Advertisement

Theory meets Practice – H. Paul Grice’s Maxims of Quality and Manner and the Trobriand Islanders’ language use

  • Gunter SenftEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Perspectives in Pragmatics, Philosophy & Psychology book series (PEPRPHPS, volume 18)

Abstract

As I have already pointed out elsewhere (Senft 2008; 2010; 2014), the Gricean conversational maxims of Quality – “Try to make your contribution one that is true” – and Manner “Be perspicuous”, specifically “Avoid obscurity of expression” and “Avoid ambiguity” (Grice 1967; 1975; 1978) – are not observed by the Trobriand Islanders of Papua New Guinea, neither in forms of their ritualized communication nor in forms and ways of everyday conversation and other ordinary verbal interactions. The speakers of the Austronesian language Kilivila metalinguistically differentiate eight specific non-diatopical registers which I have called “situational-intentional” varieties. One of these varieties is called “biga sopa”. This label can be glossed as “joking or lying speech, indirect speech, speech which is not vouched for”. The biga sopa constitutes the default register of Trobriand discourse and conversation. This contribution to the workshop on philosophy and pragmatics presents the Trobriand Islanders’ indigenous typology of non-diatopical registers, especially elaborating on the concept of sopa, describing its features, discussing its functions and illustrating its use within Trobriand society. It will be shown that the Gricean maxims of quality and manner are irrelevant for and thus not observed by the speakers of Kilivila. On the basis of the presented findings the Gricean maxims and especially Grice’s claim that his theory of conversational implicature is “universal in application” is critically discussed from a general anthropological-linguistic point of view.

Keywords

Maxims of Quality claim to universality Kilivila Trobriand Islands Papua New Guinea biga sopa” 

References

  1. Arndt, H., & Janney, R. W. (1987). InterGrammar. Toward an integrative model of verbal, prosodic and kinesic choices in speech. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Basso, E. B., & Senft, G. (2009). Introduction. In G. Senft & E. B. Basso (Eds.), Ritual communication (pp. 1–19). Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
  3. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality. A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  4. Bornemann, E. (1973). Unsere Kinder im Spiegel ihrer Reime, Verse und Rätsel. Olten: Walter.Google Scholar
  5. Bornemann, E. (1974). Die Umwelt des Kindes im Spiegel seiner ‘verbotenen’ Lieder, Reime, Verse und Rätsel. Olten: Walter.Google Scholar
  6. Brown, P. (2002). Everyone has to lie in Tzeltal. In S. Blum-Kulka & C. E. Snow (Eds.), Talking to adults. The contribution of multiparty discourse to language acquisition (pp. 241–275). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  7. Eibl-Eibesfeldt, I. (1984). Die Biologie des menschlichen Verhaltens. Grundriß der Humanethologie. München: Piper.Google Scholar
  8. Eibl-Eibesfeldt, I., & Senft, G. (1987). Studienbrief: Rituelle Kommunikation. Hagen: Fern Universität Gesamthochschule Hagen, Fachbereich Erziehungs- und Sozialwissenschaften, Soziologie, Kommunikation – Wissen – Kultur.Google Scholar
  9. Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  10. Grice, H. P. (1967). Logic and conversation. William James Lectures. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.Google Scholar
  11. Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics. Vol. 3: Speech acts (pp. 41–58). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  12. Grice, H. P. (1978). Further notes on logic and conversation. In P. Cole (Ed.), Syntax and semantics. Vol. 9: Pragmatics (pp. 113–127). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  13. Haiman, J. (1998). Talk is cheap. Sarcasm, alienation, and the evolution of language. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Heymer, A. (1977). Humanethologisches Wörterbuch – Deutsch – Englisch – Französisch. Berlin: Parey.Google Scholar
  15. Keenan (Ochs), Elinor. (1976). The universality of conversational postulates. Language in Society, 5, 67–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kiefer, F. (1979). What do conversational maxims explain? Linguisticae Investigationes, 3, 57–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Levinson, S. C. (2000). Presumptive meanings. The theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  18. Malinowski, B. (1927). Sex and repression in savage society. London: Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  19. Malinowski, B. (1929). The sexual life of savages in Northwestern Melanesia. London: G. Routledge and Sons.Google Scholar
  20. Malinowski, B. (1935). Coral gardens and their magic. A study of the methods of tilling the soil and of agricultural rites in the Trobriand Islands. Vol. 1: The description of gardening. Vol. 2: The language of magic and gardening. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  21. Merlan, F., & Rumsey, A. (1991). Ku Waru. Language and segmentary politics in the Western Nebilyer Valley, Papua new Guinea. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Parkin, D. (1984). Political language. Annual Review of Anthropology, 13, 345–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rosaldo, M. Z. (2011). The things we do with words. Ilongot speech act theory in philosophy. In B. B. Schieffelin & P. B. Garrett (Eds.), Anthropological linguistics – Critical concepts in language studies, volume II: Thinking about language: Part II, 78–115. London: Routledge [First published 1982 in Language and Society 11:203–237].Google Scholar
  24. Rühmkorf, P. (1967). Über das Volksvermögen. Exkurse in den literarischen Untergrund. Reinbek: Rowohlt.Google Scholar
  25. Sadock, J. M. (1978). On testing conversational implicature. In P. Cole (Ed.), Syntax and semantics. Vol. 9: Pragmatics (pp. 281–297). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  26. Sansom, B. (1980). The camp at wallaby cross. Aboriginal fringe dwellers in Darwin. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar
  27. Saukkonen, P. (2003). How to define and describe genres and styles. Folia Linguistica, XXXVII, 399–414.Google Scholar
  28. Senft, G. (1985a). How to tell – And understand – A ‘dirty’ joke in Kilivila. Journal of Pragmatics, 9, 815–834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Senft, G. (1985b). Emic or etic or just another catch 22? A repartee to Hartmut Haberland. Journal of Pragmatics, 9, 845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Senft, G. (1986). Kilivila. The language of the Trobriand Islanders. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Senft, G. (1987a). Nanam’sa Bwena – Gutes Denken. Eine ethnolinguistische Fallstudie über eine Dorfversammlung auf den Trobriand Inseln/Papua Neuguinea. Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 112, 181–222.Google Scholar
  32. Senft, G. (1987b). Rituelle Kommuniktion auf den Trobriand Inseln. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik, 65, 105–130.Google Scholar
  33. Senft, G. (1991a). Prolegomena to the Pragmatics of “Situational-Intentional” Varieties in Kilivila Language. In J. Verschueren (Ed.), Levels of Linguistic Adaptation. Selected papers of the 1987 international pragmatics conference (Vol. 2, pp. 235–248). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  34. Senft, G. (1991b). Mahnreden auf den Trobriand Inseln. Eine Fallstudie. In D. Flader (Ed.), Verbale Interaktion. Studien zur Empirie und Methodologie der Pragmatik (pp. 27–49). Stuttgart: J. B. Metzler.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Senft, G. (1995). Notes from the field. Ain’t Misbehavin? Trobriand pragmatics and the field researcher’s opportunity to put his (or her) foot in it. Oceanic Linguistics, 34, 211–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Senft, G. (1997). Magical conversation on the Trobriand Islands. Anthropos, 92, 369–391.Google Scholar
  37. Senft, G. (2008). The case: The Trobriand Islanders vs. H. P. Grice – Kilivila and the Gricean maxims of quality and manner. Anthropos, 103, 139–147.Google Scholar
  38. Senft, G. (2009). Trobriand Islanders’ forms of ritual communication. In G. Senft & E. B. Basso (Eds.), Ritual communication (pp. 81–101). Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
  39. Senft, G. (2010). The Trobriand Islanders’ ways of speaking. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Senft, G. (2011). The Tuma underworld of love – Erotic and other narrative songs of the Trobriand Islanders and their spirits of the dead. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  41. Senft, G. (2014). Understanding pragmatics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  42. Senft, B., & Senft, G. (1986). Ninikula – Fadenspiele auf den Trobriand-Inseln, Papua-Neuguinea. Baessler-Archiv NF 34:93–235.Google Scholar
  43. Strathern, A. (1975). Veiled Speech in Mount Hagen. In M. Bloch (Ed.), Political language and oratory in traditional society (pp. 185–203). London: Academic.Google Scholar
  44. Watson-Gegeo, K. A. (1986). The study of language use in Oceania. Annual Review of Anthropology, 15, 149–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Weiner, A. B. (1983). From words to objects to magic. Hard words and the boundaries of social interaction. Man, 18, 690–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wheelock, W. T. (1982). The problem of ritual language. From information to situation. Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 50, 49–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Max Planck Institute for PsycholinguisticsNijmegenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations