The Yupno as Post-Newtonian Scientists: The Question of What is 'Natural' in Spatial
Description
Author(s): Jurg Wassmann
Reviewed work(s):
Source: Man, New Series, Vol. 29, No. 3 (Sep., 1994), pp. 645-666
Published by: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2804347 .
Accessed: 28/11/2012 13:33
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to Man.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.222 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:33:01 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE YUPNO AS POST-NEWTONIAN SCIENTISTS:
THE QUESTION OF WHAT IS 'NATURAL IN
SPATIALDESCRIPTION
JURGWASSMANN
Max PlanckInstitutefor
Psycholinguistics,
Nimegen
and(Indogermanic)
scientists
wereinducedbythe(European)cultures
Cognitive
languages
abouttheintrinsic
structure
alreadyknownto themto formulate
over-hasty
generalizations
andconsequently
universal
ofhumanthinking.
thatitis natural
Theybelieve,forexample,
toviewthespacearoundus froma relative,
andanthropomorphic
egocentric
pointofview.
from
However,thiswayofseeingtheworld- withone'sbodyatthecentreoftheuniverse
radiateout- isjustone ofthepossiblewaysofviewingspace,as
whichspatialco-ordinates
ofspatialorderamongtheYupnoofPapuaNew Guineaillustrates.
thecultural
conception
A universalist
ckaim
The approachto issues concerningtherelationsamonglanguage,cultureand
thoughtproceeds fromdifferent
presuppositionstodayfromthe ones held
Withthe riseof the cognitivesciencesin the 1960s,the commonpreviously.
alities in human thinkingand their bases in the genetic endowment of
humanitywere emphasized,in partbuildingon Piagetianuniversalsof human
development.This emphasiswas strengthened
by developmentswithincogwith its controversial
nitiveanthropology,
discoveryof significant
universals
in colour termsand in the structureof ethnobotanicalnomenclature,and of
kinshipterms.The aim of researchat thattime shiftedaway fromthe descriptionof cultural diversitytowards the search for underlyinghuman
constants.Againstthis background,the overall disciplineof anthropology
was reduced to silence, due to its seeminglycontradictory
desire to stress
while simultaneouslyinsistingon what is common to human
differences,
kind.
All this somehow licensed the committedcognitivists,who were researchingonlyEuropean culturesand Indogermaniclanguages,to formulate
hastygeneralizationsabout the intrinsicstructureof human thinking.However,therehas been a recentchange of intellectualclimate in psychology,
linguisticsand other disciplinesrelatedto anthropology,
towardsan intermediateposition,'in which more attentionis paid to linguisticand cultural
Man (N.S.) 29, 645-666
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.222 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:33:01 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
646
JURG WASSMANN
such diversity
beingviewed withinthe contextof whatwe have
differences,
learned about universals'(Gumperz & Levinson 1991: 614). There is also
across culturalboundaries,differencesin
evidence forcognitivedifferences
and forsolvingproblems,as well as differhabitualstrategiesforclassifyring
are
ences in cognitivestyle.However,researchsuggeststhatthesedifferences
in performanceratherthan in competence,and are due to basic cognitive
processesapplied to particularcontexts,ratherthan to the presenceor ab'thereis
sence of the processes.Despite cross-culturalcognitivedifferences,
of cognitiveprocesses'(Segall etal. 1990: 184, eman underlyinguniversality
phasis in original). These basic or elementaryprocesses, such as visual
constitutive
sortingand memory,are constructive,
perception,categorization,
and complementaryin the sense thattheyare adopted not as isolated elecombinations,as functionalsystemsto solve everyday
ments,but in different
problems,accordingto varyingcircumstancesand contexts.Thus, social relationsand everydaypracticeenterinto the cognitiveprocessesof particular
persons. For this reason it seems pertinentthatanthropologistsand other
cognitivescientistslistento each other(Wassmann& Dasen 1993). Cognitive
scientistshave somethingto say about matterssuch as learningand memory.
'avoid theattemptto maketheirtheoshould not,therefore,
Anthropologists
withwhatothercognitivescientistshave to say
riesabout social lifecompatible
about the processesof learningand storage'(Bloch 1990: 184, emphasisin
original).On the otherhand,the 'cognitivists'should also question some of
assumptionsby examiningthe
and over-simplifying
theirpartlyethnocentric
(whose work
culturalanthropologists
researchof cognitiveanthropologists,
has implicationsfor the natureof cognition [e.g. Munn 1989], and those
scholarswhose primaryobject is to understandhow the historyof social
relationsenters into the constitutionof cognitiveprocesses (e.g. Mimica
1988; Toren 1990; Walkerdine1990; Kuchler& Melion 1992).
This challengeto the cognitivesciencesapplies in particularto the fieldof
There are manyreasonsto thinkthatspatialconspatialconceptualizations.
ceptualization is central to human cognition. Spatial understandingis
perhaps the firstmajor intellectualtask facinga child. Above all, spatial
thinkinginformsour conceptualizationsof many other domains, such as
time ('before tomorrow'),social structure('low class', 'distantrelatives'),
music ('flatnotes'), mathematics('high numbers')and emotions('high', 'depressed') (Levinson 1992b:8). Spatialconceptualizationalso appearsto be of
since spatialconceptualizationis
interestwhen examiningculturalrelativity,
clearlyhighlyconstrainedby the natureof the physicalworld 'out there',as
well as by the natureof human psycho-biologywith its visual systemand
uprightposture.
These environmentaland cognitiveconstraintsled the cognitivesciences
to believe that it is naturaland consequentlyuniversalto conceive of the
space around us froma relative,egocentricand anthropomorphicpoint of
view and to understandit accordinglyCognitivescience holds that:
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.222 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:33:01 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JURG WASSMANN
647
1. Naive human spatial conception makes no use of fixed angles but
i.e. objects are seen as relative,
alwaysbuilds on relativerelationships,
to the speaker
eitherin regardto anotherobject, or (prototypically)
him- or herselfThus people localize objects by using prepositions:
notablyin, at, on, behind,to, from,between,above, below,and a set
of prepositionalphrasessuch as in frontof,to theleftof,fromthe side
of,nextto (Miller &Johnson-Laird1976; Talmy1983).
2. Spatialconceptionis alwaysunderstoodfroman egocentricand anthropomorphicperspective,i.e. it proceedsfromthe human body which
standsuprightand looks ahead - what Clark calls the 'canonicalposition' (1973: 34). Startingfromthis position,space is divided into in
frontand behind, into above and below, into left and right.This
or
systemof co-ordinatesmaythenbe projectedonto an interlocutor
an oriented object (Piaget & Inhelder 1948; Clark 1973; Miller &
Johnson-Laird1976; Lyons 1977).
A person's body stands in the centre of the universe and the spatial
co-ordinatesradiateout fromit. The Piagetianchild strugglesto extendthis
frameworkacross the environment,learningslowlyabout the constantsof
theworldbeyonditsperception(cf Steiner1987). Only thepost-Newtonian
scientisthas escaped thisanchoredworldwherespace is ego-centred,and has
displacedorigo
learnedto thinkof space in absolutetermswith an arbitrary
fromwhich radiateinfiniteco-ordinates,i.e. independentof anyobjectsthat
space mightcontain (Smart 1968; Harfield1990). This idea of one's own
body as the centreof the universe,and the convictionthatthe relativistic
conceptionof space is 'more naturaland primitive'(Miller & Johnson-Laird
1976: 381; cf Gell 1985), is deeplyrootedin Westerntraditionsof scientific
and philosophicalthought(cf.Gosztonyi1976).
Kant rejectedthe view of space as a sort of 'etherealstuff'(as Newton
claimed), as well as the view that space could be reduced to the sum of
relationships
betweenthings(as Leibniz claimed). He postulatedinsteadthat
space is a subjectiveframeworkwe impose on the objectiveworld and, in
1768, suggestedthatwe conceive space in termsof threedimensionsradiating out fromour bodies along the orthogonalplanes above/below,before/
behind and right/left:
In physicalspace,on accountofitsthreedimensions,
we can conceivethreeplaneswhich
thesenseswe knowwhatis outside
intersect
one anotherat rightangles.Sincethrough
it is notsurprising
us onlyin so faras it standsin relationto ourselves,
thatwe findin
the relationship
of theseintersecting
planesto our bodythefirstgroundfromwhichto
derivethe conceptof regionsin space... One of theseverticalplanesdividesthe body
similarpartsand suppliesthegroundforthedistinction
betweenright
intotwooutwardly
and left,
theother,whichis perpendicular
to it,makesit possibleforus to havethecon-
and behind(Kant 1991: 28-29, emphasis in original).
cept before
It is due only to the orientationof our body,and to the relationbetween
our sides and the regionsprojectedfromthem,thatwe are able to localize
something:
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.222 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:33:01 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JURG WASSMANN
648
ofthepositionof
knowledge
ourgeographical
knowledge,
evenourcommonest
Similarly,
to thesidesof our bodies,
places,wouldbe of no aid to us ifwe couldnot,byreference
relativeposiassignto regionsthe thingsso orderedand thewholesystemof mutually
tions(Kant1991:29).
This idea of space as relativeand egocentricstill prevailstoday,and informs much contemporarywork in cognitivescience, as the following
quotationillustrates:
as Cassirer(1923) and othershave
The conceptualcore of space probablyoriginates,
withthebodyconcept- withwhatis at,in,or on our own bodies.The first
maintained,
we learnto use is ego... PiagetandInhelder(1948) claimthatescapefrom
spatialrelatum
The abilityto decendevelopment...
cognitive
thisegocentric
spacerequiresconsiderable
it... Egocenof space,butit supplements
conception
terdoes notdisplacetheegocentric
tricuse of thespaceconceptplacesego at thecenterof theuniverse.Fromthispointof
coordinatesystemthatdependson his own
originego can lay out a three-dimensional
locatedas
otherobjectscan be directionally
orientation.
Withrespectto thislandmark
above or below (ego), in frontor in back(of ego), to the leftor to the right(of ego)
1976:394-5).
(Miller& Johnson-Laird
In the West,space is understoodwithinthe frameworkof Euclidean geometrywith its relationshipbetween lengths,areas and volumes of objects
to its place, i.e.
to the locationof a certainobject in space, referring
referring
the partof space it occupies. Thus, the linguistBowden argues:
to someitslocationrelative
In orderto specify
thelocationof an objectwe mustspecify
forus (1991: 87).
thingelse whosepositionis alreadydetermined
For thisspecification,
we need a co-ordinatesystemwith referenceplanes.
It seems thatwe must realize thatthe 'influenceof our bodily experiences
extendsveryfarinto our conceptualsystem'of space (Lee 1988: 239), because it is biologythat'providesus with [the] threereadymade planes of
reference'(Bowden 1991: 88) requiredforestablishinga necessaryreference
pointin relationto whichwe can specifylocation(cf Levelt 1989: 49 sq.)
Such views of space can be shown to be just plainwrongby lookingat how
Humans have thecognitivecapacconceptionsof space varycross-culturally.
ityto decentrespatialdescriptionalmostentirelyin everydaylife,injust the
way thatNewton explicitlypioneeredas a scientificspecialism.
A challenge
withtwo counterThe two main assumptionsabout space can be confronted
examplesfromnon-Europeancultures.First,it is maintainedthat'ordinary
space; with space relativeto
languagesare designedto deal with relativistic
of angles or distanceare
'no
fixed
units
objects thatoccupy it' and where
A
1976:
counter-examplecomes
380).
involved' (Miller & Johnson-Laird
from
Levinson
among the Guugu
1992a),
fromAustralia(Haviland 1991;
Yimidhirrin NorthernQueensland,who conceivetheirspatialenvironment
different
ways compared to
and orient themselvesin it in fundamentally
has
no relativeterms,
Their
America
and
in
North
language
Europe.
people
which
of
four
cardinal
correspondto
roughly
edges
an
absolute
system
only
the Euro-Americanfourcardinaldirectionsof North,South,Westand East.
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.222 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:33:01 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JURG WASSMANN
649
These cardinalpointsare determinedmainlyby the winds: fromthe North
(i.e. the Guugu Yimidhirr'North') thereblows a stronghot wind, fromthe
South an irregularcooler wind, fromthe East a constantsoftcurrentof air.
In everydaylife,thissystemis appliedon everylevel,and is used to describe
objectsin close proximity,
as well as thosewhich are faraway.If,forexample,
someone wants to say 'Bill is standingin frontof the store', in Guugu
Yimidhirrit has to be: 'Bill is standingin the North of the store'.Or: 'You
there,move to the lefta bit' becomes,'You there,move to theWesta bit'.
The use of absolute angles constitutesa fundamentally
different
strategy
froma relativesystemsuch as thatin theWest,forit presupposesthatat any
one time people are absolutelyoriented,and know exactlywhere certain
pointsof reference(e.g. objects in the landscape) are situated.If theymove,
theymustkeep all the changesof directionin mind,and be able to reporta
scene fromeverydaylifeat a laterdate.The dramaticconsequencesof such a
systemcan be illustratedwith a hypotheticalexample takenfromHaviland
(1991, my paraphrase):
Let us imagine I invitea Guugu Yimidhirrto dinner in a revolvingrestaurant.We sit at
the same table and yet experience the environmentin totallydifferentways. As far as I
am concerned,while I am eating,all the furnitureand persons in the restaurantremain
in a constant(since relative)spatial relationto each other,i.e. I can always localize them
in the same way. Thus my butteris always on my leftside, my guest is always sitting
opposite me. As far as my guest is concerned,the location of the objects and persons is
constantlychanging,since he does not measure theirrelationto each other but against a
fixed exterior(absolute) system:the butteris now to his North and I to his West, soon
the butterwill be to his East and I to his North.
The second assumptionregardinguniversalperceptionsof space, which
has manyadherentsin the cognitivesciences,statesthatspace is alwaysseen
froman egocentric
pointofview Tzeltal,a Mayanlanguagespokenin Chiapas,
providesa counter-example(P Brown 1991; P Brown & Levinson 1991).
Tzeltal makes some, thoughmuch more limited,use of an absolutesystem.
Its speakersinhabita regionconsistingof a highmountainrangein thesouth
and lower-lyinghillyareas in the northof Chiapas. Their absoluteanglesof
orientationreferto a fixednotional 'uphill/downhill'
inclined plane correspondingto the overallfallof the terrainalong a South/Northaxis.Westand
East are not distinguished,both are held to be 'traverse'.If, for example,
Tzeltal speakerswant to point out a tree standing'northerly'on a hilltop,
theywill say 'look, the treedownhill',even ifthe treestandshigherthanthe
speaker.
This general'uphill/downhill'
contrastis supplementedby a more precise
relativesystemof spatialdescriptionwhich, however,is not egocentricbut
intrinsicin character.The Tzeltal languagehas only one singlepreposition,
i.e. 'at'. 'in', 'on', 'to', 'from'and so on cannotbe distinguished.If an object
(or figure,to use the termsuggestedby Talmy1983) is localized,it is not its
hence the egocentricpoint
positionvis-d-visthe speakerwhich is important,
of view,but only the descriptionof its exact dispositionvis-d-vis
a further
objectwhich is adjacent(or ground,to use Talmy'sterm).This second object
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.222 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:33:01 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JURG WASSMANN
650
may be any otherobject found nearby- a house, a yardor a mountain,for
instance.To localize it requiressome systemof mentallydismemberingthe
referenceobject into its constituentparts.This is done by analogicallymapping a human or animal body onto the object. Thus 'on the mountain' in
Tzeltal means 'at the head of the mountain';openingsare 'mouth',a round
somethingelse is 'leg', a smoothsurfaceis
partis 'belly',somethingcarrying
'face'. These associationsare mostlymade accordingto optical similarities,
but in partalso accordingto functions.The sharppartof a knifeis 'teeth',the
writingend of a ball-pointpen is a '(dripping)nose'. An object (figure)is
localized by describingit as beinglocated'at' a (body) partof the ground:no
void are involved.
projectionsinto a three-dimensional
'The man is standingin frontof the car' becomes 'the man at the nose of the car';
'The man is standingon the other side of the car' is 'the man at the flankof the car';
'The man is standingon the corner of the house' becomes 'the man at the ear of the
house';
'The man is standingbehind the house' is 'the man at the back of the house'.
These findingsfromMayan (Durr 1990; P Brown 1991; Levinson 1991; de
Leon 1992), Australian(Evans 1991; Haviland 1991; Levinson 1992a) and
other Oceanic (Austronesian)languages (Ozanne-Rivierre 1987) disagree
withthe generalizedview thatspatialconceptionis 'naturally'relativistic
and
egocentric,and organizedaccordingto the co-ordinatesystemwith its three
planes of referencewith which our body providesus. If we accept this,it
seems plausible to assume thata languagecan possess eithera relativeand
egocentricor an absolutesystemof spatialdescription.However,as we shall
see below,the Yupno of Papua New Guinea show thatthis does not apply
either:their(Papuan) languagemakes it possible forthem to use both systems at the same time and, moreover,theyalso use landmarksand place
names as referencesto localize objects.(I should stresshere thattheseobserratherthan about
vations are about the languageof spatial representation,
embodied cognitiveprocesses,thoughI will returnto this point later.)Before elaborating on this, it is necessary to give an overview of the
ethnographiccontextand methodologieswhich informmy analysis.
Theethnographic
context
The Yupno inhabita ruggedand isolatedregion in the easternpart of the
FinisterreRange, Madang Province of Papua New Guinea. The roughly
6000 inhabitantsof theYupno valleywere virtuallyunknownto the outside
world until a few years ago, although the German Lutheran Mission of
Neuendettelsaustartedmissionaryworkaround 1930, increasingitseffortin
the 1950s. Some of theYupno are stillsemi-nomadic.For severalmonthsof
the year,theyleave theirvillagesto live in dispersedsettlementsat altitudes
of over2000 metres,collectingscrew-pine(Pandanus)nutsand huntingmarsupials, feral pigs, cassowaries and possums. Around their villages they
cultivatesweetpotatoesand, more recently,
vegetables.Their houses, which
are surroundedbyhighfences,a styleof construction
look likebig hay-stacks,
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.222 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:33:01 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JURG WASSMANN
651
foundonly in thisarea of Papua New Guinea. They are well adaptedto the
cold climate:theyhave no windows,and in the middle a fireburns almost
continuouslyin an elongatedfireplace(as long as 15 metres),providingheat
and light(as well as largeamountsof smoke), and the means to roastsweet
potatoesand to cook food in bamboo pipes.
Characteristicof Yupno cultureare the kongap melodies: each individual
owns a shorttune,thatbelongsto the personjust as a name does, and which
has eitherbeen self-composedor providedby bush spiritsin a dream.When
crossinga particulargarden or stretchof bush, the Yupno sing the tune
belongingto the ownerof thatland,thusshowingtheirlocal knowledge,and
indicatingtheir own status as a friend.Only strangers(i.e. enemies) are
silent.Since 1971, theYupno regionhas had an airfieldand is in contactwith
the outside world (for a generalethnographicdescriptionsee Keck 1992;
Wassmann1993a).
Spacegames
There is no question thata studyof spatialconceptionsrequiresrichethnographyand a vast amount of data based on natural interaction.But an
ethnographermay have to wait a long timeto assemblea reasonablesample
of such data. Moreover,thesedata will not testthe limitsof the descriptive
system.In everydaylife,a systematicfocusis feasibleforonly a fewexpresIn orderto
sions (cf Hanks 1990), and the restmustremainimpressionistic.
stimulateverbal and gesturalinteractionover spatialissues, so-called 'space
games' were playedby Yupno informants
in additionto a restricted
systemA batteryof elicitationtechniqueswas
atic focuson spontaneousinteraction.
used, as developed by the Max Planck CognitiveAnthropologyResearch
Group, drawingon workby cognitivepsychologists(Clark & Wilkes-Gibbes
1986; Weissenborn1986) and by linguists(de Leon 1991).
'Space games' here refersto tasksdesignedto stimulateconversationabout
or participantobserver,but
space. The researcheris not an interrogator
ratheris the instigator
of an interaction.
These gamesallow forsome formof
a crucialpointifwe are interestedin datawhich not only
naturalinteraction,
reflectthe knowledgeor the structureof a language,but the actual practice
of the speakers(cf also Senft1992: 14).
The gameswere designedas a communicativetaskperformedby a pair of
players.Two partnerssit side by side with a screen separatingthem; each
orientedin the same way.They are asked to performa seriesof interactive
tasks. For example, one informant(the 'director') must describe a route
(markedwitha cord) througha model townso thatthe otherinformant(the
model. In
'matcher')can emulatethe routeon an identicalbut screened-off
anothertask,the 'director'must describethe positionand stance of an articulatedwooden man, so thatthe 'matcher'can emulatethe body positions
on anotheridenticalfigure.In a thirdtask,the 'director'must describethe
relativelocationsof a set of toyfarmanimalsso thatthe 'matcher'can again
reproducethearrangement.
By farthemostinformative
taskwas a photo-photo
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.222 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:33:01 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
652
JURG WASSMANN
matchinggame: a totalof forty-eight
pairsof photographswere presentedin
groupsof 12, the 'director'chose one of themand had to describeit in such
a way thatthe 'matcher'could pick the same photographfroman identical
stack.The positionsof the plasticmodels shown in thesephotographs(male
figures,trees,animalsetc.) variedin a systematic
way.The orientationof the
'direcplayerswas periodicallychanged (i.e. theywere looking in different
tions'),just as theirroles as 'director'and 'matcher'were also reversed(for
furtherinformation
on the space games c? de Leon 1991; Levinson 1992b).
FourteenYupno subjectsplayedthephoto-photomatchinggame (onlythis
game is considered here) in paired units which varied according to age,
genderand school attendance.The durationof the game per pairwas ninety
minutes.The games were playedat Gua village,on a table in frontof the
anthropologist'shouse; they were recorded on audio-tape and were also
partiallyvideo-taped.
TABLE 1:
The use of thethreereference
system.
theplayers
relative
absoluteangles
angles field-namesabsoluteangles
(egocentric)
| plusfield-names
Nayakot/Yangogwak
males,no
2
schooling,16 years
33
(20 thereof
left/right)
Gumban/Kandat,
females,
gradeII,
18years
4
(0)
21
Pol/Koki,
males,28 years
withschooling,
and
35 years,no schooling
53
(27)
Wakine/Gumeyu
males,no schooling,
approx.40 years
30
(27 thereof
8
uphill/downhill)
8
61
35
47
(28)
18
3
(0)
33
12
(10)
22
males,
Megau/Jim,
noschooling,
approx.50 years
18
(16)
7
47
(20)
Nanguot/Sivik,
males,no schooling,
approx.50 years
7
(0)
22
24
(11)
Yavit/Virinone,
males,no schooling,
6
(0)
29
11
(8)
124
(63 thereof
left/right)
149
204
179
(122thereof |
uphill/downhill)
approx. 60 years
Total
(8)
l
13
61
J 21
_
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.222 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:33:01 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JURG WASSMANN
653
As alreadymentioned,the Yupno use threesystemsat the same time for
theirspatialdescriptions:a relative(body-centred)system,an absolute sysuse of field-nameswhich is often
tem (not body-centred)and the systematic
combined with the naming of the absolute angles. The frequencywith
which each systemwas used, and by which subjects,is shown in table 1. In
whichway thesediffering
as
systemscan be verballyappliedis demonstrated,
we will see below,by the descriptionsof the same photograph.This photograph,renderedhere as a drawing(see fig. 1), shows the model of a boy
turninghis back to the observerand holdinga stickin his righthand,while
to his leftis a tree.The threeexamplesoutlinedbelow have been chosen in
such a way thatin each case one of the possibleYupno methodsof description is favoured- although,as a rule,thesemethodsare farmore thoroughly
or age-effect
in respectto the
mixedin everyday
Yupno life.No gender-effect
use of the terminologies
was evident,thougha more comprehensiveanalysis
of theireverydayuse is yetto be carriedout.
Yupnospatialdescriptions
Let us discuss each of these threeexampleswithin the particularcultural
contextto which it belongs.
Case 1: thebody-centred
or relative
In this example Nayakot,a
reference
system.
boy of about 16 yearsof age and withno formaleducation,is the 'director';
he describesthe pictureto Yangogwakwho is of the same age. While doing
this,theyboth look downstream,i.e. towards(our) East.
The ramificationsof the tree are above (the man), a man is standingwith his feet on a
green elevation, he is wearing a very green (blue) T-shirt and his right hand holds a
yellow stickor anotherthing,he is standingthereand turninghis buttocks(to me).1
The playerdescribes how the male figureturns his back towards him
(player),how he holds a stickin his righthand and how thetreestandsabove
him (the branchesare reachingslightlyhigherthanhis head); the term'left'
(which mighthave been expected)is not used. In orderto understandthis,
we mustconsidertheculturalcontextin which theverbalutteranceis made,
as well as Yupno conceptionsof the human body
In Yupno life,the completehuman being (amin) consistsof severalparts
(Keck 1993; Wassmann1993a). As well as the body,a human being has two
spiritualsubstances.The firstis the freesoul, wopm(the 'image', 'shadow'),
which is not localized and leaves the body duringsleep and in case of sickness. The second is the body soul, monian(the 'steam appearing in the
morningwhen the sun shines on the ground wet from the dew'). It is
presentin everypartof thebodybut especiallyin thebreath;since it contains
the 'vitalenergy'of a person,it makes it possible forthem to see, hear and
move. Also partof the personalityof a human being is thekonigap
(melody),
the 'voice of the dead spirits',a shortsequence of threeto fivesounds which
was 'found'duringa dreamand whichactsas an individualidentification
call
togetherwith a personalname. An individual'spersonalname is identicalto
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.222 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:33:01 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JURG WASSMANN
654
FIGURE
whichwas shownto theYupno: a tree
1: Drawingof thephotograph
and a manwitha stick.
uphill
the sid e
below,
Gua
t.BR.'
FIGURE 2:
of Ndanda
Photograph
etchingthe'world'with
themiddleline
theriver,
representing
and thesmallovalsthe
villages.
severalfenced-in
~~*
2
.
theside
above
<'.eWas
',,;,dwnhill
FIGURE 3:
The 'world'(basedon
thedrawingof Ndanda)
and itsquadrantsas
seen fromGua village.
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.222 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:33:01 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JURG WASSMANN
655
the name of the man who contributedmost towardshis mother's brideprice.In thissense,a name is not so much an individualpossession (like the
konigap)as an expressionof a social relationship.Everybodyalso possesses
'vitalenergy'(tevantok),
an impersonalenergycontainedin thebody soul, the
amountof which fluctuatesand determineswhetheran individualis considered 'hot', 'cold' or 'cool'. A 'hot' personis overheated,angry,
with a will of
his or her own, and burdenedwithproblems.As a result,such personsstand
'above' theirsocial group. People who show inertiaand displayspeechlessness are likelyto be unpopular,and are held to be 'cold'. Only the 'cool' state
is desired,since only in this stateare individualsthoughtto be fullyintegratedand of the same social standingas theirfellowhuman beings. Such
individualstakeon the ideal stanceof a slightlybentposture.In thisposition,
theycan listenattentively
to othersand therebybecome 'knowinghuman
beings' (nandakamin:fromnanda,'to listen';and -k, nominalizer;amin,'human being').
The body (ngodim)is held uprightby the bones (kirat),which are believed
to have two importantqualities:theypreventsomethingfromfallingdown
(a man, a house) and at the same time they provide stability(vernacular
terms for a house-post, firmground, bamboo pipes or human skeletons
always contain the term 'bone'). The body is covered by a wrapping,the
human skin (ngop:skin, rind,husk), which is vulnerableto outside influences.Justas clumps of soil stickto sweetpotatoes,andjust as bean pods are
bitteninto by caterpillars,so the invisible'oppressiveproblems' resulting
fromstrainedsocial relationsleave 'cold' or 'heat' on a person'sskin(c? Keck
1993). Between bones and skin are fleshand muscles as well as blood, the
lattercoming fromthe motherand the former(fleshand bones) fromthe
father.For conceptionto occur a singlesexual act is insufficient,
and a man
mustrepeatedly'feed' the embryowithhis semen.
The body of eachYupno is dividedintotwo unequal partsby an imaginary
line leading fromthe nose to the penis. The leftside is consideredto be
female,passive,'cold' (i.e. with little'vitalenergy'in the 'body soul'), and
can act only as an 'assistant'(kwandimn);
the rightside, in contrast,is considered male, active and 'hot' (i.e. with much 'vital energy'). This symbolic
assignmentapplies especiallyto the hands: the righthand activelypulls the
bowstring,the left one assists by holding the bow In addition to being
divided in this way,the body is also ideallyorientedas a whole: it looks
downstream(to the East). As we will see, this oppositionis criticalformy
analysis.
If the locationof objects in space is to be described,this may- but need
not necessarily- be done in an ego(body)-centricand relativemannerby
using prepositions.The Yupno employa rangeof prepositionsforsuch descriptions:forexample,in front,facing,facingeach other,behind,thisside,
otherside, contiguous,on top,at the base, on, above the speaker,below the
speaker,betweenme and a 'border',beyondabove a 'border',beyondbelow
a 'border' (if I am sittingat the fireplacein the upper part,'uphill', of the
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.222 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:33:01 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JURG WASSMANN
656
house, the person opposite is 'beyond above a "border"',somebody at the
other,lower end near the door, 'downhill' therefore,is 'beyond below a
"border"').
The termsleft(kwandim)and right(aminteet)may also be used (as in the
an objectis onlydescribedas
case above), butwithone importantrestriction:
being to the leftor rightifthereis directcontactbetweenthe object and the
body half in question; that is, only if the object may be understoodas a
physicalextensionof the respectivebody half If thereis no immediatecontact, the two terms are not used; the localization must be formulated
eithermisleadingly,
like the 'director'in the firstexample (e.g.
differently,
line 1.1 in footnote1, where he uses 'above' as a substitutefor'left')or, for
example,by using field-names,as in the followingcase.
Case 2: thefteld-names
Pol is a 28-year-oldman who
or locallandmark
system.
reachedgrade5 in school. In thiscase, he is the 'director'.His 'matcher'is
Koki, 35 years old, who never attendedschool. Both playersagain look
downstream(eastwards).Againit is thephotographrepresented
by thedrawing in figure1 which is being described.
Director: A boy is turned to the place down therewhere you ('matcher') live, his right
hand holds a stick,he stands and looks down to Mundogon and a shrub is standingon
the hillside,on the side of Teptepvillage.
Matcher: Is the tree on the hillside and the man turned to the place below,
Mpagmbewufiok?
Director: Yes.2
The problemof not beingable to referto the 'left',which Nayakotexperienced in the firstexample,is solved by Pol in this example by namingthe
villageof Teptep,since the treeis on thatside, and the figure(withthe stick
in the righthand) looks towardsMundogon, down towardsthe site which
wherethe 'matcher'has his house (it
borderson thearea of Mpagmbewufiok
is typicalthatthe 'matcher'mentionshis own piece of land).
to a relational(case
A generativesystemof place namesoffersan alternative
In the
1) or an angular (case 3 below) method of location-specification.
gardensor partof
Yupno valley,everypiece of land,whetherforsettlements,
thebush, has a specific,originallydescriptive,
propername; in principle,this
yields a checkerboardof named units forspatialdescription.Like absolute
independentof the speaker.However, the disystems,these are effectively
rectionsare determinedby referencenot to conventionallyagreed angles
whichwill remainconstant,but to specificfixedlocationswhich maychange
fromone speech eventto another,mainlyaccordingto the respectivesite of
the speech eventitself(preferenceis givento tractsof land which are within
sight)or to the personspeaking(preferenceis givento tractsof land which
belong to one's own kin group).
Of the 250 field-namesaround Gua (where the space games were carried
out), 60 per cent. containpurelytopographicalindications,like 'place of the
found
crumblingsoil', while 40 per cent.statewhat is growingor frequently
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.222 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:33:01 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JURGWASSMANN
657
on the piece of land in question,oftenin connexionwith a topographical
indication.Surprisingly(in the contextof Papua New Guinea) historicor
mythologicalevents are very rarelyincorporatedinto field-names(for a
counter-examplecf Wassmann1991). In the course of the space games,the
followingfield-namesor landmarkswere mentionedwithgreatestfrequency:
For 'right/South'
or 'slightly
lower'(forplayerslookingEast,hencetakingtheidealposi'the
tionof orienting
thebodyas a whole):Sindalin,'theplacewitha view';Kamgwam,
placewhereeverything
growsfast'.
'thehillwherethegingergrowsbig';
For 'left/North'
or 'slightly
higher':Mambapmbaga,
Kunagatowa,
'theplaceabovethescrewpines'.
'theplaceof themanytree-beetles'.
For 'at theback/West'
or 'steeplyabove':Waminokaa,
'theplacewherewatercollects';
or 'steeplydown': Mpagmbewufiok,
For 'in front/East'
Mundogon,'theplaceof thefallingdownrocks'.
Let us now turnto the case where a system
Case 3: theabsolute
reference
system.
is used which is not centredon the body of the speakerbut insteadmakes
use of externally
fixedangles.In thisthirdexample,Sivikis the 'director'and
Nanguot the 'matcher'.Both men are about 50 yearsold. The photograph
describedis the same as thatindicatedby the drawingin figure1 and again
both men are lookingdownstreamtowardsthe East.
A man; a verygreenshrubis to theside higherup (North),a boy is to theside lower
down (South),he standson topof a stonyelevation,
he holdsthisyellowpartof a stick
and extending
his armto theside
to theside lowerdown (South),therehe is standing
higherup (North)and is lookingdownhill(East) to Mundogon.3
In thiscase, the speakerdoes not use relativeterms(even the righthalfof
the bodywhich holds the stickis missing),and limitshimselfto threeabsolute co-ordinates.In order to understandthe space conception underlying
the sentence, the topographicsituation of the Yupno habitat must be
described.
The Yupno Valleystretchesapproximately
Westto East and is bounded on
threesides by highmountains,literally'fences'(naal), reachingan altitudeof
up to 4,000 metres.From its source at about 3,000 metres,theYupno River
flows throughsteep gorgesand along rock faces of up to 700 metreshigh
into AstrolabeBay In thisextremelyruggedregion,veryfew level areas can
be found.Villagesare situatedon mountainledges in small adjacentvalleys
at altitudesof between600 and 2,200 metres,hence betweenthetropicalrain
forestand the treelessgrassland.
Yupno view,this valleyis the 'world' (WassAccordingto the traditional
mann 1993b). It is shaped like an inclinedoval withonlyone openingat the
bottom,in the 'East', throughwhich theYupno Riverflowsinto the sea (see
fig.2). This 'world' is orientedby the course of the river,which at the same
time is regardedas the creatorMorap, 'the one who dwells in abundance'.
Above (West') is the source fromwhich humanityoriginated,
washed ashore
in bamboo pipes (teet,the termwhich also standsfor 'right')by the Yupno
ashore and deposits it on
River,literally'the one which washes everything
the banks'; at the bottom('East') where theYupno flowsinto the sea, is the
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.222 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:33:01 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
658
JURG WASSMANN
land of the dead, the islandof Nomsa, 'the thingwhich riseslike a fernstalk
fromthe sea' (Arop or Long Island). The source of the river(above and at
the back) is Morap's head, the estuary(below and to the front)is his feet.
Morap is lookingdownstream(justas forthe individualYupno the canonical
orientationis the one downstream).
This worldview is replicatedin the structureof the traditionalYupno
house, which is also oval, with a single opening at the front(towardsthe
river).In the middleof the house thereis a long fireplacewhich extendsfor
the full lengthof the dwelling.Men sit to the right(which is active and
'hot'), while women and childrensit on the left(passive and 'cold'). The
same orientationof river,dwellingand human bodies is obvious, as is their
symbolicallyunequal divisionintotwo parts.However,as we have seen, this
partitiondoes not radiateout fromthe body,so thatit would be wrong to
speak of a 'cold' and a 'hot' side of thevalley.
Given this overallinclinationof the valleyfromhighlandto lowland,the
upper quadrant(withthe source as its centre)is alwayscalled 'uphill' (in all
theYupno villages),while the lowerquadrant(withthe estuaryas its centre)
is referredto as 'downhill'. These two termsdesignatenot only an incline
but also fixedangleson the horizontal.Gua villagelies in the upper thirdof
the main valleyabout one and a halfkilometresfromthe river,on the left
side of the valleyin an adjacentvalleyon a spit of land slightlydescending
towardstheYupno. Consequently,in Gua (though not necessarilyin other
villages) 'uphill' lies towardsour West and 'downhill' towardsour East (a
descriptionwhich is a bit misleadingsince edges and not cardinalpointsare
meantby it). Apartfromthismain axis tracedby the river,the local plane (in
Gua) slightlyinclinessouthwardsfromthe North towardsthe Yupno and
therebydefinesthe two furtherquadrants(see fig.3). The fourquadrants
are:
omoden:fromomo,'down' and defi,'the whole'. Hence 'downhill'. This means the whole
area downstreamto the estuaryin the East.
osodefi:from oso, 'up' and deni,'the whole'. Hence 'uphill'. This means the whole area
upstreamup to the high mountainsaround the source in the West.
fromngwi,'an area nearby' and si, 'up', defi,'the whole'. Used in the sense of
ngwisidefi:
'sideways from the main axis', 'a bit higher up'. Thus ngwisidenmeans the closer surroundingswhich slightlyincline towardsthe North. The adjacent higher mountains are
alreadythoughtof as 'beyond above' (esigap)or equally as 'uphill'. (It should be borne in
mind thatthe 'world'-oval has a much shortertransverseaxis.)
fromngwi,'an area nearby'and me,'down', deni,'the whole'. Used in the sense
ngwimeden:
of 'on the side of the main axis', 'somewhat lower'. This means the closer surroundings
which slightlydescend towardsthe South and theYupno. The lower-lyingYupno may be
designatedas 'downhill', the highermountainsbeyond are 'beyond below' (emisan).
The use of the conventionallyagreed upon expressions'uphilVdownhill'
and 'the side, above, below' to locateentitieson two idealizedWest/Eastand
North/Southplanes constitutesan absolute model of spatial description,
since the termslabel constantanglesor quadrants,fixedwithoutreferenceto
the orientationof ego or anotherhuman body (see fig.3). These anglesmay
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.222 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:33:01 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JURG WASSMANN
659
be used to referto an object severalkilometresdistantor to one only a few
in pointingto a treestandingin
centimetres
away. There is no contradiction
the East and saying'look downhillat the tree',even ifthe treeis situatedon
a ridgeat a higheraltitudethanthe speaker(a similarexample fromTzeltal
has alreadybeen mentioned). Thus when talkingabout two cups on an
East-Westoriented table, one may be described quite naturallyas being
'downhill'comparedto the other,even thoughthe tableis horizontal.
'Downhill' and 'uphill' are also used when pointingto a nearbyobject or
to describephysicalmotion.The Yupno languagepossessesa deictictermfor
'this' (on), but no generaltermfor 'there';it firstmust be distinguishedin
which of the four quadrants'there' is, and secondly if it is visible to the
speaker (markedwith nii)or invisible(markedwith ngan).Thus an object
within arm's reach may be pointed to while sayingoniii (on 'this'; fii,'visible'); if,however,the object is at a distanceof about two metres(e.g. to the
is used (ngwi,'an area nearby';nli'visible'),afterfour
West),the word ngwinii
metresngwisifni
(si, 'up' ), aftersix metresngwasiiii(ngwa,'an area nearbybut
furtheraway than ngwi')and beyond that,ngwasingan
mightbe appropriate
(ngan'invisible',e.g. if the object is hidden behind a house). If the object is
more thanten metresaway,or is beyondthevillagefence,it is referredto as
'uphill'. The same deicticexpressionsare used forobjectswhich standNorth
of the speaker; if they stand South, si (up) is replaced by me (down). If,
however,a speakeris pointingto somethingto the East, theyfirstsay ovinii
(ovi,'below'), thenovimefni
(me,'down'), and then 'downhill' dependingon
the distance. Thus once more West and North (both regions ascending,
thoughto varyingdegrees),and East and South (both descending,thoughto
different
extents)are equated, and the East is terminologically
markedas a
specialdirection(the canonicalorientation).Of course,the use of the different lexicalindicatorsvariesaccordingto speakerand contextand is notjust a
matterof degree from'here'; if somethingis hidden,or out of hearing,or
even beyond the village fence,then it is also 'fartheraway' than if it were
visible (and the fourabsolutequadrantsare more readilyused).
Somethingsimilarhappenswhen theYupno describephysicalmotion. In
correctusage, 'to go' (ki) should only be applied to the (more level) directions North and South. Once someone moves to the West, they 'go up'
(wuo),while to the East they'go down' (po). For example,
tetposat'.
'ngakomoden
ngak/ omoden
/ tet/po-sat.
'I go down to downhill(the East)'.
I / downhill/ side / go down.
For theverb'to come',Yupno mustdistinguisheveryone of thedirections
of provenance.If someone arrivesfromthe East, theyare said to 'go up'
(wuo),fromtheWestto 'go down' (po) fromthe North 'down fromthe side
above' (avi), and fromthe South 'up fromthe side below' (ovi). Thus,
ovisat'.
'ngakngwimedeiida
'I come up from to the side below
(South)'
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.222 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:33:01 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
660
JURG WASSMANN
ngak/ ngwimedeni-nda
/ ovi-sat.
I / to the side furtherdown (South)from / go up from the side
below-i.singularin presenttense.
Conclusion
The Yupno - like truepost-Newtonianscientists- make use of threedifferent referencesystemsat the same time. As such, they not only offer
counter-evidenceto the universalisticclaim for predominanttraditionsof
Westernthinkingwhich look upon the body-centredspatialdescriptionas
'natural',but theyalso call into question the assumptionthateach language
is structuredonly for one single system,be it relativeor absolute. Table 1
shows thatthe 14 subjectsused a totalof 124 relativeand egocentricterms
(63 of them 'left'or 'right'),149 geographically
anchoredfield-names,and
179 topographically
determinedabsoluteangles,of which 122 were 'downhill' or 'uphill'. Absolute angles, which state the general direction,
accompanied by a field-name(which furtherspecifiesthe direction)were
most frequentlyused (204 times). Unfortunately,
with such a small sample,
it is not clearwhethercertaingroupsof the population- men,women, the
old, the young,thosewithor withoutformalschooling- prefera particular
methodof description.
If one's own body is not necessarilyalwaysthe deicticcentre,neitherare
'uphilVdownhill'the only possible referencepoints. In other languageswe
also findlocativeswhich seem also to have been culturallyand geographically
determined.In thisconnexion,Bowden emphasizesthe following:
In Oceania, SEA and LAND are the most strikingexamples of non-universal locative
adpositions,but in other geographicor cultural environmentsthere are other locatives
which can also serve cruciallyimportantfunctions.One of the best known examples is
the use of grammaticalised
formsfor'up-river','up-valley',and 'down-river','down-valley'
in some languages (1991: 109, emphasis in original;forfurtherexamples of spatialorganization see Heeschen 1982; Mosel 1982; Ozanne-Rivierre1987; Toren 1990; Barnes 1993).
Systemsthatlocate an object by referenceto local landscape featuresare
and should thereforenot be too
logicallyfallibleoutside a local territory
readilyequated with the Westerncardinalpoints. For example, the widespreadsystemof 'towardsthe mountains'versus'seawards',when utilizedon
a small island,will obviouslyyieldconstantlychangingangles as one circles
the island (cf. van den Berg 1991; Nothofer1991). This is notoriouslythe
case on Bali, where what seems to be a cardinaldirection'North' when
talkingon the South side of the island,becomes 'South' when talkingon the
Northernside (since all directionsreferto the centralmountainAgung).
Similarlywith the Yupno, forwhom 'uphill' alwaysremainsthe same (the
quadrantwiththe sourceas thecentre);but not so forEuropeans,sincewhat
in Gua lay to my west shifteddependingon my locationin the valley That
thelateralaxis 'to theside above/below'reversesdependingon theside of the
Yupno do not use
valley,however,also applies to theYupno. Furthermore,
theirreferencesystemonly in theirvalley They also use it, for example,
when visitingthe coastal town of Madang. The main streetof the town
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.222 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:33:01 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JURG WASSMANN
661
(Modilon Road), which leads straightdown fromthe hillyhinterlandto the
harbourin an approximately
South-Northdirection,is mentallyequated by
the Yupno with theYupno River,so thatin front(North) where the sea is,
becomes 'downhill', the hinterland(South) becomes 'uphill', the Northwest-coast(North Coast) is 'the side above', and the Southeast-coast(Rai
Coast) becomes 'the side below9.
When theYupno use theirrelativesystem,the distinctionbetweenleftand
rightplaysa major role,and as we have alreadyseen each carriesa different
symbolicload. This recallsHertz's (1909) suggestionthatthe slightphysiological favouring of the right hand (in the majority right-handed
population)providesa potentnaturalmetaphorfora host of social dualisms,
especiallythe oppositionof sacredand profane,of good and evil,of birthand
death,and of food and excretion.It seems thatthe Indo-Europeanlanguages
equate leftwith the cardinalpoint North, rightwith South, behind with
West,and assume an East-facingcanonicalposture.C. Brown (1983) argues
thatthe associationbetween the cardinaldirectionsand 'front','back', 'up'
and 'down' is a universaltendency.Whetheruniversalor not, it certainly
is limitedto theirown
applies to theYupno, althoughtheiruse of left/right
which
do not map out otherspace, somethingwhich
bodies, the halves of
field-namesand absoluteanglescompensatefor.
By way of conclusion it mightbe askedwhetherthe linguisticdifferences
describedhere also have cognitiveconsequences.In recentyearsit has been
assumedthatlanguagehas no effecton thewaywe thinkand mostimportant
processesare deemed to have a universalstructureindependentof language.
Nevertheless,therehas also been a growinginsistenceon linguisticdifference and itspossibleconceptualimplications(Bowerman 1991; Slobin 1991;
Lucy 1992). Perhaps it is time cautiouslyto 'rethinklinguisticrelativity'
(Gumperz & Levinson 1991) withoutimmediatelyquestioningthe idea of
the psychicunityof mankind.Let us returnagain to the Mexican and Australianexamplescitedearlier.
The Tzeltal apparentlyhave no termsforleftand right(P Brown 1991).
Accordingto Brown,thisinabilityto distinguishverballybetweentwo sides
of an object has far-reaching
consequences (thoughwe perhapsneed to be
cautious in interpreting
Brown's preliminary
results).Tzeltal speakersplaying a photo-gamefailedverballyto distinguishobjects displayedas 'mirror
images' of one another.From a Westernpointof view,thereis thus a gap in
Tzeltal spatialconcepts (not only a linguisticone), and Brown (1991: 64)
notes that'the most tellingindicationthatthereis such a left/right
gap was
the informants'completebewildermentwhen facedwith the requestto distinguish verbally two configurationsthat to them apparentlyseemed
identical'(despitethe factthat,accordingto the neurologists,the divisionof
our brain into two halves leads to a conceptionof the world as similarly
divided).
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.222 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:33:01 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
662
JURG WASSMANN
Levinson (1992a) has describedthe resultsof a simple recall task among
and
theGuuguYimidhirr
(otherexperiments
referred
to visualperception
inference).
Subjectswereshowna line-upofa toyman(A), a pig (B) and a
cow (C), all lookingNorth.The lineheadedEastor towardsthesubject's
so thatif
right(A,B, C). The subjectwas toldto memorizetheassemblage
it.
theexperimenter
putthefigures
in a heap,thesubjectcould reconstruct
The subjectwas thenled intoanotherroom,positionedat a deskfacing
in a heapand askedto arrange
withthreeidentical
South,presented
figures
themjust as before.The majority
(although
notall) oftheGuuguYimidhirr
chose to preservethe absolute orientationof the threeobjects (V 'i 'D); a
Dutch controlgroup,however,
theobjectsaccordingto a relative
arranged
pointofview (D 'a M) (i.e. withtheturningof thebodythesequence of the
objectswas also rotatedso that,forexample,A alwaysremainedon the left;
among the Guugu Yimidhirr,in contrast,A is alwaysin theWest,firstto the
left,thento the rightof the body).
notonlycallintoquestionsome
Although
thesearepilotexperiments,they
of the widespread universalisticassumptionsabout traditionsof Western
thought;theyalso suggestnovelwaysforexploringhow the historyof social
ofcognitive
relations
entersintotheconstitution
processes.
NOTES
Some paragraphsof this articledraw heavilyon the unpublishedworking papers of the
Cognitive AnthropologyResearch Group at the Max Planck Institutefor Psycholinguistics,
Nijmegen, and on talks with colleagues in this group. I wish to thank Christina Toren,
Hastings Donnan, Thomas M. Wilson and IngridBell fortheircommentson my paper and
theirattemptsto improvemy English. Fieldworkamong theYupno was carriedout between
1986 and 1992 (24 months), and was supported by grant no. 1.185-0.85 from the Swiss
Council forScientificResearchand by the German Max Planck Society.
The Yupno textforthiscase is as follows:
1.1)
1.2)
1.3)
'njarensok
walinda
akanavimban'
njaren-sok
/wal-i-nda/ak-an/avimban
'aminkandayokomankoman'
amin/kanda/yo/koman
/koman
'The ramificationof the treeabove (the man)'
flower(in the Mission languageKite)diminutive/ the whole of the branches-itspossessive/ stand-3.pluralin presenttense/
above-directionfromsource
'A man is standing'
humanbeing/one/one thing/green,new/
green,new
'timmbagakandakonmbamakakndak' 'withhis feeton a greenelevation'
tim/ mbaga/ kanda-kon
part(pedestal)/ hill/ one-on / put footdown /
/ mbamak/
in presenttense
ak-ndak
stand-3.singular
komamo
eek'
1.4) 'akwikomam
nampak
a verygreen(blue)T-shirtand'
'hiswearing
akwi/ komamIkomam-mo
/ nampak/ T-shirt(in the missionlanguageKite) / green,
eek
1.5)
kolonkolon'
'aminteetnda
njieni
amin-teet-nda
/njien
/kolon
/kolon
new(here:blue)
/wear
/green,
new-emphasizer
/and
'his righthand holds a yellow stick'
humanbeing-bowstring,
hence:theside
whichpullsthebowstring-subject
/stick/
yellow/yellow
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.222 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:33:01 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JURGWASSMANN
avidak'
1.6) 'okandinan
o /kanda-nan
/avi-ndak
nameek
akndak'
1.7) 'mbon
/ak-ndak
/name-eek
mbon
663
'oranotherthing'
in present
or/one-object
/hold-3.singular
tense
hisbuttocks
thereandturning
'he is standing
(to me)'
/stand-3.singular
/turntowards-and
buttocks
tense
in present
2 The followingis theYupno text:
Director:
'aminsokkandaomo'
2.1)
amin-sok
/ kanda/ omo
akndak
akan'
'wusieek
'whereyou(matcher)
live'
in
/sitdown-2.singular
2.singular
emphatic
tense/ side-to(notvisible)/standpresent
tense
in present
3.singular
'hisrighthandholdsa stick,he standsand'
bowstring,
stick/ humanbeing-bamboo,
hence:thesidewhichpullsthebowstringin present
tense
subject/hold-3.singular
'looksdown...'
'theplaceofthe
downbelow/field-name:
anddown
downrocks',Southeast
falling
below/side-to(notvisible)
'...to Mundogon'
walikanda'
'kandapsok
tense/and
'anda shrub'
2.2)
'gakyiknal
akndak'
tetngan
/ak-ndak
/tet-ngan
gak/yik-ndal
2.3)
avidak'
'njienaminteetnda
/avi-ndak
inien
/amin-teet-nda
2.4)
'omoMundogon
tetngan'
omo/Mundogon
/tet-ngan
2.5)
2.6)
2.7)
'A boy is turnedto the place down there'
/ one / down below
human being-diminutive
wusi-eek
/ ak-ndak/ akan
kandap-sok
/ wal-i/ kanda
look for-and/ stand-3.singularin present
tree-diminutive
/ the whole of the branches-
its/one
on thesideof
on thehillside,
ak' 'is standing
'osoyumambaga
akanTidiptetngan
Teptepvillage'
/ up above/area/ hill/and/nameofthe
oso/yuma
/ Tidip/tet-ngan
/mbaga
village(Teptep station,where the airstripis):
'the place of the manystones',North and up
above / side-locative(not visible)/ stand
ak
Matcher:
2.8)
'Is thetreeon thehillsideand'
akan'
'kandawalwusimbagon
/up above/
/akan one/ thewholeofthebranches
kanda/wal/wusi/mbaga-kon
2.9)
'aminomoMpagmbewuniok
tetngan
tovilak
ma'
/tetamin/omo/Mbagmbewutiok
/ma
ngan/tovil-ak
hill-locative/ and
'the man turnedto the place below,
Mpagmbewufiok?'
'the
humanbeing/downbelow/field-name:
placewherewatercollects'(hollow),Eastand
below/side-locative
(notvisible)/turn-
3.singularin presenttense/ so?
Director
2.10) 'o'
'yes'
yes
0
3 The Yupnotextis as follows:
3.1)
'aminkanda'
amin/kanda
'A man'
humanbeing/one
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.222 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:33:01 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
664
3.2)
3.3)
3.4)
3.5)
JURGWASSMANN
'kandapwal komamkomamongwisirenl 'a verygreen shrubis to the side higherup
tet'
/
kandap
/wal/komamikomam-mo
ngwisiren
tet
'aminsokkandangwimedeni
tet'
amin-sok
/ kanda/ ngwimedenl
/ tet
'a boy is to the side lower down (south)'
human being-diminutive
/ one / to the side,
a bit lower down /side
'tipmbagakandarakwinonmbamakak'
'he standson top of a stone elevation'
tip/ mbaga/ kanda-ra/ kwi-non/
stone/ hill/ one-possessive/ top-at/ put foot
mbamak/ ak
down / stand
'njienii
kironkolonavidakngwimedenl
tet' 'he holds thisyellow partof a stickto the
njien-ni/ kiron/ kolon/ avi-dak/
ngwimeden
/ tet
3.6)
3.7)
(north)'
tree/ thewholeofthebranches
/green,new
/green,new-emphasizer
/ to theside,a bit
higherup (North)/side
sidelowerdown(South)
stick-this(visible)/ part/ yellow/ hold3.singular.in presenttense/ to the side, a bit
furtherdown (South) / side
'tedakeekkasiringwisireii
'therehe is standingand extendinghis arm
mavankeek'
to the side higherup (north)and'
tedak/ eek/ kasit-li/ ngwisireni
/ mavan/ standup / and / arm-its/ to the side, a bit
ki-eek
out/ to go-and
higherup (North)/to stretch
wusieekakndak' 'he is lookingdownhill (East) to Mundogon'
'omodenl
Mundogongen
omodeni
/ Mundogon-gen
/ wusi-eek
/ ak- downhill (East) / field-name:'the place of
ndak
/
thefalling
downrocks'-to
/lookfor-and
in presenttense
stand-3.singular
REFERENCES
Barnes,R.H. 1993. Everydayspace: some considerationson the representation
and use of space
in Indonesia. In Alltagswissen;
Les savoirsquotidiens;
Everyday
cognition
(eds) J. Wassmann& P
Dasen. Fribourg:Universitatsverlag.
Berg, R. van den 1991. Concepts of space and spatialreferencein Austronesianand Papuan
languages.Nijmegen: mimeo.
Bloch, M. 1990. Language,anthropologyand cognitivescience.Man (N.S.) 26, 183-98.
Bowden,J. 1991. Behind the preposition:grammaticalisation
of locativesin Oceanic languages.
Thesis, Universityof Auckland.
Bowerman,M. 1991. The originsofchildren'sspatialsemanticcategories:cognitivevs. linguistic
determinants.Nijmegen: mimeo.
Brown,C. 1983. Where do cardinaldirectiontermscome from?Anthrop.
Ling. 25, 121-61.
Brown, P 1991. Spatial conceptualization in Tzeltal. Working Paper No. 6, Cognitive
AnthropologyResearchGroup, MPI Nijmegen.
& S. Levinson 1991. 'Uphill' and 'downhill'in Tzeltal. WorkingPaper No. 7, Cognitive
AnthropologyResearchGroup, MPI Nijmegen.
and theacquisition
Clark, H. 1973. Space, time,semantics,and the child. In Cognitive
development
oflanguage(ed.) TE. Moore. New York:Academic Press.
& D. Wilkes-Gibbes1986. Referringas a collaborativeprocess.Cognition
22, 1-39.
and left.Dordrecht:Kluwer.
Cleve, J. van, & R. Frederick(eds) 1991. Thephilosophy
ofright
Duirr,M. 1990. Referenceto space in colonial Quiche. Gottingen:mimeo.
Evans, N. 1991. Cardinal categoriesin Kayardilddeterminers.Nijmegen: mimeo.
New York:Basic Books.
Gardner,H. 1985. The mind'snewscience.
Gell, A. 1985. How to read a map: remarkson the practicallogic of navigation.Man (N.S.) 20,
271-86.
in Philosophie
seinerProbleme
undWssenschaften.
Gosztony,A. 1976. Der Raum:Geschichte
Freiburg,
Munchen: Alber.
Gumperz,J. & S. Levinson,1991. Rethinkinglinguisticrelativity.
Curr:Anthrop.
32, 613-22.
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.222 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:33:01 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JURG WASSMANN
665
Chicago: Univ. of
Hanks, W 1990. Referential
practice:
language
andlivedspacein a Maya community.
Chicago Press.
theories
ofspatialperceptionfrom
KanttoHelmholtz.
Harfield,G. 1990. The naturaland thenormative:
Cambridge,MA: MIT Press.
and relativity.
WorkingPaper No 3, Cognitive
Haviland,J. 1991. Projections,transpositions,
AnthropologyResearchGroup, MPI Nijmegen.
Heeschen, V 1982. Some systemsof spatialdeixis in Papuan languages.In Hereand there(eds)
J.Weissenborn& W Klein. Amsterdam:Benjamins.
derGegendenim Raume.Translation
Kant, I. 1991 (1768). Vondemersten
Grundedes Unterschiedes
'On the firstground of the distinctionof regionsin space'. In Thephilosophy
ofright
and left
(eds) J. van Cleve & R. Frederick.Dordrecht:Kluwer.
- schwer
beidenYupnoin Papua New Guineaaus
Kranksein
erkrankt:
Keck,V 1992. Falschgehandelt
undbiomedizinischer
Sicht.Basel: Wep?
ethnologischer
1993. Two ways of explainingreality:the sickness of a small Yupno boy from an
anthropologicaland biomedicalperspective.Oceania63, 294-312.
Kuchler,S. & S. Melion 1992. Imagesofmemory.
Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
(ed.) JA.
Lee, M. 1988. Language,perceptionand the world. In Explaininglanguageuniversals
Hawkins. Oxford: Blackwell.
Leon, L. de 1991. Space games in Tzotzil: creatinga contextforspatialreference.WorkingPaper
No. 4, CognitiveAnthropologyResearchGroup, MPI Nijmegen.
WorkingPaper
1992. Body partsand locationin Tzotzil: ongoinggrammaticalization.
No. 16. CognitiveAnthropologyResearchGroup, MPI Nijmegen.
toarticulation.
Cambridge,MA: MIT Press.
Levelt,W 1989. Speaking:front
intention
Levinson, S. 1991. Relativityin spatial conception and description.WorkingPaper No. 1,
CognitiveAnthropologyResearchGroup, MPI Nijmegen.
1992a. Language and cognition:the cognitiveconsequences of spatialdescriptionin
Guugu Yimidhirr.WorkingPaper No. 13. CognitiveAnthropologyResearch Group, MPI
Nijmegen.
ofspatialdescriptionand conception.Pragmatics
1992b.Primerforthefieldinvestigation
2, 5-47.
& P Brown, 1992. Immanuel Kant among the Tenejapans:Anthropologyas empirical
philosophy.Working Paper No. 11, Cognitive AnthropologyResearch Group, MPI
Nijmegen.
a casestudyofthelinguistic
relativity
hypothesis.
Lucy,J. 1992. Grammatical
categories
and cognition:
Cambridge:Univ. Press.
Lyons,J. 1977. Semantics.
Cambridge:Univ. Press.
Cambridge:Univ. Press.
Miller,G. & P Johnson-Laird1976. Languageandperception.
ofIqwayecounting
system
and number.
Oxford:
Mimica,J. 1988. Intimations
ofinfinity:
themythopoeia
Berg.
(eds)J.Weissenborn&W Klein.Amsterdam:
Mosel, U. 1982.Local deixisinTolai.InHereandthere
Benjamins.
Munn, N. 1989. The FameofGawa. Cambridge:Univ. Press.
Nothofer,B. 1991.Some noteson thefourcardinalpointsin SundaneseandJavanese.Nijmegen:
mimeo.
Ozanne-Rivierre,F. 1987. L'expressionlinguistiquede l'orientationdans l'espace: quelques
exemplesoceaniens. Cahiersdu LACTO 2, 129-55.
ofspace.London: Routledge.
Piaget,J. & B. Inhelder(1948) 1956. Thechild'sconception
an
Segall, M., PR. Dasen, J. Berry& Y Poortinga1990. Human behaviorin globalperspective:
introduction
tocross-cultural
psychology.
New York:Pergamon.
Senft,G. 1992. Everythingwe alwaysthoughtwe knew about space - but did not botherto
question... Working Paper No. 10, Cognitive AnthropologyResearch Group, MPI
Nijmegen.
linguistic
Slobin, D. 1991. From 'thoughtand language'to 'thinkingforspeaking'.In Rethinking
relativity
(eds) J. Gumperz & S. Levinson.Cambridge:Univ. Press.
Smart,J.C. 1968. Problents
ofspaceand time.London: Macmillan.
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.222 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:33:01 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
666
JURG WASSMANN
Steiner,G. 1987. Spatialreasoningin smallsizeand largesizeenvironmentsor: in searchof early
In Piagettoday(eds) B. Inhelder,
prefigurations
ofspatialcognitionin smallsizeenvironments.
D. de Caprona & A. Cornu-Wells.East Sussex: Erlbaum.
theory,
research
and application
Talmy,L. 1983. How languagestructuresspace. In Spatialorientation:
(eds) H. Pick & H. Acredolo. New York:Plenum Press.
as socialprocess
in Fiji. London: Athlone.
cognition
Toren,C. 1990. Makingsenseofhierarchy:
ofreason.London: Routledge.
Walkerdine,V 1990. The mastery
oftheimportant
men
knowledge
Wassmann,J. 1991. The SongtotheFlyingFox: thepublicand esoteric
cords(MiddleSepik,PapuaNew Guinea). Port
songs,namesandknotted
ofKandingaiabouttotemic
Moresby: The National ResearchInstitute.
derYupnoinPapua
Menschen:
eineethno-kognitiveAnalyse
1993a.Das Idealdesleichtgebeugten
New Guinea.Berlin: Reimer.
1993b.Worlds in mind. The experienceof an outside world in a communityof the
FinisterreRange in Papua New Guinea. Oceania63.
inPapua
vonderVergangenheit:
Finisterre-Gebirge
EthnologischeBerichteausdem
1993c.Abschied
New Guinea.Berlin: Reimer.
derkognitive
Ansatzim interdisziplinaren
Dialog. Les savoirs
& P Dasen 1993. Alltagswissen:
dansledialogue
cognition:
interdisciplinary
interdisciplinaire.
Everyday
lesapproches
cognitives
quotidiens:
Fribourg:Universitaitsverlag.
perspectives.
theverbalnegotiationofcommon
1986. Learninghow to become an interlocutor:
Weissenborn,J.
framesof referenceand actions in dyads of 4-14 year old children.In Children'sworldand
children's
language(eds) J. Cook-Gumperz, W Corsaro & J. Streeck. Berlin: Mouton de
Gruyter.
ou qu'est-ce
Les Yupno en tantque scientifiquespost-newtoniens,
?
la
de
1'espace
dans
description
qu'il y a de 'naturel'
Resume
des cultureseurop6enneset des languesindo-germaniques
circonscrit
C'est le caractere
dansle domainedes sciencescognitives
travaillant
connuesqui a conduitles chercheurs
interne
de la pensee
la structure
partrophativesconcernant
a proposerdes gen6ralisations
humaine.Ils pensent,par exemple,qu'il est naturel,et par consequentuniversel,de
et anthro6gocentrique,
concevoirl'espacequi nous entoured'un pointde vue relatif,
pomorphique.La manieredontlesYupno de Papouasie(Nouvelle-Guinee)organisent
des coordonque la repr6sentation
et ordonnentl'espacesertd'exemplepourd6montrer
placesau centre
du corpsd'observateurs
neesspacialescommeautantde rayonsjaillissant
n'estqu'une des visionspossibles.
de l'univers,loind'etreuniqueou universelle,
19, 4051 Basel,Switzerland
ofBasel,Miunsterplatz
University
ofEthnology,
Institute
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.222 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:33:01 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions