linguistics at the Teaching Centre of Foreign Languages (CELE-UNAM).

References

  1. Bastardas-Boada, A. (2003). Lingüística general: elementos para un paradigma integrador desde la perspectiva de complejidad. LinRed: Lingüística en la red, 12, 1–23. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10017/24698.
  2. Bastardas-Boada, A. (2013). Sociolinguistics: Towards a complex ecological view. In Á. Massip-Bonet & A. Bastardas-Boada (Eds.), Complexity perspectives on language, communication and society (pp. 15–34). Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Massip-Bonet, Á. (2013). Language as a complex adaptive system: Towards an integrative linguistics. In Á. Massip-Bonet & A. Bastardas-Boada (Eds.), Complexity perspectives on language, communication and society (pp. 35–60). Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Milroy, L. (1982). Language and social networks. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  5. Morin, E. (2001). El método I. La naturaleza de la naturaleza. España: Ediciones Cátedra.Google Scholar
  6. Romaine, S. (1989). Bilingualism. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Inc.Google Scholar
  7. Romaine, S. (1994). Language in society. An introduction to sociolinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Schmidt, A. (1985). Young People's Dyirbal. An example of language death from Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Terborg, R. (2006). La ‘ecología de presiones’ en el desplazamiento de las lenguas indígenas por el español. Presentación de un modelo. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 7(4), 39. URN: urn-nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0604396, http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/fqs-7.4.167.
  10. Terborg, R., & García Landa, L. (2006). Cómo los conceptos pueden influir en la planificación del lenguaje: la competencia y su impacto en las relaciones de poder y la desigualdad. In R. Terborg & L. García Landa (Eds.), Los retos de la planificación del lenguaje en el siglo XXI (Vol. I, pp. 163–182). México: CELE, UNAM.Google Scholar
  11. Terborg, R., & García Landa, L. (Eds.). (2011). Muerte y vitalidad de las lenguas indígenas y las presiones sobre sus hablantes. México: CELE/UNAM.Google Scholar
  12. Terborg, R., & García Landa, L. (2013). The ecology of pressures: Towards a tool to analyze the complex process of language shift and maintenance. In Á. Massip-Bonet & A. Bastardas-Boada (Eds.), Complexity perspectives on language, communication and society (pp. 219–246). Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Trujillo Tamez, I. (2012). La vitalidad lingüística de la lengua ayuk o mixe en tres comunidades: Tamazulapam del Espíritu Santo, San Lucas Camotlán y San Juan Guichicovi. (Doctoral dissertation). UNAM. México.Google Scholar
  14. Varela, F. (1990). Conocer. Las ciencias cognitivas: tendencias y perspectivas. Cartografía de las ideas actuales. Barcelona: Editorial Gedisa.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Escuela Nacional de Lenguas, Lingüística y Traducción, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de MexicoMexico CityMexico
  2. 2.Facultad de LenguasUnivesidad Autónoma del Estado de MexicoTolucaMexico

Personalised recommendations