'i'J
ANDLANGUAGTS
CULTURT
STRUCTURI,
An Essaycom par ingthe indo- Eur opean,
_B y J o h a n G a lt u n g a n d F u mik oNjs h imu ra
ln jis s e n s ch a f t s k o l I e q z u B e rl i n
h J aIl o t s t ra l3 e 1 9
1 0 0 0 B e rl' in 3 3
Jenuai"l,' '!983
-t
4
I n t r o d u cti o n
Th e purpose of this paper is t o e x a min et h e rc le o f la n g u a g e s
a s car r jers
m ati c wjll
of soc'ial cosm o lo g y . I n d o in g t h is n o t h ' in g p ro b ' le be assumedin con n e c t io n wit h t h e t e rm " la n g u a g e " :
w e a r e referring to natural la n g u a g e s , a s t h e y a re writ t e n a n d a s
the y a re spoken,by men and w o me na ro u n d t h e wo rld . T h e t . it le limit s
the subject but at the samet ime in d ' ic a t e s t h a t it
is f a irly
br o a d : "lndo-E uropeanlanguag e s " s t a n d s f o r a ma jo r f a mily o r
"cla n " of languagesout of w h ic h we a re p a rt ic u la rly t h in k in g o f
the o n es we happento be familia r wit h : No rwe g ia na n d t h e S c a n d ' in a via n languages in general; G e rma na n d E n g ljs h a n d Du t c h ; F re n c h ,
' la n g u a g e . s g € re rd 1
iD
Ital'ia n and S panish and the Ro ma n
; Ru s s ia n a n d
som eo ther S lavonic languages . He n c e it
is o n ly o u t o f t ra d it io n
in l'in gu'istics that we use the t e rm " I n d o -E u ro p e a n " . S im' i1 a r1 y
the w ord "Chjnese" als0 stand s f o r a f a mily o f la n g u a g e swjt h c o mmo nwri t i n g a n d
ce r tain common
characterist'ic s a lt h o u g h it is Ma n d a rjn Ch in e s e weh a v e ha d
i n m in d, and "JapaneS e"S tand Sf o r s t a n d a rd iz e d (n O n -v e rn a c u la r)
Ja p a n esewhich itself
is a fa mily o f la n g u a g e s , d e f in e d b y s o c ia l
r ela t'i ons betweensender and re c e ' iv e r o f v e rb a l c o mmu n ic a t io n .
Th en there is the jdea of c o s mo lo n r(. ' )t tis t a k e n h e re t o me a n
"de e p structure" and "deep cu lt u re " .
I n t h a t e x p lic a t io n o f t h e
con ce pt somethingmore than l^ J e lt a n s c h a u u nisg' in d . ic a t e d . F irs t ,
ih e r e is the qualifier
"deep" - p o in t in g t o t h a t wh ic h is n o t o n
th e su rface, that which is de e p e r d o wn , imp lic it , la t e n t , n o t
talke d about 'in general , unq u e s t ' io n e d ,a s s u me d .T h e n t h e re is t h e
j uxta- p osition of "structure" a n d " c u lt u re " , d ls o f o u n d jn t h e
ti tle
of this essay. They are h e re s e e n a s b e in g a t t h e s a me le v e l,
- 2n o n eo f th e mp re ce d i n gth e o ther in a tempor alor causal sense,
t h e r e b y re j e cti n g b o th th e " mater ialist" pos' ition that str uctur e
for m at' ion)
should shapecultur e or
i p a r t j c u l a rl y so cj o - e co n o m.ic
t h e "' i d e a l i st" p o si ti o n th a t cultur e is pr imar y and is m ater ialized
i n s t r u ctu re - p o si ti o n s h e l do r espectively, in cer tain types of
'libera'!
position taken her e
a n d i 4 a rxi st th i n ki n g , in the W est( .2) th.
i s n o t ne ce ssa ri l ya g n o sti c i n the sensethat' Since we do not know
w h ' i c ho n e co me sfi rst w e sh o uld take no stand on the m atter ", but
t r e a t e d I i ke a ch i cke na n d e gg pr oblem. Rather , the positjon
' i s t h a t b o th stru ctu re a n d cultur e ar e appar it.ionsof the same
oe
n re r efer r ed to as"cosm ology".
d e e p e rl yi n g p h e n o me n h
But that
'l
yi
n
g
"
not
p h e n o me n o
n eeper
i s'U
in the senseof bejng located som ewher e
b e h i n d , b e l o w , b e n e a tho r b e yondstr uctur e and/or cultur e. Rather ,
i i i s d ee p e ri n th e se n seo f being in themboth, but only to the
e x t e n t th a t th e stru ctu re a n d cultur e.in question ar e "of the sam e
jfestat' ions of
k . i n d ", "o f th e sa mefa mi l y" - in other wor dsar e m an
t h e s a me co smo l o gMy
y. ri g h t handand m y left handar e both par ts
o f m e , s o a re my th o u g h tsa n d my m entalactivity
- but one usually
d o e s n o t se e a n yo n eo f th e se as be' ingthe causeor the effect of the
o t h e r b ut ra th e r a s a sp e c6 of "m e". That "m e"can be concejvedof jn
a m a t e r i a l, o rg a n i c / g e n e ti c senseand/or in a non- mater ialm ental/
g e n e t i c se n se .On ed a y w e mi ght per hapsbe better than we ar e today
the two. In socioa t s e e j n g re i a ti o n s a n d si mi lar ities betv*een
c u l t u r a l ma tte rs, h o w e ve r,the assum ptionher e is that we can alr eady
betweenwhat iss e e s u ch si mi l a ri ti e s, fo ri n s tance as isomor phisms
u s u a l l y re fe rre d to a s stru ctur eandas cultur e, and that ' is exactly
co smo l o g y(o r mo rep recisely social cosmology)is about.
what
m ost usages
H owca n 'l a n g u a g e s" bca
e rr ier s of' bocial cosmology?' ln
o f t h e te rms l a n g u a g e sa re seenas par ts of the cultur e of that nation, or
l a n g u a g eco mmu n 'i ty.
A s su ch they should or might expr ess,whenlooked
a lo ng particular dimension s , s o l' n e b a s ic
a s s u mp t jo n so f t h a t
cultur e , carrjed by the ver-v la n g u a g e it s e lf . B u t t h e s a mea p p iie s
ei
langu a g e s in d u c e s t ru c t u re s b e t we e ns e n d e rs
an d r eceivers of verbal comm u n ic a t ' io nal n d t h e y s t ru c t u re t h e re a lit y
to the term "structure":
w hich they try to mirror in th e ir e x p re s s io n s b e c a u s ed n Y ia n g u a g e
syste m 'itsel f, i n i ts syntax , h a v es t ru c t u re s t h a t t h ro u g h s e ma n t ci
r ule s i nduce structures on tha t wh ic h is re f le c t e d .
P e rh a p s it s h o u ld
-J-
b e p o i nte d o u tth a t i n sa yi n g this we
do not conceiveof the wor ds
"s t r u c tu re " a n d " cu l tu re " a s ver y separ able.0n the contr ar y, ther e
i s s t r u ctu re i n cu l tu re , a n d ever y str uctur e has or is a cultur e.
T h e r e a so nfo r th 'i s i s th a t the ter m "str uctur e" is in fact am biguous :
0 n t h e o n e h a n d i t o fte n re fer s to m ater ial ar r angements,
such
a s u r b an a rch 'i te ctu re ;o n th e other handit r efer s to any k' indof patt e r n w h 'i chca n b e e xp re ss ed
in a logical for m,jn ter m s of a set
is
o f e l e me n tsa n d a se t o f re l ations amongthese elements.M athem at' ics
a n a b s tra ct l a n g u a g eca rryi n g str uctur es ' in this pur e for m.
So , th e p o i n t i s th a t a languagetakes str uctur al and cultur al
s t a n d s ;a n d p a rt.l y i n o rd e r not to have to say whetherthese built- in
O o s j t i on sa re i n h e re n tl y mor estr uctur e or inher ently m or ecultur e,
w e u s ea te rm th a t ca rri e s th ese deepaspectsof either : cosm ology
( e x a c t l y w h 'i cha sp e ctsw 'i l 'l be elabor atedbelow). Howeverin
, saying
t h i s ' i t sh o u l d a l so b e p o i n ted out that both "stand" or "positjon" as
e x p r e s si o nasre to o stro n g . Rather , one might talk about"biases"
i n c e r ta 'i n d i re cti o n s,p re d 'i sposing the m embe6
of one languagecom m uni tyto, ac t,
t o t h i n kra n d p e rce i ve th e w or ld in cer tain dir ections r ather than
o t h e r s . A fte r a l l l a n g u a g e s ar e to a lar ge extent m utually tr ans) atab1e,
w i th mo n eo r l e ss success.The.var e not discontinuouswith each
o t h e r . A p e rso nd e e p l y ste e pedjn one languagecom m unity
can sur face
f r o m i t a n d g e t su ff i c'i e n t depth in anotherto ser ve as a I i v' ingbr idge
w e e nt h e tw o . H e i s n o t cu t off fr om any other ' language,in pr .inciple.
Bu t t h e n h e 'i s a l so ma rke db y his languageexner iencefor life and mores o the
accountfor a
l o n g e r he h a s l i ve d i n a p a rticular languagecomm unity.This t^r ould
c e r t a i n bj a s. 0 r, to w e a ke nth e expr essionstill m or e: for cer tain
c j l l g l f l 1 ] -l ffg s. B e j n ga p a rt of one' language
com m unity
is not1nc o m p a t i bl ew i th th e typ e o f co sm olgypr evalent in another language
c o m m u n ity.B u t h a vi n g b e e ntra ined jn one is hjghly com patiblewith
t h e c o r r esp o n d i n g
co smo l g y;i t comeseasy, by itself, so as to be
c o n s i d e r e dn o rma la n d n a tu ra l . so as not to stand out r adiatinq incom p a ti bility. Languagepredispo s -e s ,t h a t is a ll we a re t ry ' in g t o s a y ;
jt do e s not determine jn any un a mb ig u o u sv v a y .
- 42 . C o : mo l o gdy i me n si o n sa n d l anguageanalysjs
N o atte mp t w i l l b e ma deher e to justify the six djm ensions
u s e d i n th e p re se n ta n d re l ated essaysforanalysis of cosm ologies,
v ' t z .:
5PALL
T I ME
KNOI,ILIDGE
P E RS O N-NA T URT
E RS O N
P E RS OP
NPTRSON
-TRANSPIRSONAL
The ge n eral assumption'is that t h e s e s ix d ime n s ' io n sa re if n o t
suffic'ie nt, at least necessar y in o rd e r t o d e s c rib e a c u lt u re , a n d
m cr r epa r ticularly a macro-cul t u re , a c iv il jz a t io n . E a c h c u lt u re is
see n as having a stand, a pos jt io n o n t h e s e s ' ix d ime n s io n s , a n d t h e
qu e sti on js to what extent lan g u a g e sa re c a rrie rs o f t h a t s t a n d o r
po sit'!o n.
Given the point of depart u re o f t h is e s s a y t h is me a n st h a t
r i l esho u ld try to say somethinga b o u t h o w t h re e )a n g u a g e so r la n g u a g e
gr o u p s r elate to six dimensio n s , in o t h e r wo rd s 1 8 c o mb jn a t ' io n s
as'in th e follow'inq table:
Ta b le 1 .
a n a ly s is
The frameworkfor c o s mo lo g y / la n g u a g e
Euro pean
Knowledge
Pe r so n- Nature
Fer son- Person
Pe r s o-nT ra n sp e rso nIa
Ch in e s e
:.l :n:noco
- 5Ob vi o u sl y,a n e xp l o ra tor y task of th' is k.indcan be car r ied
o u t v e rt'i ca l l y o r h o ri zo n taily. The ver tical appr oachwould
g i v e a p re se n ta ti o no f th e languages,r unning thr oughthe
g a m u tof co smo l o gay n a l ys'i s .The hor izontal appr oach,which
i s t h e o n e th a t w i l l b e ch osenher e, would take one cosmological
d i m e n si o na fte r th e o th e r a nd com par ethe languageson them ,
p r o c e e d i n g fro m
th e E u ro p e an
v' ia the chineseto the Japanese.
T h e a d va n ta g eo f th i s a p p roachis that it com par es
languages,
keepi n g t h e co smo l o g i cadl 'i me ns"ion
constant, r ather than the equally inter es tj nq
b u t d i ffe re n t ta sk o f re ra ti ng cosm ologicaldimensions,keeping
l a n g u a g eg ro u pco n sta n t. si nce both appr oaches
ar e significant
h o w e ve r,w e sh a 'i l sta rt w i th the hor izontal appr oachand then
s u m m ari ze
u si n g th e ve rti ca 'l appr oach,in an effor t to say somet h i n g a b o u t th e l a n g u a g eg roupsas a whols.Thefactor s of this exer cis e
a r e t h en re p e a te di n ta b l e 2 towar dsthe end; the r eader .is r efer r ed
t o j t fo r a q u i ck su mma ry
a t any tim e.
-b-
L:i ."e
tanS ,r.geg.orp
SPAC T
Languagesappear in two f o rms , writ t e n a n d o ra l; in s p a c e
a n d i n timq respective'ly. we a re u s e d t o t h in k in g o f writ t e n la n g u a g e
i n ter ms of two-dimensional s p a c e , t h e h a n d -writ t e n o r p rin t e d
p a g e 'whereth'inking in three-d ime n s io n a l s p a c e mig h t b e e q u a lly
r ele va nt: a book is c'learly t h re e -d ime n s io n a l. A n d we a re u s e d
to thinking of speech as a st rin g o f s o u n d s , s t re t c h e d o u t in
tim e , starting at one point jn t ime a n d e n d in g ip a n o t h e r.
Actu a l1y, that string of soun d s c a n b e re c o rd e d o n t a p e o r in
othe r ways, thereby projecting t ime o n s p a c e . B u t f o r t h e
p r e se nt purposes the arrangeme n to f la n g u a g e in it s writ t e n
fo r m i s seen as a key to how t h a t la n g u a g e c o mmu n it ys t ru c t u re s
spa ce , and the arrangementof la n g u a g e ' in u s u a l o ra l f o rm is
co r r e spondingly seen as a ke y t o h o wt jn e . iss t ru c t u re o .
A book printed in a E ur o p e a nla n g u a g e is a h jg h ly s t a n d a rd iz e d
a n d u n ambiguousarrangemento f o n e -d ime n s jo n a l s p a c e in t h re e d im e n s'ionalspace. The first
p a g e is in f ro n t ,
t h e la s t p a g e
in the back of the volume; to a v o id a n y c o n f u s io n t h e p a g e s
dr € se r ia'l'ly numberedand henc e a rra n g e d in a o n e -d ime n s io n a l
fa sh 'io n. The reading of a sing le p a g e is f ro m le f t t o rig h t
an d fr o m iop to bottom; anyon e o f t h e o t h e r t h re e p o s s ib ilit ie s
w ou ld bring considerable d'is c o mf o rt t o t h e re a d e r u n le s s h e
is d e l'iberate'ly in search of n o n -me a n in g .
N ot so w i th C h j n e sea n d Japanese.
For the latter
w e a r e thinkjng in terms of th e Ch in e s e c h a ra c t e rs , n o t t h e
Ja p a n e seuse of the two sylla b le a lp h a b e t s (k a t a k a n a a n d
h ir a g a na) and the Japaneseus e o f " Ro ma n "c h a ra c t e rs (jn ro ma -ji) A s
op p o se dto the E uropeanrigidit y t h e re is c o n s jd e ra b le f le x ib iljt v .
In th e S ino-Japaneselanguag ec o mmu n it y , b o o k sma y s t a rt in
fr o n t or jn back, and at leas t t h re e o f t h e f o u r wa y s o f re d u c in g
th e two-d'imensjonalprinted o r writ t e n p a g e t o a o n e -d ime n s jo n a l
str in g c an be found.
Tho u g h . it ma y we ll b e t h a t t h e re is a t p re s e n t a
te n d e n cy towards * reducti*:: r-; i ih is v a rie iy in mo d e so f Do o k ip a p e r
p r o d u ction,variet_ysti I I there is _
Ho w e ve r,th e re i s mo reto say about Spatial ar r angement
than can b e
s a i d i n te rms o f th e o p osition betweenr ig' idity and flex' ibil' ity n o t i ng i n p a ssi n gth a t o nce the cho' icehas beenm adea par ticular
C h i n e seo r Ja p a n e se
b o o k b ecom es
as r igid as any Eur opean
text. Ther e
is
n o t o n l y th e p o ssi b iljty of pr inting or wr iting in var ious
w a y s; o n ce a ch o i ce h a s b eenm adeit m ayalso be possible to r ead
i n v a ri o u s w a ys. A E u ro p ean
sentencer ead backwar ds,fr om r ight
t o l e ft o n o n e l i n e rn a y g ive som em eaning,but usually be so syntacti c al l y
' i n c orre ctth a t i t w i l l b e rejected by any language- sensit' ive
m ' ind.
A Eu ro p e a p
n ri n te d p a g ere ad ver tically, for jnstanceby r eading
t h e f irst o r th e l a st w o rdson each line, fr om top to bottomor
f r o m b o tto mu p w a rd sto th e top w' i11pr obablyby mostm emberof
s
t h a t l a n g u a g eco mmu n i ty
b e r ejected even befor e the exper im ent
h a s s ta rte d (th e re a d e r i s encour aged
to tr y this page, for instance).
0 f co u rseth e sa mema ybe the case for Chineseand Japanese.
possibly with mor esuccess.Andwhat
H o w eve r,'i tcabnea tte mp t€ d,and
i s t o th e p o i n t: th e co mp oser
of the pr inted pdg€,the author and/
o r t h e p ri n te r,ma ya rra n g ethe char actenin sucha way that additjonal
r eadingor der s. In fact,
m e a n i n grn
s a yco meo u t o f n on- convent' ional
in ar r iving at
t h e r e a re e xa mp l e so f h i g h- 1evelach' ievem ents
diagonalr eadingas a
s e v e ra l me a n i n g sth 'i s w a y, evencombinir r g
p o s si b i l i ty, e ve n o ff-d i a g onal r eading' ."0fcour se, in the !,Jestthis
' i s k no w na s g a me s,i mmo rtaljzedthr oughthe cr osswor d- puzz1es.
Bu t i n S i n o -Ja p a n e se
sp a ceit m ayalso pointto ad' iffer ent way of
c o n c e j vi n gsp a ce , re p l e te with m eaning,in a less unam bigr r ofi
can be found.' ' '
a n d l i n e a r fa sh i o n . E ve ncir cular ar r anqem ents
Ho w e ve r,th e re i s mo reto it than that. The sumtota' l of meaning s
and for war ds,
a r r i v e d a t b y re a d i n ga ro lv or a columnbackwar ds
d o w n w a rdosr u p w a rd s,o r doing this for the who' lepage, ffidyser ve as
p o i n te rs to a me ta -me a n ing.
the sumof oneIf well composed
d ' i m e n si o n apl a
, rti a l me a n ' ings
m aybe mor ethan the set of the par ts,
m aybe accom panied
by
to m eta- meaning
a n d t h e ste p fro m me a n 'i n gs
To the extent that this
s o m eki n d o f q u a n tu mj u mp in consciousness.
i s t h e ca se i t'i s o b v'i o u sthat one page m aycar r y m or e "infor m ation"
book.
t h a n wo u l du su a l l v b e th e case in a Eur opean
-B And yet, there is still
mo re t o it
t h a n t h ' is . A . p rin t e d p a g e
i n Ch .ineseor Japanese,with c h a ra c t e rs a n ra n g e d , u s u a lly v e ry
ne a tl y, jn rows and columns c a n b e c o mp a re dt o a c o mjc s t rip wh e re
pictur es are arranged in row s a n d c o lu mn s , u s u a lly wit h c h ild re n
as r e ceivers in E uropeancoln t rie s . A s f o r t h e c a rt o o n s t h e re c e iv e r
ca n gr asp what is happeningo rc $ n mu n ic a t e da t a me re g la n c e . O n e
seccn d sr two spent sn a Don a ld Du c k c a rt o o n will t e ll t h e re a d e r
( or on looker) what it is abou t ; a f t e r t h a t h o lis t ic p e rc e p t io n ,
he or s he may then proceed to t h e d e t a ils in a mo re re g u la r, f in e a r
fa sh io n. S omethingof the sameis t h e c a s e wit h Ch in e s e a n d J a p a n e s e
scr ip t: since the characters a re id e o g ra msa q u ic k s a mp lin g o f
i de o g r ams,jn a more or less ra n d o mf a s h io n , b u t we ll-d is t rib u t e d
o v e r t he
pa g e ,wiil give a good not'ion o f t h e c o n t e n t s b e f o re
m o r e sy stematjc readjng is'in it ja t e d .
i s th e possibllity
th a n is
B u t t h ls me a n st h a t t h e re
of proceed in g in a mo re h e rme n e u t ' ic ama
l nner
usually the case wit h re s p e c t t o E u ro p e a nwrit jn q s ,
o f th e totality
to concernw it h d e t a il,
a n d ba ck to deta'il again,and s o o n . 0 f
f ro m a g ra s p
f ro m t h e re t o t o t a . lit y
c o u rs e , s o me o f t h e s a me
sam ecffect eouldbe obtained u s in g E u ro p e a ns c rjp t ,
s a mp lin g
a wo r d here and there - but t h e s e wo rd s a re u s u a lly le s s e v o c a t iv e
tha n a Chinesecharacter, one re a s o n b e in g t h a t s o ma n ywo rd s
ar e n o t - like nouns, verbs, a d je c t iv e s , a d v e rb s - c a rrie rs o f mu c hme a n ' i n g
bu t a r e connectives, f ill inq-'in wo rd sw' it h p a rt ic u la r
fu n ct'i ons, and so on, S uch w o rd s a re
s y n t a c t ic
a ls o f o u n d in Ch in e s ea n d
Ja p a n ese, but the eye cf the re a d e r wil" l mo re e a s ily b e a t tr a cted to the characters mo re s a t u ra t e d wit h me a n in q .
He nce, the messagesabout o rg a n iz a t io n o f s p a c e a re a c t u a liy
q u ite different when one comp a re sE u ro p e a nla n g u a g e so n t h e o n e
h a n d with Chjnese and Japane s eo n t h e o t h e r. T h e re is t h e d is t in c t io n
in t h e p ro je c t io n f ro m t h re e d im e n sional to one-dimensona ls p a c e . T h e re js t h e u s e o f f le x ib ' il' it y
'i n o r d er to arrive at more va rje t y . T h e re is t h e p o s s ' ib ilit y o f
b e tw een rigidity
and flexibilit y
m e ta- meaningsas the sum of p a rt ia l
me a n in g s g le a n e d f ro m a n y o n e
w ay o f proceedingin printed o r writ t e n s p a c e . A n d f in a lly
t h e re
is th e potentia'l forholistic
{ rd h e rme n e u t ic a l re la t io n s t o
spa ce , engenderedby the org a n iz a t io n o f Ch in e s e a n d J a p a n e s e
w r i tten language. In short, E u ro p e a nla n g u a g e ss t a n d o u t a s
' 9s i m p li sti c i n th e 'i r sp a cestr uctur e r elative to the muchmor ecompiex
u s e o f sp a cema d eb y C h i n e seand Japanese.
TIM E
S omethn' ig o f t h e s a mema y b e s ai d
a b o u t the organization of tjm e , a lt h o u g h le s s c le a rly s o .
Th e o bjection to any explora t jo n o f t h is is jmme d ' ia t e :T h e re ' is
som e thingabsolute about tim e , it f lo ws a n d f le e t s b u t o n ly in o n e
d ir e ction,whereas space can b e lo o k e d a t a n d h a n d le d in s o ma n y
w ays, turned upside down,ands o o n .
However,even if we do n o t s e e mt o b e v e ry q o o d a t ma s t e rin g c h ro no l o g i c a l
t'i m e we can always do somet h in ga b o u t t h e s t rin g s o f s o u n d s , a n d
the strings of words. The ap p ro p ria t e q u e s t io n t o a s k s e e mst o b e :
Give n a set of words,can they b e o rg a n ' iz e d jn o n ly o n e wa y wh ic h
i s th e correct word order, o r is t h e re a c e rt a in f le x ib ilit y
so
th a t more than one permutat io n is ' le g it ima t e ? A n d if t h e la t b e r js
th e case could jt then be, o n c e mo re , t h a t t h e re ' is a c h a n g e in
m e a n ing, if only a subtle cha n g e , wit h t h e p e rmu t a t io n ,a n d t h a t
th e set of al1 legitimatepermu t a t io n s , lin rit e d b y
the set of
all possible permutations, mig h t c a rry a h id d e n me s s a g e ,a me t a m ea n ing?In other words: To wh a t e x t e n t is a la n g u a q e
so rigid that it permits o n ly o n e wo rd o rd e r: o r s o f ' le x ' ib le t h a t
it pe rmits several word orders o u t o f t h e ma t h e ma t ic a llyp o s s ib le o n e s ?
And th en, beyond that: not on ly wh e t h e r la n g u a g e is f le x ib le ,
b u t a ls o w h e t h e r
alter n atjve word orders can b e u s e d a n d d o in f a c t c a rry me a n in g s ,
eve n meaningsthat complem e n t h e s t a n d a rd me a n in gc o n v e y e d
b y the in jtial word order. P o e tjc p o t e n t ' ia l ' is o b v io u s if t h is is t h e c a s e .
Off hand one might perha p s s u rmis e t h a t a la n g u a g e lik e G e rma n
wo u ld be extremely rig'id wh e re a sa la n g u a g e lik e Ch ' in e s emig h t b e
ve r y flexjble. l'le have not c o mea c ro s s e f f o rt s
t o c o n f irm o r
disco nfjrm such hypothesis, a lt h o u g h t h e re mu s t h a v e b e e nmu c h
r e se a rch done in this field.
T h e G e rma nwo rd o rd e r wit h n o t o n ly
o n e verb but often several v e rb a l f o rms mo s t l_ ya c c u mu la t in c la t t h e e n d o f
th e se ntence does not seemto s t a n d mu c h re a rra n g e me n twit h o u t
tr a n sgressing the borderline s o f t h e le g it ima t e . 0 n t h e o t h e r
ha n d , simjlar rjgidities
see mt o b e mu c hle s s p re v a le n t in Ch in e s e .
-
4n
tu
-
i t sh ou'ld be emphasjzedtha t t h e me a n in g , o f c o u rs e , c h a n g e swit h
th e permutation, as it also , in g e n e ra 1 , wi1 1d o wh e n t h e re a d jn g rs
d o n e 'in a d'ifferent d'irectio n , a s me n t io n e da b o v e . I t s h o u ld b e
n o ted ,however, that the poin t ma d eh e re a b o u t p e rmu t a t io n s g o e s
m u chfurther than what was d js c u s s e d a b o v e u n d e r t h e h e a d in g o f
so a ce : It is now a question o f a ll p e rmu t a t io n s , n o t o n ly f o rwa rd
a n d b ackward, upwardsor dow n wa rd s .
Imagine that somestatis t ic a ' l
s t u d y h a C p s g n u n d e rt a k e n , o r
cou ld be undertaken,and prov e d t h e h y p o t h e s js b l, a n d la rg e t o b e
co r r e ct. what would be the imp lic a t io n s o f t h a t ? T h a t t h e re js a t
le a st a potential flexjbiljty.
wh e t h e r it is re a lly ma d eu s e o f
is a n other matter. B ut in ma n y E u ro p e a nla n g u a g e s t h e re ma y n o t b e t h a t
po ten tial
and hence much le s s o p p o rt u n it y t o p la y wit h wo rd o rd e r,
an d th ereby also with time.
KNOt^JL
EDGE
|^Ieshal1 tr y to di scuss th.is subject
un d e r thnee headings: predica t iv e v s . re la t io n a l; a b s t ra c . t v s _ r_
co n cr e te and precise vs. vagu e . B y a n d la rg e t h e id e a wo u ld b e
tha t Indo-E uropeanlanguages t e n d t o p ic k u p t h e f o rme r h o rn o f t h e s e
three
d'ich o tomous'ly
expressed dilem ma s , Ch in e s e a n d J a p a n e s et h e la t t e r.
the predicative aspect of turo p e a n la n g u a g e s is a lre a d y s e e n in
the ty pical sentence structu re : t h e re js (u s u a lly )a s u b je c t , a n d
so m e thjng is predicated of th a t s u b je c t - a q u a lif ie r (a d je c t iv e )
a n d /or a verb, with or witho u t
q u a lif ie r (a n a d v e rb ). I n o t h e r
wo r d s: something is atribute d t o s o me t h in g , p re d ic a t e d o f s o me thin g . In fact,
thjs structu re is s o d e e p ' ly in g ra in e d . in me mb e rs
o f th e se'languagecommunit-lt h
x a t it js p ro p a b ly s e e n a s t h e n o rma l
w ay i n which humanthought c a n b e e x p re s s e d , t h e re b e in q n o
alter n ative.
ch'ineseand Japanese, ho we v e r, a re . e x a mpei s o f a l t e rn a t i v e s ,
Th e Chinese philosopher Chan gT u n g -S u r{ 3 d e ere
s la t ' io n a l p re s e n t a t io n
as m uchmore important, even t o t h e p o in t o f b e in g t y p ic a l o f
ch'in e se language structure. He q u o t e s Me n c ' iu s :, ' h u ma nn a t u re t o wa ro s
the go od as water downlvariis " ,a f a ' irly * p t imis t jc v je r+ o f h u ma n
n a tur e ' but clearly relationa l. T h e g e n e ra l s t ru c t u re wo u ld b e
a q u a rt e t ,
A:B = X:Y , which'is a muchmo re c o mp le x t h o u g h t s t ru c t u re t h a n
p r e d icating somethingof a s u b je c t , p (s ). wt ra t it s a y s . is t h a t
t h e re
ar e two realms of Ciscourse, o n e o r t h e m re la t in g t o h u ma nb e in q s
' 11
a n d t h e o th e r o n e to p h ys'i c a1natur e. Twoelem entsar e picked
o u t o f e i th e r, th e y a re re l ated to each other within both
t y p e s of d i sco u rse ,a n dth e n the r elations ar e r elated so as
t o a r r i ve a t a q u a te rn a ryrelat' ionship. The impor tantthing
a b o u t th 'i s re l a t'i o n i s th a t it pr edicatesnothing in any pr ecise
s e n s eof a n y o fth e te rms; i t only says that the four ter ms
pr edicative
a r e r e la te d to e a ch o th e r i n a cer tain way. W her eas
l a n g u ag ew o u l d te n d to b e mor estatic, attr ibuting something
t o s o me th i n gfo r e ve r (" I a ma boy") ,r elatjonal languagekeeps
t h e a b so l u te p ro p e rtj e s o r pr edicatesope6' ,and puts the elem ent
o f j n v ari a n cea t a h i g h e r l e vel of abstr actjon. It is ga' lilean.r ather
14 \
t h a n a r i sto te l i a n ; F u n ktj o n sbegr iffr ather than Substanzbegr iffY'In thi s s ens e,
h e n c e ,C h i n e seh a sa mu chmo r eabstr act languagestr uctur e
t h a n E u ro p e a n
l a n g u a g e s- a nd since this par ticular char acter jst' icof
C h i n e s ei s ta ke n o ve r b v
J a p a n e s eit will a ls o b e a p p l jc a b le
t o t h e l a tte r. A n d th e q u a r tet is a ver y fr equent tor r .( 7)
A n i n te re sti n g a sp e ct o f this has to do with the differ ence
b e t w e e nth e co n n e cti veth a t js used to pr edicate something,like ,,1 am
a b o y ",' i n
l a n g u ages( be, :ein,6tr e, and so on) and
E u ro p e a n
i n C h ' i n e se(sh i h L
) or " in lupu*t. ( g!s:Uand ar u
these
in Eur opean
languages'
;
). W her eas
a" 7 a ndh b
c o n n e cti ve sa re a symme tri cin
, Chineseand Japanese,per haps
p a r t i c ul a rl y th e fo rme r,th e y ar e seenas m uchm or esym m etr ic.It ' is
I w h o p o sse ssb o yi sh n e ss,
a s expr essedin the sentenceabove;
i t ' i s n o t " b o y" w h i ch p o ssessesI- ishness. In Ch' inese
and
'
is
J a p a n e seh, o w e ve r,th 'i s d 'i stjnction
m uchless str ict. Both
c o n s t r uct'i o n sw o u l d b e va l j d i per m utationsin the sensem ade
a b o v eare p o ssi b l e . C o n n o tatjons
m aybe differ ent, the m etam e a n i n g ma
s yb e i mp o rta n t. In shor t,a or edicative pr opos' itjon
m a yb e la l i d b o th w a ysa n d h encebecom es
r elat' ional al though
i n t h i s ca se b i n a n y,n o t q u a ter nur y.( B)
T h ' i sg e n e ra l e mp h a si so n r elational expr essionsmayolace
J a p a n e se
than' is thecasefor Eu popean
a n d C h i n e secl o se r to dialectic r eason' ing
l a n g u ag e s.P re d i ca tj vee xp ress' ions
tend to becom m
e or estatic,
m o r e "u n a ry" , h e n cel e ss ma lleable,lessfluid. At the fir st
g ' l a n c eth i s ma yse e mto b e exactlY the oppositeof the next
p o i n t , th e p re d i l e cti o n fo r abstr act expr ess' ionjn Indo- Eur opean
l a n g u a g e sa s o p p o se dto co n cr eteexpr essionsin Chjneseand
J a p a n eseb; u t th a t j s o n l y at the fir st glance.
-
t2-
I t i s o fte n p o i n te d o u t that both Chineseand Japanese
ar e
v e r y c on cre tel a n g u a g e sa n d that m emberof
s those language
c o m m u n i ti ea sre d i ssa ti sfi e d with any thing but highly concr ete
d e s c r i p ti o n s, fo r i n sta n ce i n the for m of pr ecise examples.The
i d e o g r a ms,
th e ch a ra cte rs them selves,
havever y concr eteor igins
a l t h o u g hso meo f th a t ma yh avebeenlost thr oughthe m illennia.
B u t t h en th e re i s a n o th epr o 'i nt which has not beenlost: ther e
a r e n o a rti cl e s j n C h i n e se ,asalso' in Japanese,and the Chinese
' l a n g u ag efro
, m
th e E u ro p e a point
n
of view,has an alm ost incr edible
l a c k o f j n fl e cti cn 'i n q e n d er ,case or tense, and with r egar d
t o s i n g u l a r vs. p l u ra l .0 f cour sethis in no way m eansthat such
d i s t i n ct'i o n s ca n n o t b e e xp r essed,only that they ar e not bujlt
i n t o s in g l e w o n d sw i th a p p ropr iatepr efixes and suffixes or sim' iI a r n r e a n, sb u t a re d e ri ve df ror nthe context. But ' it doesm eanthat
t h e d t ' s t'i n cti o nb e tw e e nq ,,.Ti, the tr ee and iust sim ply ' tr ee'
d o e s n o to ccu ra u to ma t'i ca 1 1y' .trA
ee is any tr ee,"the tr ee"is that
'
is
p a r t i c ul a r tre e ,w h e re a s'tre e'
tr ee- ishness- an abstr act pr oper ty
o f a t r ee , l i ke b o yi sh n e ss;an univer sal aspect of tr ees, pf^.fing
f o r t h e l a sti n g co n tro ve rsybetweennom inalismand r ealism.\' ' l
T h is b e co memu
s chmo re'inter estingwheninstead of tr ees one
l o o k s a s su ch co n ce p tsa s " fr eedom "and "equa1ity". In manyEur opean
l a n g u a g e sth e se w o rd sca n b e equippedwith ar ticles, but in gener al
a p p e a rw 'i th o u t,d e n o ti n ga b str act concepts.Theystand for essences,
f o r s o me th i n ge sse n ti a l th a t m ayor m aynot be said to exist or
b e p r e se n t j n , fo r i n sta n ce , countr ies. As such they ar e the tools
o f a b s tra ct re a so n 'i n gth
, e y c an be usedas subjects,andsom ething
c a n b e p re d i ca te do f th e m, the pr edicatescan be com par ed,and' long
per haps
c h a ' i n so f d e d u cti vere a so n i ngcan be establ.ished.Eur opeans,
p a r t i c ul a rl y th e Ge rma nasn d the Fr encl"r
can
, go on for a consider able
ity"
l e n g t h o f ti me d i scu ssi n gth e r elation between"fr eedom"and"equal
w i t h o u t e ve r h a v'i n gto u se a single example.llot so jn Chineseand
e i l l for ce a cer tain concr eteness
on the
J a p a n eseT: h e 'l a n g u a gw
l a n g u a g eu se rs o r a t l e a st tend to bendthem' in that d' ir ection.
"Yo ume a nIj ke i n - - -? " w ouldbe the typical questionasked
speakerwhenthe abstr act
to a n In do- Eur opean
b y a S i n o -Ja p a n e se
d ' i s c o urseh a s g o n eo n fo r sometim e and tur ned' into utter m eaning( 11
I e s s n essfro m th e p o in t o f v i ew of concr eten.r r . )
- i3 In r e sp ect of these two aspect s o f t h e e y p is t e rn o lo g ic a l d ime n s io n o f la n g u a g e
the g r o und has already been nre p a re d jn lin g u is t jc d e v e lo p me n tf o r t h e e m e r g e n c eo f
ba sic c haracterist'ics of occ id e n t a l in t e lle c t u a l
s t y le : a t o n rjs t jc
(.1 tu o -t.u ti
a n d deductive',
ve expr essions per mit detact' ,ment
or
o n e subject from another in o rd e r t o a s s ig n a t t rib u t e s ; e s s e n t ia lis m
pe r m its deductivism as a logic a l o p e ra t io n , u n e n c u mb e rebdy a n y
nisp l aced concreteness.Relat io n a l e x p re s s io n s a re mu c h le s s p e rm' is s iv e
of atomismunless one should t a ' lk a b o u t mo le c u la ris m, t h e d e t a c h me n t
of a more complex unjtfromthe re s t
r e la ti onal
en ti ty
tetrad. To attribu t e
will
o f t h e u n iv e rs e , lik e in a q u a rt e t , a
s o me t h in g c o n c e rn in g t h is mu c hmo re c o m p l e x
be more problema t ic , h o we v e r. A n d if
in a d d ' it io n
esse n tialism is less develope d d e d u c t iv e re a s o n in q wo u ' ldb e imp e d e d .
At th'is po'int the third asp e c t e n t e rs wit h f u l I f o rc e . E u ro p e a n
la n g u agesare constructed jn s u c h a wa y t h a t t h e y a t le a s t g iv e
the im pression that peop'le in s u c h la n g u a g e c o mmu n jt ie sc a n a rriv e d t
v e r y p re ci se co n cl u si o n sthat ar e
o p e n t o f a l s jf ic a t ' io n ; if
th e y cannot be "confi rmed"the y c a n a t I e a s t b e ' Ui s c o n fi rme d ' jT h e
wouldtend t o b e a p re d jc a t iv e s t a t e me n t , a
p r o p o sition,and as such subje c t t o a d e c is io n , a ju d g e me n t in t e rms
of"tr u e vs. false" (or the w e a k e r f o rm o f t h a t d ic h o t o my ,c o n f jrme d w
co n clu sion itself
f i r m ed.,]Not so in Chinese/J a p a n e s e T
. h e v a g u e n e sos f t h e a 1 ' lu s iv e ,
Ij te r a r y
sty1e, often referred t o b y l^ le s t e rn e rs a s " p o e t ic ' h
i as been
th e co nstant themeofcommen t u rJ l' i), a ls o s h o ws u p wh e n J a p a n e s e
le a r n foreign languages: exp re s s ' io n ss u c h a s " ma y -b e " , " v ie . l1 e ' ic h t " ,
|p e u t- 6tre" pop up very often in o rd e r t o re f le c f t h e v a g u e n e s so f
Ja p a n esedjscourse. A questi o n lik e " Wh e nd o e s t h e t ra in le a v e ? "
by a Norwegianhusbandis l'ik e ' ly t o
t h e a n s we r " t h e t ra in
l ea ve s, may be, around noon" - wh e n t h e t ra in jn f a c t (f ro m a
e l. ic jt
l ,Je sternpoint of view!) leave s a t 1 2 . 0 0 , s h a rp . I n t h is , it
sh o u ld be noted, 'is not only a c e rt a in v a g u e n e s s o f t h e la n g u a g e
b u t a lso in the self-present a t io n o f t h e s p e a k e r: t o is s u e a
p r e cise, absolute statement js t o p re s e n t o n e s e lf a s a ru le r o f
the un iverse, or at least as a d ire c t o r g e n e ra ' l o f J a p a n Na t io n a l
Ra 'ilr o ad (JNR). Neither is c o n s id e re d a p p ro p ria t e t o p u t it mi1 d " ly .
Deductivi sm presuppcsesp re c i s e n € s ;s ' if n o t t h e wh c . lep u rp * s e
cf de d uctivisi* is la:i" A nd t h e ri; rp o s e is t h is : f ro m c 1 e a r, p re c is e
p r e m isses via the'iron laws of d e d u c t iv e lo g ic t o c le a r, p re c is e
con clu sions. It seemsthat bo t h t h e Ch jn e s e a n d J a p a n e s ela n g u a g e s
discon-
AA
tc +
-
w o u l d b e ve ry 'i mp e rfe ctve hicles for such thought figur es,by people
i n t h e We stse e na s n e ce ssar yconditions for science jn the W ester n
s e n s e .T h e u n i ts o nw h i ch p roposjtionsar e bu' ilt ar e no longer
s i m p l e su b j e cts T h e b a si c figur es of thought ar e r elational r ather
. h e re j s I ittle or nothing of essenceswher e
t h a n p re d 'i ca t'i veT
t h e l og i ca l n a tu re o f th e 'i r inter connectioncan be explor ed, and
b o t h be g i n n i n g ,th e mj d d l e and the end of an ar gum entative
chajn
w o u l db e va g u era th e r th a n pr ecise. [.lh' ich,of cour se, only points
t o o t h e r typ e s o f i n te l l e ctual sty' les,mor eholistic, mor edia.lectic;
a l l t h e tj me ke e p i n gi n mj nd that both the Chineseand the Japanese
l a n g u a g e sa re
ca p a b l eo f se rving as car r ier s of t,/ester nscientific
t h o u gh ! o n l y th a t 'i t co me sless easjly since that type of thinking
h a s n o t d e ve l o p e dto g e th e r with the languagestr uctur e.
PERSON
Ther e is muchless to say about th' is
- NATURE
d i m e n si o n .0 nth e o n e h a n ds o manyof the Chinesechar acter sar e
c o n c r e teta
, ke n fro m n a tu ra l objects thatwer e depicted jn ear ljer
v e r s j o n s o f th e ch a ra cte rs. It is even found jn family namestoday
paddy",
i n J a p a n e sefo
, r i n sta n ce : Tanakameaning"centr al
lgSlgti
m e a ni n gth e " mo u tho fa b o a r".The absenceof clear d' istinctions between
a b s t r a ct a n d co n cre tep ro p er tjes,or aspects,of the sam eter m makes
a l l t h i n g s mo ree q u a l . T h er eis less of a wor ld of the concr ete
a n d t o u ch a b l e , " n a tu re " to whjch the hum anbodywoulda' lso belong,
o n t h e o re h a n da n d o n th e other handa wor ld of the abstr act, that
w h ' i c hca n n o t b e to u ch e d ,of essencesand even souls,the essence
o f h u ma nb e i n g s.B o th a re concr ete, both ar e the sam e.
l a n g u a g e sb y the sam etoken, ther e is also a cer tain per s oni fj c at'i on
I n E u ro p e a n
o f n a tu re th ro u g hth e u se of gender sother than neuter in
r e f e r e n ce sto n a tu re (l a n atur e, djg Natur ) and par ts of natur e,
s u c ha s a n yth i n g i n th e b i ospher e.Never theless,it is clear that
e s s e nce sa n d a b stra ctj o n sar e attr ibuted to hum anbeinqs and things
s reth a n b theanir na' lpl ant and m iner al "ki ngdom" s.
c r e a t e d b y h u ma nmo
I t i s typ i ca l th a t " fo xi n ess" is an attr ibute of cer tain hum anbeings
r a t h e r th a n o f a fo x. S o b y and lar ge\' r ewouldbe jnclined to say that
t h e d iffe re n ce s b e tw e e nth e languagefam il' ies w' ill point jn the
d i r e cti o n o f ma ki n gh u ma nbeings djffer ent fr om natur e in the
l a n g u a g e s,mo resim ilar in Chjnese and Japanese.The step
Eu r o p e a n
f r o m e sse n ce(a b stra cti o n ) to soul is but a shor t one, and this is
t3
-
w ha t is already bu'i'lt'into the la n g u a g e smo rp h o ' lo g ic a l' ly
T h is a g a in js a f a irly
PER SON
- P E RS ON
c o mp re h e n s iv e
and of course of imme n s eimp o rt a n c e t o s o c ia l s c ' ie n t js t s
s'in ce this is where social re la t io n s a re b e in g imp lic it ly d e f jn e d '
! ^^i^
LUprLt
b y ce r tain tendenciesorbiases a lre a d y b u jlt in t o t h e la n g u a g e s .
jn g e n e ra ' l
Llbsha l'l try to discuss this imp o rt a n t a s p e c t o f c o s mo lo g y
a n dsocial cosmologyin partic u la r, u n d e r t h re e h e a d jn g s : g o lle c t iv is t
a n d in s id e v s . o u t s id e y!. i ndjv'idugl_jst, vertical v s . h o riz g n t a l
i he g e n eral thesis being thatJ a p a n e s ewill t e n d t o p ic k u p t h e f o rme r
h e a d o f these three dilemmasa n d E u ro p e a nla n g u a g e st h e la t t e r'
jo n .
r .vith Ch'inesebeinq morein{et we e nb u t t e n d in g in t h e J a p a n e s ed ire c t
L e t us start w'ith the colle c t iv is t
v s . in d iv ' id u a lis t d ime n s ' io n
v ' ie w u s e f u l wa y o f
a n d w i th a somewhatmetaphoric a i b u t in o u r
ap p r o aching the problem. lma g in e o n e c o me sa s a t o t a l f o re ig n e r
to a communitywhere E ngliS h, o r Ch in e s e , o r J a p a n e s eis s p o k e n .
The ne wcomeris comp'lete.lyig n o ra n t o f t h e la n g u a c e , u n d e rs t a n d ' in gn o t h i n g
It co mesas a flow of soundS , u n d if f e re n t ' ia t e d , mo re o r le s s lik e
a w aterfall, I jke t.he chirpin g o f b ird s , t h e g ru n t ' in g o f a n ima ls .
ld o u ld there jn all of thjs b e o n e s o u n d t h a t s t a n d s o u t , o n e t h a t -a f t er
r u ' ldre c o g n iz e a n d t h e n
listen ing to the phenomenon -t hnee wc o meWo
r e r e co gnize to the point of u s in g it a s t h e f irs t s o u n d h e mig h t
r e p e a t,with a questioning ex p re s s io n in h is f a c e , t ry in g t o e lic it
scm e type of interP retat.ion?
H ere three candidates are s u g g e s t e d : t h e " I " in t h e t n g lis h
jp1the Ch in e s e la n g u a g e , a n d t h e " h a i" jn
ia n g u age, the "WU-6sn"
jt
the Japaneselanguage. The fjrs t o f t h e s e js s imp ly ' in t e rp re t e d :
'i s the assertjve first
person S in g u la r p ro n o u n , t h e s y mb o l 0 f
i nd ivjdual ism and S elfassertio n , e v e n c a p it a l' iz e d in writ in g (" I " )
so th a t it stands out, shoutin g it s me s s a g eo f in d iv ' id u a lis m t o a n y
n a p a g e f il le d w' it h E n g lis h
eye trained on this phenome n oin
pr in t.
The second one iS als o a s s e rt iv e , it
js t h e f jrs t
p e rs o n
plu r a l pronoun, "we". The in d iv jd u a l s p e a k e r p re s e n t s h ims e lf
( o r h e rself, but then Chinese d o e s n o t re f lA c t g e n d e r) a s
' 16 a p a r t, e ve n a p a rt'i cl e i n a gr oup, the collective l^Ie.This we
i s a su b j e ct, a p o te n ti a l o r even actua' l actor . And this differ s
f r o m t h e u b i q u i to u s " h a i " found in Japanese
discour se, sometimes
( i n c o r re ctl y) tra n sl a te d i n to the English "yes' j and its equivalents
i n o t h e r l a n g u a g e s.On ei n ter pr etation of th' is "hai", which accor ding
t o t h e to n e i n w h 'i ch 'i t j s utter ed also m aycomeclose to "no",
w o u l dbe so me th 'i nfigke th i s: "l am tunedr onyou, I am r eceiving
t h e s i gn a 'l syo u e mi t, I a m switchedon"t.' - 1tm ay, however ,also
h a v ea co n n o ta ti o no f su b ser vjence
as it' is the under dogr ather
t h a n t h e to p d o gw h oh a s to confir m that he is tuned in, that the
s w i t c h re ma j n so n . Wh e nth e topdogutter s
question,or a semiq u e s t io n ,th i s ma yre l e a se a cascadeof "hai" amongunder doglistener s,
a n d t h e q u e sti o n i s o fte n for m ulatedin such a way that the r r ha' i"
c a n b e g i ve n i n a ffi rma ti ve inter pr etation. In shor t, "hai" stands
f o r s o me
ki n d o fw e -n e ss
o n l y that it is r elatjonal betweenthe sender
a n d t h e re ce j ve r, a symb o lthat they at least for the time be' ing
a r elatjon, not only a gr oupof people .
c o n s t itu te a l a n g u a g eco mmunity,
T h i s ca n th e n b e co n tra stedwith the well- knownJapanese
par ticular ly in the sjngula r ,
r e l u c t an ceto u se th e fi rst per sonpr onoun,
b u t a l so to so mee xte n t i n the plur al.One mayeventalk about an
a n t j - i n d i vi d u a l i sm b u i l t j n to the linguistic habits. Im per sonal
e x p r e ssi o n sca n b e u se d : In steadof saying"I am qo' ingto
YO k o h a ma to mg rrq w "o n e might Say "tqm gr r ow- to go to Yokoham- a
t h e r e is a p 1 a n " )'R 6 fl e x'i ve
ver bs maybe used ' im per sonalizing
t h e a c tj o n ,0 r a t l e a st p u tting the act' ion awayfr om the speaker .
jn other languages,forinstance
0 f co u rse , th i s j s n o t unknown
i n Sp an i sh .A ma n a g eor f a j am factor y in Chile once had the pr oblem
in the jam ( wh' ichhad to be
t h a t a w o rke r h a d l o st a th er mometer
t r e a t e d a t ve ry d e fi n i te te mper atur es) .It was an impor tantact,
m' ight disintegr ate into the
e v e n a g ra ve o n e a s th e th e rmometer
j a m . T h e w o rke r, mu chto th e jr r jtation of the manager
out to distr ibut e
g u i l t , e xp re sse dw h a t h a d h appened
not by saying "Yo per di e1 ter m o m e trob"u t b y sa yi n g " e 1 ter mometr o se per did" - "the ther mometer
th 'i s could be inter pr eted as an exculpator y
f o r m u la ti o n , a n d a s su ch ve ry usefu' l in a situation loadedwlth
t e n s ' i on . It sh o u l d b e p o i n ted out that in a languagelike Nor wegian
l o s t i t se l f" .0 b vi o u sl y
t h e c o rre sp o n d i n gre fl e xi ve sentencewouldbe a wr onglyfor mulated
difficult. In English
s e n t e nce ,ma k'i n gth i s typ e of deper sonal' ization
-
ll
"t h e th e rmo me tegro t l o st" does not expr essthe same:the ther m omet er
b e i n g a su b j e ct ca p a b l eo f losinq itself.
Still
another way in wh jc h t h is s u p p re s s io n o r d e n ig ra t io n
o f the individual expresses ' it s e lf in J a p a n e s ewo u ld b e t h ro u g h
se lf- effacing
comments.If re f e re n c e h a s t o b e ma d et o o n e s e lf
the n they shou.ldat least be n e g a t iv e ; t h e o p p o s jt e
b e in g
un b e arably self-assertive.
An d t h a t b rin g s o u t h o w |, ' le s t e rn e rs
i n the'ir speech comeacross t o J a p a n e s e : a s e g o c e n t ric a n d s e lf la u d a tory, and also as self-a s s e rt iv e , p re s e n t in g t h e ms e lv e sa s
alwa ys in command
of the sjtu a t io n (I a mg o jn g t o y o k o h a ma
to m o r row),and with thenrsel v e sjn t h e c e n t e r o f t h e s c e n e .
Then there is the other s id e o f t h e c o l le c t iv ' is t -in d iv id u a l' is t
d im e n sion: not oniy avoiding in d iv id u a lis t
use o f collect'ivist
for m of the first
e x p re s s io n s , b u t
ma k in g f u i l
express io n s . I t d o e s n o t n e c e s s a rily t a k e t h e
person p1 u ra 1 p ro n o u n , b u t o f s o me ' id e n t if je d c o llec t i v i t y
na m e d,to whjch one belongs . A l, rle s t e rn e mig
r
h t p re s e n t h ' ims e lf a s
"Jo h a n Ga'ltung from the Univ e rs it y o f 0 s lo " , s t a rt in g f ro m t h e
'in sid e with the personal attrib u t e , t h e f irs t n a me , t h e n t h e
fam ily nameand then institutio n a l b e lo n g in g n e s s . A J a p a n e s ewo u ld
d o ju st the opposite: "Un'iv e rs ' it y o f O s lo ' s G a lt u n g J o h a n" . F i rs t
co m e sthe collectivity
definin g o n e s p o s it io n in s o c ie t y , t h e p la c e
o f w ork, then a gen'itive P os s e s s iv e c o n n e c t iv e , t h e J a p a n e s e
"n0 ") , then the fanri1y namet o s y mb oiz
i e b io lo g ic a l b e lo n g ' in g n e s s ,
an d at the end what to the W e s t e rn e rwo u ld b e " mv s e if " .
Wherewould a Chinese be lo c a t e d o n t h is d ime n s io n ? P ro b a b ly
som e wherein-between, capable o f u s in g f irs t p e rs o n p ro n o u n s ,
bo th jn singular and plural, b u t wjt h a c e rt a in p re d ile c t io n f o r
th e l atter.
B ut they would a ls o b e p e rf e c t ly c a p a b le , lin g u ' is t ic a 1 ly ,
of no t using them, letting
t h e m b e ' imp lie d b y t h e c o n t e x t . A n d
th is brings out an aspect of Ch in e s e a lre a d y h in t e d a t S e v e ra lt ime s .
eh'in e se is a languagewhich c a n e a s i] y b e s t re t c h e d b o t h ' in t h e
We sternand in the Japanesed jre c t io n ,
a la n g u a g e in t h e mid d le ,
a r ea l:nE nS _Gn (middle lan g u a g e ) a s o n e mig h t e x p e c t f ro m a
zho n g grd 1*iddle kingdom). I t t a k e s le s s d e f in jt e
stands.
'
t6
-
L e t u s th e n l o o k a i : th e next aspect, ver tical vs. hor izontal.
N o l a n g u a g ei s i n se n si ti ve to ver tical socja' l distance ( "class differ enc e" ,
a l t h o u ghth i s i s a so me w h at
linr itjng ter m ) and hor izontal socjal
d ' i s t a nce ,th e d i sta n ce to fo r e' igner sof var ious kinds, the differ ence
b e t w e enj n si d e a n d o u tsi d e (the languagecom m un.ity)to, be d.iscussed
b e l o w . E a chso c'i a l l a ye r h a s its way of using the language,its
p a r t i c ul a r vo ca b u l a ry,i ts o wngr am m at.ic
par adigm s,idiomatic exp r e s s i on s, p e rh a p ssyn ta x, e ven semantics,its intonation. The
s o c j a l g ro u pa t th e b o p i s L r suallyable to define the way it speaks
t h e l a n g u a g ea s th e " co rre ct" usage,the other s beingdeviations
the social gr ouo in
a n d a b e rra ti o n s, e ve n i n co rrect, even"vtr ' lgal'Also,
.
.is
t"thethet'
it
or not the social
t h e c e n tre o f th e l a n g u a g ecom m un' ity,
g r o u pa 'l th e to p , j s u su ally able to define its usageof the
l a n g u a g ea s " n a tj o n a l " , " standar cl",and other usagesar e defined
evennlor ethe case for wor ld
a s "v e rn a cu l a r" . A n d th i s b ecor nes
l a n g u a g e ssu ch a s E n g l i sh . Nationally other gr oupsthan those a' b the
ly, for eqLr al
t o p a n d /o r j n th e ce n tr'ema yf ight, even successful
r i g h t s wi th i n th e to ta l l a n guagecomm unity.But inter nationally
has
i t s e e msto b e ta ke n fo r g rantedthat the countr y of or igin, suchasEng l and,
th e ri g h t to d e fi n e c or r ect usageand other countr iesnone,
all
is a "wor ld language".For that r eas on
r e g a r d l e sso f h o wmu chth e IangLr age
En q li sh
could be seen as b e lo n g in g t o t h e wo rld , ju s t a s a
"n a t i o na l l a n q u a g e "i s mo reand mor eseenas being a par t of a
n a t ' i o n a lh e ri ta g e , me a nni g b y that a' ll par ts of the natjon , not only the
6 l i t e . A l l u se rs co u l d b e seenas having mor eequal r ' ights in defining
the language.
S t a n d a rdOxb ri d g eo r " K 'i ng' s"fngl ish; Hannover
Ger m an,the
F r e n c hof th e T o u ra i n e ,th e Italian of Toscana/Umbr ia,
the Span' ish
- al I of
o f S a l an ra n cath, e C h 'i n e se
o f Beijing, Tokyo Japanese
t h e s e a re e xa mp l e so f th e p a tter n just m entioned,thr usting wedg e s b e tw e e n" sta n d a rd "a n d " ver nacu1ar ",
"dialect". In doing so
g e o g r a p hi sy e q u i p p e dw i th a ver tical gr adient, classifying distr icts
a s w e l l a s i n d i vi d u a l s. T h e re is m or eoverthe ' inter active aspect
o f t h i s ,d l so fo u n d i n a l l l a nguages:speechdiffer s accor dingto
s o c i a l r e l a ti o rrs, o n e d o e s n ot talk jn the sam eway to the For eign
M j n i s t er a n d to h i s d ri ve r. And it is not only a questionof which
p e r s o n a lp ro n o u ni s u se d (j n English the differ ent' iationcanhnadebyneans
m ight use
o f l a s t n a meo r fi rst n a merespectively, wher ea Ger m an
S i e o r d L t a F re n chvq u so r tu_; it is^a1soa questionof tone of
v o j c e , an clth e ch o i ce o f vccabular y) ' ' ffsentencespokenupwar dsbec o m e lso n g e r', o rn a te ; th e sa m econtent expr esseddownwar ds
m ay
-tY-
b e c o me
sh o rte r, mo red i re ct. Hor izonta.llanguage,to equals, m aybe
l o c a te d so me w h e re
i n b e tween.But that does not necessar ilydefine jt
a s t h e n a ti o n a l l a n g u a g e.It m aybe veny r ocar . The s1ang,jar gono
a r g o t, o f e q u a l sma yva ry betweenclasses and fr om place to ptu*.( 17)
T h i s, h o w e ve r,i s a u n' iver salphenom enon
a' lthoughit differ s
i n d e g re efro m o n e l a n g u a gecomm un' ity
to the other . Thus, in
N o r we g i a th
n e re i s ce rta i n ly not m uchleft of this kind of differ e n t i a ti o n p a rti cu l a rl y a fter the secondper sona'pr
l onounsingular
"d u " is n o wa l mo st u n 'i ve rsal;"De" havingalm ost disappear ed.
Bu t Ja p a n e se
a s a l a n g uagegoes far beyondthis, even to the
p o i n t th a t o n e n 'i g h t ta l k about four differ ent languages:a downw a r d l a n g u a g ea, n u p w a rdl a nguag€,d ver y muchupwar dlanguage,
a n d a h o ri zo n ta l l a n g u a g e .The syntax will djffer ,and so will the
c o n c re tew o rd su se d ,e ve nto conveymor eor less the samem eaning.
c o n s e q u e n t'l y, th e Ja p a nesehavetoknowwher ethey stand in r elation
t o e a cho th e r b e fo re co rre ct ver bal com m un' icatjon
can star t. Thepr ove r bi al
a c t o f i n tro d u ctj o n to e a ch other , with two Japanese
gentlem en,both
of them
d r e s se d 'i n b l a ck, a p p ro a ching
each other , gr adually bowingdown
w i t h stra i g h t'l e g s a n d stra ight backs,
€Xper iment' ing
with the
r e l a t i ve a n o l e a t th e h i p s ti11 they,by utter ing soundsof belongingn es s
a n d n ame s,h a ve
fo u n d o u t w hat will be the cor r ect r elative anqle;
u n d e rp i n n i n gth e mu tu a l p resentationby fishing out of the br east
p o c k et o f th e j a cke t a vj si ting car d ( cener ally of the same
s i z e ) b e co meme
s a n i n g fu l .It is a pr econditionfor talk.
Bu tca nth e y n o t si mp ]y makeuse cf hor izontal language?
That
j s t h e l a n g u a g eo f ma ssco mm unication,
of newspaper s,
r adio and TV,
t o b e use d i n i mp e rso n are
l lations wher ethe sender sdo not know
w h ot h e re ce i ve rs a re , o n l y that they will be scatter ed ar oundj.n
J a p a n e se
so ci e ty i n su cha way that noneof the thr ee ver tical
l a n g u ag e sca n b e u se d . 0 f cour sethis wouldhavebeenthe answerif
J a p a n e se
h a d b e e na We ste rnlanguage;it would havem ovedin the sam e
d i r e c t i o n , l i ke N o rw e g i a h
n as
at a m or esuper ficial level. But the
'l
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
s
o t h e r Ja p a n e se
a re ther e, cr ying to be used, defining
s o c i a l re l a t'i o n s o f su p e ro rdinance
and subor dinance.
Oneday they
m a yb e g i ve n u p , h o ri zo n ta l Japanese
m ayspr eadat the expense
61 the v er ti c al
v e r s i on s o f Ja p a n e se B rrt that day is pr obab.lystill far away.
-7 Q Thi s , hoivever, does not me a nt h a t h o ri z o n -uia l a n g u a g ej s n o t
use d i n personal relatjons, o n ly t h a t jt is f ra g me n t e d . O n e g ro u p
m a y use this type of horizont a l la n g u a g e , a n o t h e r o n e t h a t t y p e de p e n d'ingon gender, dgeo oc c u p a t ' io n a l c a t e g o ry , g e o g ra p h ic a l
l oca ti on (and probably also o t h e r f a c t o rs ). Rg a in t h js me a n st h a t
'l an g u age
becomesa symbo'lof s o c ia l a t t rib u t jo n , o f b e lo n g in g n e s s
a s w ell as relationship in a mo re v e rt jc a l
l i ng u jstic
s e n s e . A lmo s t e v e ry
act defines attribu t e s a n d re la t io n s ,
me a n in gt h a t
the sp oken and written langua g e is n o t o n ly a s o c ja l a c t in t h e
r r su a l sense of being interact iv e , b u t in t h e s e n s e o f p o ' in t in g
ou t, underl ining, even reenf o rc in g s o c ia l d iv is io n s a n d re la t io n s .
Th e y function like a map of t h e u n d e rly in g s o c ia l t e rrit o ry ;
th a t map territorial
locat'i o n a n d re la t io n wjll
wit h o u t
get 1ost, and the
i nd ividual Japanesewould fee l a t a lo s s . T h is , in c id e n t a l 1 y ,
jn c o n t e x 6 wh e will a lso be a reason why Ja p a n e s eo f t e n k e e p q u ie t
r e Westernerswould not: the s ' it u a t io n ma y n o t b e c le a r e n o u g ht o
d e fi ne the adequate languag e . A n d t h e p ro b le m is n o t s o lv e d b y
l oa d in g one's languagew'ith h o n o rif ic s t o b e o n t h e s a f e s jd e : t o
talk too muchupwardsmay be a s in s u lt in g t o t h e o t h e r p e rs o n
( a n d thereby also to oneself ) a s t h e o p p o s it e mis t a k e . I ^ J h e jn
n
do u b t, keep quiet, wajt and s e e , wa it a n d I is t e n , t il1 s o me b o d y
el se defi nes the s i tuati on .
of this is mo re t h a n rn e re ly a n a n a lv t ic e x e rc is e .
Th e r e is a concreb appl jcat io n o f t h e p rin c ip le o f b u ilt - in
ver ti cality,
morphologicall y t h a t js , ' in t h e J a p a n e s ela n g u a g e
However,all
tha t
c oul,l be mentioned. I s a s t u d e n t re v o lu t io n , o r a n y re v o lu t io n
p o ssjb le jn that society at a ll, wit h o u t a ls o c h a n g in g t h e la n g u a g e ?
O ne ba s'ic aspect of revolution is t o b u ild d o wns o me
ver tj cality,
f o rms o f
for instance re la t jn g t o c o mma nodv e r me a n so f
ovel me a n so f re p ro d u c t io n - wh e t h e r t h e la t t e r
p r o d u ction, or command
the bjological sphere,linked t o a ris t o c ra c y , o r in t h e s p h e re
of social reproduction in ge n e ra l, lin k e d t o me rit o c ra c y . T h e
. |9 6 0 s
c a n b e t a k e n a s a n e x a mp le .
stu d e nt revolut'ion of the lat e
Th e 'Student revolutiorf is a c h a in o f e v e n t s , wh ' ic ha c t u a lly s t a rt e d in
La t'i n' A merica in the early 1 9 6 0 s 0t h e n a p p e a re do n t h e l^ le s tc o a s t
o f th e United S tates jn the f o rm o f t h e " f re e s p e e c h " mo v e me n t ,
an d th en exploded'in China d u rjn g t h e Cu lt u ra l Re v o lu t io n 1 9 6 6 -6 9 ,
l ater on
to aopeat'i;'r iiJes t e rn[ u ro p e a n d [ a s ie rn Un it e d S t a t e s
1S 'ln
-
/l
a n d t h e n fi n a l l y i n E a ste rnEur ope( but nevento apoearin any for m ,
i t s e e ms,i nth e so vi e t u n i on and in Isr ael) . pr ofessor swer e built
d o w n ,o th e r me mb e rs
o f th e univer sity wer e to som eextent built up,
p o s s i b l y a s a h o p e dfo r co nsequence
s
of building pr ofessor down.
O n ew a y o f d o i n g th i s w a s b y changingspeechhabjt, addr essingtnem
w i t h f e w e r h o n o n i fi cs, w j th less r espect, evenwith djsr espect. In
s o m el an g u a g e sth i s co u l d b eaquestionof changingfr om "sje" to
"d u ' l b u t w i th o u t a t th e sa metjme changingfr om fam jr y nam eto fir st
n a m es j n ce th e l a tte r mi g h t br ing the class enem yuncomfor tably
close.
Bu t i n Ja p a nn o su ch a tom istic changecould be done.Not
o n l y l an g u a g emo l e cu l e s,
b u t the whole languagewouldhave to be
'l
a
n
g
u age,
c h a n g e d .H o ri zo n ta l
indicating a belongingness
to the same
g r o u p ,b o rd e ri n go n i n ti ma cy,wasout. Hence,the only alter natjve
t o v e rti ca l u p -l a n g u a g w
e o uld be ver t' ical down- language.
For the
I ^ l e s t ern
mi n d i t mi g h t b e d i fficult fully to compr ehend
what this
m e a n ssi n ce i t g o e sso fa r
beyonda m er echangein per sonal
p r o n o u n .T h e rea re sto ri e s of Japanesepr ofessor shavingcom m itted
s u ' i c i de a fte r h a vi n g b e e ne xposedto an exper ienceof that type.
As a c o n se q u e n ce
o n e mj g h t dr aw the conclusjonthat thjs appr oachjs no t
o n l y t oo d ra ma ti c, b u t a l so non- r evolutionar yor evenanti- r evolutiona r y ,
u n l e s s o n e a ssu me th
s e d j ctator ship of the pr oletar iat ( "student' iat"? )
a s t h e g o a l o f a re vo l u ti o n ar y pr ocess.A nat' ionwidehor izontar
s o c ' i e tyw o u l dn o t a t p re se nt f ind its l' inguistic expr essionwithin
J a p a n esel a n g u a g e ,a s'i t i s known,and
thjs constitutes a m ajor impedim ent
t o a n y su ch ch a n g e .Wh a te verchangedoes take place languagewill
'i n th e speakerof who j s hr ' ghand who i s I ow.
c o m m anco
d n sc'i o u sn e ss
A n dw h e na l l d i me n sj o n so f h' ier ar chyhavebeeneliminated som enewonesw oul d
h a v et o ta ke th e 'i r p 1 a ce .T his had actually happened
once, after
t h e f l e i j i re vo l u ti o n , p l a ci ng those wr ' th higher educationfpep elite
i n s t ' i t uti o n s a t th e to p a nd other s belowat var jous levels in
a "d e g re e o cra cy'l a ssu cce ssoror der to the pr ecedingar ir to.r u.y!18)
H e n c e ,i t co u l d ve ry e a si l y happenagain, if for no other r eason, then
f o r p u re l y 1i n g u j sti c re a sons:
ver tical ity r epr oducedby 1ingu' istic nec es s i ty .
I n a se n seth e i n si d e -o utsided' istinct' ionalso po' ints to a
p e cu 'l 'i ar ity:a shar p bor der line betweenJapan
v e r y b a s'i cJa p a n e se
a n d t h e re st o f th e w o rl d , betweennihon ( the Or igin of the sun)
tt-
a n d g g 1_ -_ !g (o
!e u tsi d e co u n tr _4"abr oad") . M ost ' impor tant' is the way
j n w h i ch fcre 'i g *e rsa re i a l ked about and addr essed.Theyar e talked
a b o u t , to a l a rg e e xte n t, a s non- per sons
o us"ingconstr uct' ionsthat cou l d al s o
a ni mals and com m odi
ttes( .191r
the for ei qner
be ap prooriate for
ta 1 ks Japanesea problem ar js e s : wh e re d o e s s / h e f it
in t o t h e
Jap a n esehiearchy? W hat kind o f la n g u a g e s h o u ld b e u s e d ? I f t h e re
j s n o answer to these import a n t q u e s t io n s t h e n t wo p o s s ib ilit ' ie s
rema'in: to use a foreig n la n g u a g e ( o f wh ic h t h e J a p a n e s e
still
ar e i ncreasingly capable), or t o u s e n o la n g u a g e a t a ll, k e e p q u ie t .
A no n - commi
ttal smiI e m'iqht b e o n e s o ' lu t ' io ni n t h a t k i n d o f
si tu a ti on .
Addedto this comesa bas ' ic c h a ra c t e ris t ic
o f J a p a n e s ea n d
C hin e se from the point of view o f E u ro p e a nla n g u a g e s : t h e ir in a cce ssability. Not only E uro p e a n s ,a ls o t h e J a p a n e s ea n d Ch in e s et h e mdu ra t jo n o f e le me n t a ry s c h o o l in o rd e r
to acq u'ire adequate nastery o f t h e jr o wn la n g u a g e , ' in o rd e r t o b e
selve s would need the full
"alp h a bet'ized",wh'ichof cours e is a wro n q e x p re s s io n s in c e t h e re a re ch a r a c t e r s
an d no alphabet ('bharacterize d " ? ). A s f o r mo s t la n g u a g e le a rn in g
th e diffjculties
increase wi t h in c re a s in q a g e o f t h e s t u d e n t .
Give n this it follows that o n e a lmo s t h a s t o b e a me mb e ro f t h o s e
socie ti es in order to becomeme mb e rso f t h e la n g u a g e c o mmu n ' it ie-s
no t q u ite,.but alm,:st. A nd fro m e le me n t a ry k n o wle d g e(e . g . o f t h e
r2nt
f a n o r .rsiB 50'E haracters prescri b e d b y t h e J a p a n e s eMin i s t ry o f
Ed u ca t'ionas the basic must f o r a n y J a p a n e s e )t h e re is a v e ry lo n g ,
see m ingly endless ladder to c ljmb t o wa rd s h jg h e r le v e ls o r ma s t e ry ,
p e r fection.
Most Japanesea n d Ch in e s e t h e ms e lv e swill
never be
a b le to comevery h"igh on tho s e la d d e rs , t h e re b y re in f o rc ' in g wh a t e ve r
rank djfferentjals
the re ma y b e wit h in t h o s e s o c ie t ie s .
Th is actually meansthat t h e in s id e -o u t s jd e rn e t a p h o ris o n ly
ccr r e ct up to a certain poin t . T h e re is a s t e e p d jc h o t o my b e t we e n
spe a kers and non-speakersof t h o s e la n g u a g e s ' in c lu d in g t h e wa y
th e y are addressedand talked a b o u t . B u t o n c e t h a t b o rd e rljn e h a s
be e n passed there are eV en co n s ' id e ra b le d is t a n c e s b e t we e np e rip h e ry
a n d centre of I ingu'istic comp e t e n c e .
- 23I n E u ro p e a n
l a n g u a g e sther e is har dly any par ticular djstjnction
'i
n
si
d e rsa n d o uts' ider s
b e t w ee nh o w
ar e addr essedand tal ked about.
M o r e o ve r,th e re a ct'i o nto for eigner s aquir ing Eur opean
languages
m a yd i ffe r fro m th e re a ctj onsfound jn Chinaand Japan.par tjcular ly
i n J a p a na fo re i g n e r ca p a bleofspeakingadequateJapanese
m aybe, or
e v e n sh o u l d b e , co n si d e re dwith a cer ta' in tacit
uneasin.r r ( .2lil.
o,^
s h e w 'i l l b ri n g d 'i ff i cu l tj e s jnto jntennar social ar r angements,
i n e v i ta b l y. Mo re o ve r, h e or she penetr atesinto a cor pus
m y s t icu m,a so c'i e tyre se rv edfo.insider s. Linguistic competence
i s n o t e n o u g hto a cq u i re
member ship;
ver y completesoc.ial
b e l o ng 'i n g n e ss
i n cl u d i n g p osition in a Japanese
or ganization,
p r o b ab l ya l so Ja p a n e se
e d u c ationwouldbe r equir ed. And even if
t h e s e me mb e rsh cri
i p te rj a l ar e fullfilled the r acial distinctjons m ight
m i g h t sti l l sta n d o u t, E a s t- andsoutheastAs.iansr o someextent
e x c e pte d .A l l o f th i s a ctu ally only under linesthe m uchm or esocial
c h a r a cte r o f th e Ja p a n e sel anguage,ver y sim ple ( for Eur opeans)
in tinqui s t.i c
g r a m ma nve
, ry co mp l e xj n soc.ial qr amm ar .
F or th e ch i n e seso me thingof the sam emayapply althoughtne
s o c i a l g ra mmaar sp e ct o f ch ineseis mor ecom panable
to Eur opean
l a n g u a g e s.A ci vi l i za tj o n se tting itseif apar t, dr awinglines
b e t w ee nth e C h i n e seo n th e one handand the bar bar ians( Nor yr , East,
So u t han d We st)o n th e o th er is not a civil' ization that wouldeasily
adm i t
f o r e ' i g n e rsi 'd n dl i n g u i sti c obstaclescan be used to keepfor eiqner s
o u t . I n a se n seo n e mi g h t e ven tur n this ar oundfor Eur opean
'languages
a n d sa y th a t th e relative easewith which at least som e
o f t h e mca n b e a q u i re d (su ch as Span' ish,to som eextent also
En g l i sh ) se rve sa s a me a n sto ' let for eigner s in, to becom a
e par t of
t h e c o mmu n i ti ya t l a rg e . T h er eis even consider ablesatjsfaction
w h e na fo re i g n e r a tta i n s 1i nguistjc competence:
somek.indof
c o n f i r ma tj o no f th e u n j ve rsal validity of the language,and mor e
s o t h e mo n ee xo t'i c th e fo re j gner . Fr anceis per hapsthe extr eme
e x a m pl eo f th j s, w i th th e F renchseem inglyr egar dingtheir language
a s l a l an g u eu n 'i ve rse l l e .A n Afr jcan talking Fr enchper fectly is
o n e m oreco n fj rma t'i o ,n w a 1ki ng on two f eet, of that pr oposj t.ion.
P r e c i se l y th e o p p o si tema ya pply to chineseand Japanese.
Not only
d o t h e y n o t re g a rd th e 'i r I a nguages
as un' iver salI anguages;they
m a yn o te ve nw a n t th e mto b e unjver sal,but to be par ticular , languages
f o r t h e mse l ve s,n o t n e ce ssar iiyfor other s. Theselanquagesar e ideal fo r
s e t t i n g th e me mb e rs
o f th e l a nguagecom m unity
apar t to defendthejr identi ty .
T h e ya r e l e ss a d e q u a tea s o ffensive l' inguistic instr umentsto conquenthe w or l d.(22)
- L +-
- TRA NS P E RS CIIA L
PER SON
Ca n o n e s a y t h a t t h e s e la n g u a g e st a k e
a s t a nd o n th e tra n sp e rso na'
? In a sense
, leven the tr anscendental
y e s , b u t p e rh a p so n l y i n d i rectly so. Look' ingat Japanese,for instanc e,
t h e c on cre te n e ss
o f th e l a n guage,the r elatjve absenceof essentialism ,
m i g h t ma ke th e l a n g u a geless capableof imbu' inganything
w i t h so u l -l i ke ch a ra cte ri s tics, be that non- animate
or anim ate
n a t u r e, a n d fo r th e l a tte r non- hum anor human.Because
of this
s y m me try,w i th e ve ryth i n g em er ging lingujstically without an
i n n e r l ^ Je se n ,oma
n e yo f co u rsechoosee' ither inter pr etation: that
h u m a nas re w i th o u t so u l , o r that ever ythingelse is with soul;
J a n p a n e sej s
languages
so d i ffe re nt fr om Eur opean
becauseof the de j
o
n
p e r s on i fj ca t
s par ticu' lai"lyof oneself , that th' is cannorDe
o f p e rso n e
w i t h o u t i mp fi ca ti o n s.
A t th e sa met'i me th e Japaneselanguagehas a special var iety
f o r t al ki n g " vb ry mu ch "u p war ds.But that languageis not for ta.lking
w i t h Go d , b u t fo r ta 'l ki n g or thinking about, for instance, the
[ m p e r o r. In o th e r w o rd s, o ne m ight say that
exactly becausethe
l a n g ua g ei s so ste e p l y ve rtical,andnonetheless
usedon eanth,the
one. That does not
v e r t j ca l p yra mi d re ma i n sa non- tr anscendental
m e a nt h a t th e E mp e rojrs a per son, he' is pr obablya tr ans- per son,orw as
e m b o d yi nJa
g p a na n d th e Ja panese.But he is still of this wor 1d,
non- tr anscendental.
And th' is m eans
m e a n i n qth a t Go dh a s b e co me
that
Japaneseas such is e n t jre ly
c o mp a t ib le w' it h t wo b a s . ic
ch a r a cterjstics of the buddh js t b e l ie f - s y s t e n : n o n -s o u l a n d
n o n - God,meaningno personal g o d .
All E uropeanlanguagesre n d e r t h e ms e lv e se a s ily t o t h e a t t rib u t ' io n
' la n g u a g feo r t a l k i n g b
o f so ul -l i ke characteri st'ics . T h e re i s a . ls o a s p e c ia 1
( som emight say with) God: qu a in t p a t t e rn s o f v e ry p o lit e a d d re s s ,
also used for kings, like th e [ n g lis h f o rms t h o u a rt , g _ q ! --! g : ! .
Sut thjs is certainl-v also av a ila b le in J a p a n e s e ,me a n ' in gt h a t
jn so mefuture, when E mpero rwo rs h ip h a s c o mp le t e ly d is a p o e a re d
the n the lingu'istic forms mig h t b e re s u rre c t e d a n d f jlle d wit h a
m on o theistic content. This js n o p re d ic t io n t h a t J a p a n in t h e
2 1 st century wi'11 becomeCh ris t ia no r Mu s lin , o n ly a n in d jc a t ' io n
tha t the languagewould not s t a n d ' in t h e wa y wh e re v e rt ' ic a lit y is
co n ce rned. Jhere is enough v e rt jc a lit y
a s it
stands today social c+ lle c t iv is ir
t o s e rv e a ls o t h is p u ro o s e . B ut
a n d n o n -t ra n s c e n d e n t a -lv e rt ic a l i t y
a r e e mlnently compatible wit h b u d d h is mo f a ma h a y a n av a rie t y . A n d t h a t c o l le cti v'ism
or anti-individua l is m, wo u id s t a n d in t h e wa y o f O c c ' id e n t a lr e l j g j o n s
p a r ti cularly
of indiv'idual iz in g P ro t e s t a n t Ch ris t ia n it y . (? 3 )
- 25-
4 . C o n cl u si o n
It'i s
n o wti me fo r a n attempt to pu11all of this together and the
f i r s t ste p i s th e su mma ry
p r esentedjn Table 2, which js nothjng other
t h a n Ta b l e 1 w i th th e co n clusjonsof the analysis in section 3 in highl y
c o n c e n tra te d ,e p i g ra mma ti for
c m. In contr ast w' ith the explor ator y
h o r i z o n ta l a p p ro a chu se d i n the pr ecedingsection, let us nowtr y to
r e a d T a b l e 2 ve rti ca l l y to see what this tells us about the lanquaqes
a s c a r ri e rs o f co smo l o g y.
A s r e ga p d 5th e E u .o p " a tta tguages:Both spaceand time ar e end o w e dw i th re l a ti ve l y ri g i d and r ather simple str uctur es. Ther e
i s a p o i n t o f d e p a rtu rea nd a point of ar r ival, what is' in- between
' i s I i n e a r a n d re l a ti ve l y ri g' id, unam b' iguous
. The knowledgestr uctur e
c o m e so u t a s p re d i ca ti ve (attr "ibutive) , and at the samet' im eabstr act
a n d pre ci se . In sh o rt, th e r ight type of languagefor both atom' istic ,
d i c h oto mo uasn d d e d u cti ver easoninq. As concer nsthe oer son- natur e
d 'im ens
i on
the lan g u a g e sa t le a s t p e rmit c o n c e ' iv in g o f
n a t u r e a n d h u ma nas s d i ffe rent ( althoughnot ver y clear ly so) , and jve of Godand
l m akeit poss' ib' leto conce
i f w e n o wma kea j u mp -aso
h u m a nas s d i ffe re n t, th e l atter equippedwith a soul,possibly
r e l a t j n g to a p o ss'i b l eGo d. In shor t, ther e' is a hier ar chywith
G o don to p , th e n h u ma nb e ings, then natur e; Godbeing abstr act,
e s s e n ti a l i st a l th o u g he q uippedwith hum anfeatur es. At the inter p e r s o n a ll e ve l th e l a n g u a gesar e flexible: ther e is a pr edilection
f o r i nd i vi d u a l i sm b u t th e n ther e ar e never thelessopeningsfor ver tjcal as w el l
a s h o rj zo n ta l re l a t'i o n s, and no shar p d' ist j ncti or sbetweeni ngr oups
a n d o u tg ro u p s.
On ema yco n cl u d ei n saying that these ar e languagesthat ar e
c o m pa ti b l ew i th E u ro p e a u
n niver salism , incor por atingthe r est of
t h e wo rld ,
i n so ci a l for m ationsthat althouqhindiv' idualist ar e
a c c o m mo d a ti to
n g b o th
ver t' ical and hor izontal ar r anqements.
T h i s fl e x'i b 'i 1 i ty 'i s l o st whenone looks at the or ganizationof
s p a c e ,ti me a n d kn o w l e d g e:all of themr igid, linear , centr alist.
A s r e q a rd sJa p a n e seh, e re i n a sensewe find exactly the opposjtepatter n.
T h e r e i s co n sj d e ra b l efl e xibility wher ethe or gan' izationof space,
t ' i m ean d kn o w l e d g e ,aesxp ressed' in l inguistic patter ns, ar e concer ne d.
_26_
Ta b le 2.
L a n g u a g eass C a rr jer s of Cosm ology:
A Summ ar l
E u ro p e a n
Chi n e s e
Spa ce
I i near
ri g i d
u n a mbgiu ous
.lexi
flexible
f
bl e
guous
ambiguous
ambi
m eta- mean' ingsm eta- mean'
i
ngs
Ti m e
I inear
rigid
fl exi bl e
f le x ib . le
me t a -me a n in g s me t a -me a n in g s
Kno wledge
predi cat'iv e
abstract
preci se
re I a t i o n aI
c o n cre t e
v ag u e
re la t io n a l
c o n cre t e
v ag u e
P e r s o-N
n atu re
nature and
humansd'if f e r-
n a t u re a n d
h u ma n ss a me
natur e and
hum ans
same
individual is t
collectivist
ve rti ca -i and
hori zontaTi n g ro u pa nd
o u tg ro up
symb o l :I
ver t' icaI and
hor izontal
ingr ouponlY
c o lle c t iv is t
a n t ' i-in d iv id u a l is t
v e rt ' ic a l ma ' in ly
h o rjz o n t a l p o o rly
i n g ro u p o n ' lY
ani
P er s o n- P e rso n
sym bol,w6- mens y mb o :l h a i
n 0 souI
P e r s o n -T ra n s- so u l vs. body
personald i ch o to my
Go dvs. h um ans N O God
d i ch o to my
souI
God
-2 7 N either space, nor time, nor k n o wle d g eis e q u . ip p e dw. it h a c le a r
cen tr e, the latter becauset h e la n g u a g e js n o t a d e q u a t e f o r t h e o rie s w i t h c l e a r
de d u ctive reasonjnq imply'ino t h a t a ll p ro p o s jt jo n s t h a t c a n b e
cor r e ctly formulated are tr u e o r f a ls e a n d c o n t ra d jc it io n s w' ill n o t
ap p e ar. Then the transperson a l, p e rs o n a ) a n d n a t u re s p a c e s a re
m o r e placed at the same lev e l, a t le a s t lin g u is t ic a lly . T h e re is
n o t that tremendousgap betwe e na p e rs o n a l y e t t ra n s c e n d e n t a lG o d , v ia h u m a n
b e in g sto an inanimate nutu.. (. 2 Q e rt ic a 1 it y , h o we v e r, is c le a rly e x o re s s e d
in so c'ial organization, and js we ll re f le c t e d . in o n e o f t h e wo rld ' s mor e e x t r e m e
l an g u ages in this regard. A n d t h a t la n g u a g e a ls o d ra ws a s h a rp
'lin e
betweeningroup and out g ro u p , ma k in g J a p a n e s ea n y t h in g b u t
a can didate for. a pos'it'ion a s
u n . iv e rs a l la n q u a q e .
As regards Chinese,nnybet h js wo u ld b e t h e c a n d id a t e f o ru n iv e rs a lit y ,
b e ca use it is the language s p o k e n b y t h e la rg e s t f ra c t io n o f
not only
/^F \
|
/
h u m a n k'i n d ? ''Iti s fl e x'i b l e both wer e space, time and knowledge
is conc er ned,
a n d a l so i n te rms o f
relations to natur g to other humanbeings
^l
a n d t o th e tra n sp e rso n a l .
It stands out as the r jchest
l a n g ua g efa m'i l y a mo n gth e thr ee com par ed,
not taking such
c l e a r sta n d s,l e a vi n g
o ptions open. In a sense' it is to social cosm ol ooy
w h a t t heR u ss'i a nl a n g u a g ei s to phonetj65.But thene is one r ather
b a s i c sh o rtco mi n gth
: e i n a c cessibility - Chinesetends to r em ain
a n i n g ro u p l a n g u a g efo r th a t r eason. Howeverwhat
,
about the vaguenes s
a n d a mb 'i g u i ty?T h i s i s n o t necessar :i1y
an objectjon.One m iqht ar gue, as
C h i n e seo fte n te n d to d o , that
r eality is ambiguous
and hence
i n a d e q u a te l ymirro re d i n o ver - pr ecisestatem ents.
C o n c l usi o n :l a n g u a g e sa re car r ier s of cosmology,
alongside
r e l i q i o n . te ch n o l o g y,sp or t, and ar t, the or ganizationof soaceand ti m e,
- (te\
a n d so on.-"[anguages
conditi o n t h o u g h t i n t h e ' la n g u a g ec o mmu nt yi ;
th e y d o not determine thought . T h e y in d u c e a n d c o n d jt io n s t ru c t u re s ;
the y do not determine them. A n d c u lt u re / s t ru c t u re c o n d it io rs la n q u a g e s ;w e a v i ng a ll
of this together, n o t s e a mle s s ly , b u t t o a f a m. ily , a s c h e me
of th ings. A nd that js what c o s mo lo g yis a ll
a b o u r.
NOTES
A fi rst ve rsi o n o f th i s paper , "Language
Str uctur e and Social
S t r u c t u re : th e C a seo f Ja p a n"waswr itten in 1972and since that tim e
b o t h o f u s h a veb e e nd i scu ss' ingthese topics' in lectur es and sem inar s,
p a r t i c ui a rl y a t th e In te r-U n.iver sityCentr e, Dubr ovnik;Univer s' it' i
S a j n s Ma l a ysi a(1 9 7 9 ); 0 st-AsiatischesSem ' inarFr
, eie Univer sitdt,
B e r l i n (1 9 8 3 ). Wea re i n d e b tedto discussantsall places, and par tic u l a r l y to E i n a r F l yd a l a n d Y[j, Cheung- Lieh.
( 1 ) T h e co smo l o gpy e rsp e ctivehas beendevelopedin a pr e' l' im inar y
f o r m i n Jo h a nGa 'l tu n g w
, i th Tor e Heiestadand Er ik Rudeng,"0n the
L a s t 2 5 0 0Y e a rs'i n We ste rnHistor y, And Som eRem ar ks
on the Com ' ing
5 0 0 ", i n T h e N e w C a mb ri d gModer
e
nH' istor y, Com pan' ion
Vglum e,Cam br idge,
C a m b r i d gU
e n i ve rsi ty P re ss, 1979,pp. 318- 362.
{ ? ) As a n e xa mp l eo f a n e ffor t to give a m or esym m etr icposition
t o m a t e ri a l /stru ctu ra l a n d n on- mater jal/str uctur alfactor s, see Johan
G a ' l t u ng o" S tru ctu re , C u l tu re and IntelIectual Style: An EssayCompar i ng
S a x o n i c,T e u to n i c, Ga l l j c a nd NipponicAppr oaches",
in Social Scjence
I n f o r m a ti o n (S A GEL, o n d o na nd Bever ly H' ills) 20, 6, 1981, pp. 817- 55.
M a "v btehe b a si c p o i n t i s th e r elative absenceof tensq in Chinese/
J a p a n ese
ma ki n gth e e xp re ss ionsless tim e- boundthan ' in past- pr esentf u t u r e co n sci o u sIn d o -E u ro pean.
W er nerM Uller , in "Spr acheund Natur a u f f a s su n gb e i d e n S i o u x" , i n Unter demPflaster : Iiegt der Str and,
H . P . D ue rr, € d ., K ra me rV e rl ag, Ber lin,19B1 points out that Bibr i
i n C o staR 'i cacl a ssi fi e s th i ngs as r ound, and in that categor yar e
n o t o n l y fru i ts a n d o ra n g e s,but also year s, saying m uchabout how
t h a t l a n g u a g eco n ce i ve so f that par ticular unit of tim e. The basjc text ' i n
Thoughtand Realjty, M IT Pr es s, Canbridge,
t h i s f i e l d re ma i n sB .L . !,l h or,f Language,
( 3 ) A co n d i ti o n fo r th i s, of cour se,' is the high ievel of flex' ibility
i n t h e C h i n e sel a n g u a g e ." B roadlyit m aybe said that any wor d m ay
d o d u t y fo r a n y p a rt o f sp e echw' ithjn the lim its set by its' intr ins' ic
meaninga
; n d , p a rti cu l a rl y, that what seemat fir st sight to be adi e c t ' i v e s a re i n a ve ry l a rg e num berof casescapableof use as nouns
a n d ve rbs, and almost univers a lly u s e d a s a d v e rb s . "
VIn
a discussion of "That A wf u l G e rma n " ,b y B ra d le y G ra h a m,I n t e rn a t io n a l
H l r r a l dT ri b u n e9 Ja n u a ry1 9 80( p.1a) jt is pointed out howlong Ger man
by even
w o r d sh a ve a te n d e n cyto b e , and that "these wor ds, accompanied
' i o n g e rmo dfy'i
i n g cl a u se s, a 'lwaysseemto comebefor e the ver b, which,
i n m a nyGe rn n nse n te n ce sa p pear sat the end, whenone finally lear ns
- ?w h a t j s h a p p e n i n g ."l 'l eca nnot r esist including his r efer enceto Mar k
T w a in :" I h e a rd l a te 1 y o f a wor n and sor ely tr ied Amenican
student who
u s e d to f1 y to a ce rta i n Ger m an
wor d for r elief whenhe could bear
u p u nd e rh i s a g g ra va ti o n sno longer - the only soundwas sweetand
p r e c 'i o u sto h i s e a r a n d h ealing to his lacer ated spir it. This was the
w o r d d a mi t. It w a s o n l y th e soundthat helpedhim , not the meaning
( i t me a n sme re l y h e re w i th ) ; And so, at last, whenhe lear ned that the
e m p ha si sw a s n o t o n th e fi rst sy' lab1e,his only stay and suppor twas
g o n e, a n d h e fa d e d a w a ya n d d' ied."
R . A . D .F o rre st i n T h e ch i n eseLanguage,
Faberand Faber , London1973 .
( 4 ) S e eN a ka mu raH, a j i me ,l^laysof Thinkingof Easter npeoples:
I n d i a -ch i n a -T i b e t-Ja p a nH, ono1u1u,
The univer sity pr ess of Hawa.ii,
1 9 6 4 ' p . 1 8 4 . S u chp a tte rn s, however wer
,
e also found in ancjent Gnee k .
I n g en e ra,l th e cyc'l i ca 1n atur e of Gr eektim e per spectiveis com patib'l e
w i t h th i s typ e o f w ri ti n g , as' it is for ch' inese- not meanjngby that
c y c ' l i c a 1a s to ta l l y e xcl u sive of linear per spectives.For a gener al
d j s c u ssi o no f th i s se e Jo sephNeedham,
Timeand Easter nMan,London,
R o y a lA n th ro p o l o g i ca lIn s'i tjtute, 1965, par t' icur ar r ychapter vIII,
"T i m ea n d H i sto ry i n C h i n aand the W est' ,,FF. 4S- SZ.
( 5 ) ch a n gT u n g -S u n g",A chinesephilosopher ' sTheor yof Knowledge"
Y e n c h'i nJo
g u rn a l o f S o ci a l Studjes, vol . I, no. 2, Beijing, 1939,p. 2 5.
w e h a vema d eu se o f a tn a n slat' ion' into Nor wegian,( "Kinesisk og vest1 i g t e n kn i n g " , V i n d u e t,0 slo,1971, no. 1, pp. 18- 28, in tur n based
o n a t ra n sl a ti o n i n to F re n c h,publishedin Tel Quel, no. 38/1969) .
( 6 ) Th e sete rms a re u se dher e to point out an essential differ ence
i n h o wto co n ce j veo f re a l 'ity, essent' iallyas stat' ic, or essential' ly
a s d y na mi c.A cco rd i n gto th e for m er per spectivebodjes, or things,
a t r e st, o r w i th p e rma n e nt
c har acten' isticswer e mor er ea1, the tr ans i e n t b e j n g e p h e me ra lA
. ccor dingto the latter per spectivebodies, or
t h ' i n g sca n b e se e na s re a l also whennot at r est becausethejr m ovement
i s a c co rd i n gto ce rta i n i n var iances( such as the galilean law of m otio n) .
A p r e d j ca te d e fj n e s a su b j ect' in an invar iant way; a r elation places
t h e i n va ri a n cea t a h i q h e r level.
J e a n - Fra n E o iBs i 1 1 e te r, i n "Ding, den Koch,zer legt ein Rind' ,,
As j a t j sch e S tu d i e n /E tu d eA
s s' iatiques,36( 2) jgg?, quotes paul Va16r y,
C a h i e rs, B i b l i o th 6 q u ed e l a Pl6jade, Ca' lljmar d,par is, 1973- 74on
t h e r e l a ti o n b e tw e e nth o u g ht and speech:"Les 3/4 de la m6taphysique
c o n s t 'i tu e n tu n si mp l e ch a p itr e de l' histoir e du ver be Etr e". Va16r y
- 3-
po in ts out how the very circu ms t a n c e t h a t a c o rre c t s e n t e rrc ein a n
In d o - E uropeanlanguage has a n o u n a n d v e rb ' imp o s e s a c a u s a l o rd e r,
"N otr e phrase occidentale cr6 e d e la c a u s a lit 6 " { p . B B ).
T h i s b e co meps a rti cu l ar ly ' impor tantwhenthe ver bs ar e tr ansit i v e . Th u s, i t co u l d b e a rguedthat the ver bs "d- evelopperand
" "for m er "
j n F r e n chsh o u l d b e i n tra n s' itive on1y, not tr ansitive. A constr uction
s u c h a s " L e s p a ys ri ch e s d d veloppent' lespays pauvr es"shouldbe as
i m p o s si b l el 'i n g u i sti ca l l y as it seem sto be in social r ealjty. The
' linguistically
c o n s t ru ct'i o nu si n g re fl e xi ve for ms, however ,is valid both
a n d e m p i ri ca l y: " 'i l se d 6 veloppe","el le se for me". This constr uct' io n
m i g h t s o u n dso me w h aatrti fi cial in English, however .
( 7 ) T w oe xa mp l e so f typ i ca l quar tets: "no destr uctjon, no constr uction" ,
a n d "co n stru ct'i o nl 'i ve s i n destr uct' ion". It does not say that ther e
i s o r s h o u l d b e d e stru cti o n or constr uction: what is pointed out
i s o n l y h o wj n ti ma te l y th e two ar e r elated.
;
p o s i t i ve a n d n e g a ti vee l e mentsm aketao. ( Chang,op. cit. p.??) "0ne dj vj de s into two" and "Two uni t e jn t o o n e " a re q u a rt e t s a lo n q t h is I jn e .
A s f o r q u a rte ts so a l so fo r duets: "cr isis" becomes
"danger /oppor tun'i ty " :
"East/W est":
"c o n t r a d i cti o n " b e co me"ssp ear /shield"; "thing" becom es
"c o s mo s"b e co me "sti me /sp a ce". "Unity of opposites"is the gener al for m ul a.
A gain, 'it should be emp h a s iz e dt h a t t h e re is n o s t ric t
( B)
d ' iv id in g
l'in e between Indo-E uropeanla n g u a g e sa n d t h e s e O rie n t a l la n g u a g e s .
i n Ru ss'ian"I am a boy" is " ja ma l' c h ik " , b u t t h e in v e rs io n , " ma l' c h ik
ja " m i ght comecloser to the s e c o n d in t e rp re t a t ' io n rn e n t io n e djn t h e
+^ ..
+
( 9 ) T h e e xa mp l e 'i sta ke n from I. Elder s, "Les r appor ts de la langue
No. 156,1966, pp.
e t d e 1 a p e n sd ej a p o n a i se s",RevuePhilosophiqu_e,
m ater ial
3 9 1 - 4 0 6 .E l d e rs p o i n ts o u t that k' i stands for the wooden
i n t h e tre e ra th e r th a n th e idea of the tr ee; henceone cannotsay
t h a t a ki i s i n b l o sso m,th e flower s of the tr ee m aybe in blossom.
of the Japaneselanguagehe
A s a n o th e re xa mp l eo f th e concr eteness
t a k e s th e w o rd tsu m'i, w h i ch stands both for "sin" and for the ' infr actio n
- 4-
o f a r eg u l a t'i o n ;j u st l i ke kim ochistands for m y "inner state" both
i n t h e se n seo f " h e a l th " , a nd "m ood".To m akeclear what is m eantthe
J a p a n e se
w o u l d h a veto u se concr eteexamples,or r ely on the context.
( 1 0 ) Th i s d e b a te , th e n , a b out whether"essences"can be said to have
a n i n d p e n d e net x'i ste n cep ri or to the things, ante r em , or only in the
t h i n g s th e mse l ve s,i n re b u s, is m or em eaningfulwithjn the context
o f I n do -E u ro p e ath
n a n th e se 0r jental languages.
( 1 1 ) El d e rs, o p .cj t., p .4 05, m akesthe point that the examplesar e
c a r r y ' i n gth e b u rd e no f p ro o f: "La d6m onstr ation,au sens str ict du m ot,
e s t s o u ve n tp re sq u ea b se n te.Uneanalysedes concepts, une divis' ion
d u t h 6 mee t d e s d 6 fi n i ti o n s ne sont pas n6cessair es,par fois elles
C e sont 1es exemplesqui 1e plus souvent
s o n t m d me
e mb a rra ssa n te s.
e n t r a ' i n e n tl 'a d h 6 sj o n " .E l d er s ' is pr obablynot himself awar eof his own
c u l t u r al l i mi ta t'i o n w h e nh e r efer s to what appear sto be deductive
r e a s o n i n ga s d e mo n stra ti o n"au sens str ict du m ot".
( 1 2 ) Bo th a to mi sma n d d e d uctivismcan both be associatedwith Descar tes .
Se e nf ro m th e o u tsi d e th e se pi' l1ar s of W ester nepistemologyhaveas
t h e i r co n se q u e n ce
th a t e n ti ties ar e fr agmentedinto sm aller units
t h a t a re th e n stu d i e d se p a rately, and r elinked to eachother deduct' iv e1y .
T h e r e i s a p ri ma cyo f'l o g i cal over other ( "or ganic", "jnner m eaning")
' l i n k a g e s.A g a i n l Je ste rnl a n guagesar e not the same' in this r egar d.
A s A r t h u r K o e stl e r sa 'i d i n an inter view sent after hjs death ( in W est
T V ,4 Ma rch1 9 8 3 ): " Youcannot say in English ' die' inner e
G e r m an
' logic",
L o g i k de r E re i g n 'i sse '- th e re is only one
( 1 3 ) Ja me sA . Mi ch e n e ri n the best- seller Sayonar a,Cor gi 1979, pp.
1 6 4 - 6 5 ,g 'i ve sso mee xa mp l esof the am biguitiesof the Japaneselanguage,
c o n c l ud i n g" j t i sn 't cl e a r, becauseI' m only guessingthat' s what the
s t r a n ge r me a n t- Ou r l i fe i n Japanis one of im pljed meanings,hidden
s ' i g n fi ica n ce s."
- 5(l+I
rh e P o l i sh w o rd ta k ( "yes") maybe inter pr eted the sam eWdY
h a v i n ga ve ry h i g h fre q u e ncyin por ish par r ance.In Nor wegian '
man/ ysy6q
p e o p l eu se th e w o rd ri kti g ( ' ,cor r ect,' ) the sameway, meaning
n o t "I h e r^ e bce
y rti fy th a t what you havesaid is cor r ect,,.
"go ontt,
( 1 5 ) E l d e rs, o p . ci t., p .398. As Elder s adds: ,,poun
la fem m ede
c e t h o mme
i l e st cl a i r q u e c' est son m ar i quj vjent par tjr en voyage,'.
H o w eve r,E l d e rs a d d s th a t the youngergener ationand those whohave
b e e nmo rei n co n ta ct w i th for eigner s ( meaning"wester ner s,' )' ,ut- il
isent
p l u s so u ve n tl e s p ro n o n sp er sonnels".
I n g e n e ra l H i n d i se e msto havemost char acter istics in com m on
with
I n d o - E u ro p e al n
a n g u a g ei n genenal, as it should;butthen ther e ar e
c h a r a cte ri sti cs th a t a re mor ein the dir ection of Chineseand
Japanes e.
T h u s , " H 'i n d isp e ,rki n gIn d i a ns havea tendencyto use the wor ds
ham,
"w e " a n d h a ma ra ,',o u n s',w h er eDaneswouldsay and mine. I think
this
I
i s d u e to th e ci rcu msta n cethat Indians havea tendencyto
see them s e l v e s a s a p a n ts o f a b i g g enun' it, wher ethe Daneis .inclined
to out
h i m s e l f i n th e ce n te r.',
F r o m"No g 'l eB e tra g tn i n g e ro ver Spr ogetsM edvjr kenved Dannelsen
at Ver dens bi l l edet" ,
D a n m arks
L e re rh d j sko l e , C o penhagen,
1gBZ,by Finn Th' iesen,p. 199.
( 1 6 ) Th e fo l l o w i n g fo u r e xpr essionsalI stand for "welcom home",
e
b u t a t fo u r d i ffe re n t l e ve l s of social r elations:
o k a e r i - a so b a seo; ka e ri -n a sajmase;
okaer i- nasai; okaer i. 0f cour se, honor i fi c s ,
p o l j t e ne ss ma ya l so b e a te chn' iqueto cr eate distance. Distanceand verti c a l i t y ma yg o to g e th e r a s i n the im polite politeness of bur eaucr ats.
A n i s o 1 a te dvi l l a g e ma yd e fenditself against "jntr uder s" wjth excessi v e
\ p o l i t e n ess, w h i ch ma ya l so be a way of m akingfun of people.
HongKongUniver s' ity
- B e r n h a rd K a rl g re n , i n S o u n dand Symbolin Chinese_,
Pr e s s , H o n gK o n g1 9 6 2 , h a s thjs ir r esistible anecdoteas an i' llustr ation
o f w h at C h i n e sep o l i te n e ss i m plies ( p. 94) :
A vi si to r ca ]1 e d , c'l a d in his best r obes, and awaitedthe ar r ival
o f h i s h o st se a te d i n th e re c ept' ionr oom.A r at, which had beendisp o r t i n g i tse l f u p o nth e b e a msabove, insjnuating its nose into a jar
o f o i l wh j ch w a s p u t th e re for safe keeping,fr ightened at the sudden
' i n t r u s ' i o no f th e ca l l e r, l " a naway,and' in so doing upset the oi1- jar ,
w h j c h f e l l d i re ctl y o n th e caller , str jking him a sever eb1ow,and
r u i n i n g h i s e 'l e g a n tg a rme n tswith the satur ation of the o' il. Just as
t h e f a c e o f th e g u e st w a s p ur ple with r age at thjs djsaster , the host
e n t e r e d , w h e nth e p ro p e r sa l utatjons wer e per for med,after which the
g u e s t p ro ce e d e d
to e xp l a j n the situation. ' As I enter edyour honour able
---''+-^^+.nrl
caarorl mvqplf rrnder voun honourable beam, I inadvertently
-o-
t e r r i f ie d ye u r h o n o u ra b l erat, wh' ichfled and upset your honour able
o i l - i a r u p o nmy me a na n d i n sign' ificant clothing, which is the r eason
o f m y co n te mp ti b l ea o p e a rance
in your honour ab' le
pr esence.,
{ 1 7) T h is se e msto b e w h e r esoiio- t f ngulltiii enteii w- j- tr r pir ticular
f o r c e n o t so mu che xp l o ri n g the socia' l s.ignificanceof the differ ences
b e t w ee na s w i th i n l a n g u a g es.A bookwith the attr active title Language
j n J a p a n e se _ l o ci e ty:
!u rre n t Issues' in Sociolinguistics, F.C.C.
Pe n g ,e d i to r, u n i ve rsi ty o f r okyo Pr ess, Tokyo, 1975contains nothing
o f d i r e ct re ve re n ceto th e pr esent explor ation. D' iscontentjs also
f o r m u l a te db y s. T a kd i r A l i s jahbana, in his The Failur e of Moder n
Lin g u jstjcs in the Face of L in g ! rt t jc
P ro b le mso f t h e T we n t je t h Ce n t u r y ,
Ku a l aL u mp u r,U n i ve rsi ty o f M alaya1965. He points out that,,while
t h e o t h e r so cj a l sci e n ce s, like econom ics,politics - even sociology
a n d a n th ro p o l o g y- a re i n te nsively inter ested' in national and inter nat i onal
d e v e l op me n t,
str" u ctu ra l l i n guistics and phonologyhavemor eand mor e
. i s o l a te dth e mse l ve sfro m
so cial and cultur al pr oblem s- - " ( p. B) and
"l , i h a tth e y/th e l e a d e rs o f d evelopingnations/need' is not descr iptjve,but pr es c r i pt i v e l ' i n g u i sti cs. It'i s th u s ver y r egr ettable that pr ecisely in these
p r o c e s se sa n d p ro b l e msth a t ar e cr ucial for the languagesof developin g
c o u n t ri e s, p ro ce sse sa n d p roblemswh' ichcan be for mulatedsuccinctly
in the terms :!qlaafg:E!:g! and modefnization , modern1inguistics ,
t h r o u ghi ts sta ti c, fo rma l and micr o appr oach,is least able to contr ib u t e " (p . 1 5 ). In o th e r w o r ds, linguistics becomes
like botany. Howe v e r , A l i sj a h b a n ad o e s n o t discuss howlanguagesm aycanr y developr ne ntal
c o d e s ,w h 'i chmj g h t b e a mo reim por tantaspect of the inter face between
l a n g u a g e sa n d d e ve l o p me nthan
t
the linguistic engineer ingpr obiem s
Al i s j a h b a n ah a s i n mi n d .
i l B) Th e p re ce d i n go rd e r w as by and' lar ge by b' ir th, the shj- no- k5- sho
( s a m u r a i -fa rme r-a rti sa n -mer chant)
system:"degr eeocr acy"
wouldbe by
t h e m e ri t a ccu mu l a teth
d ro u ghdegr ees,the point being not the r anking
o f t h e p e rso na cco rd i n gto s ubject or gr ade, but of the univer s' ity accor di n g t o p re sti g e . S e eJo h a nGaltung, "Social Str uctur e, Education
s t r u c t u re a n d L i fe -1 o n g E d u cation:The case of Japan", Essaysin peace
R e s e a rchV o i , III,
tj l e rs,
Copenhagen,
1976,chapter 11.
i t g ) T h u s. " P ro fe sso rGa l tungis giving lectur e ther e" wouldbe
"G a ' l t u n g -se n se
w aia ch i ra d eki r ::- shj:- eol"a=eftasu"
if Galtungwer e a Japane s e:
"G a l t u n gw a a so ko d eko g i sh i teimasu"as he is not. The total lack of
h o n o r i fi cs ma ke sth e e xp n e ssionsimjlar to one that could also be used
f o r d o gs. T h a t th i s cl e a r d emar cation
of the nai- gai distinction m iqht be
p a i n f u l fo r th e Ja p a n e se
w i fe of a qa11in goeswithout saying.
-l
( 2 0 ) It sh o u l d b e p o i n te d out that this is a m inimum,and
a' lthough
i t a s s u re sso meco mp e te n ce
it m ayalso ser ve to r einfor ce the class
s t r u c t ure o f a so ci e ty ru n as a "degr eeocr acy",
by defining a m inimum
f o r t h e'l o w e r ra n ks s1 T h e social or der . SeeA Guideto Readjng&
W r i t i n g Ja p a n e seT, h e 1 .8 5 0Basic Char acter sand the KanaSyllabar ies,
T u t t l e , T o kyo , 1 9 7 5 .T h e 1 850char acter sinclude the "881 char acter s
d e s i g na te db y th e Mi n i stry of Educationas the basic r equir ement
f o r t h e si x Y e a rso f e l e me ntar yschool"( p.7) .
D e r k Bodde, Ch'ina's Cultural T ra d it io n , Dry d e n P re s s Hin s d a le , I llin o js
1957h a s th e fo l l o w i n g to say about class differ ences in Chinese( p. t3 ) :
eve na n a ti ve C h i n e ser equir es year s of study to masterthe wr itten
yet
l a n g u a g e(a l so rto fl mo rl ykn o wnas l' iter ar y on classical Ch' inese)And
.
s o g r e a t w a s th e p re sti g e o f the liter ar y languagethat until r ecent' ly
a l m o s t e ve ryth i n gw a s w ri tte n' in it, aside fr om fiction and dr ama( whi c h
f o r t h e ve ry re a so nth a t th ey followed the colloquial idjom , wer e looked
d o w no n i n tra d 'i ti o n a l C h in a) .
il
---
( 2 1 ) Th i s p a rti cu l a r th e mejs elabonatedat som elength by RoyA. M ille r
i n J a p an 'sMo d e rnMyth , T h e Language
and Beyond,W eather hill, Newyor k & T ok y o,
1 9 8 2c, h .8 ,p .1 5 7A. fo re 'i g n e nc apableof som ephr asesin Japaneseis ver y
m u c ha pp re ci a te d a fo re i g n er capableof r eally talking Japaneseis
n o t . B u t th i s d o e s n o t o n l y apply to languagebut also to insight in
m a t t e r s Ja p a n e sei n g e n e ra l. A for eigner whohas under stooda l' ittle
star ts getting deep
o f J a p a ni s co mp 'l i me n tew
d ;henthe under stand' ing
h e i s f e a re d . We ste rnu n 'i ver salismpr oducesfor ejgner s w' ith a ver y h' igh
l e v e l o f i n si g h t i n th e We s t; they ar e welcomed
and pr aised although
u s u a l l y a cco rd e do n l y se co ndar yposit' ions. Japanese( and Ch' inese)par t' i c u l a r i sm p ro d u ce sa stro n g i nsjde- outside, nai- gai divide: for eigner s
a r e t o b e ke p t a t a d j sta n ce. All of ch. 8 jn M ' iller ' s bookdeals with t hi s .
( Z Z 1 0 f co u rse , d n y l a n g u ageis also the car r ier of a cer tain cultur al
c o d ea n d h e n cen o t u n i ve rsal insofar as the adoptionof that language
w o u l db e a tth e e xp e n seo f o ther cultur al codes. But Ch' inese
and Japane s e
to lear n for an
a r e a l so d i ffi cu l t, i n th e s enseof tim e- consum ing,
of the language.Howeveras
, a sem i- secr et
a d u l t w i th n o p ri o r kn o w l e dge
l a n g u ag eth e y a re ve ry a d e q uate:a networ kof Chinese( or Japanese)
belonging
a b r o a d,e g C h i n e seb e l o n g i ngto the sam eclan, or Japanese
t o t h e sa meco mp a n y,
w 'i 1 1to som eextent be shjelded off fr om peeping
T h e Ja p a nese
W e s t e r ne ye s.
could colonjze Taiwan( 1894- 1945)
and
Ko r e a( 1 9 1 0 /1 1 -1 9 4 5a)l so l i nguistical' ly, us' ingChinesechar acter sas
a b a s j s; b u t'i t j s d o u b tfu l whetherthey could havedoneso in countr ie s
w i t h o th e n syste mso f w ri ti n g.
- B-
An i n t e re stj n g stu d y a b o u t Chinesemar x' istter m s has beenmadeby W olf gang
L i p p e r t, E n tste h u n gu n d F u nktioneiniger Chinesischermar xistischerTer m i ni
F r a n z S te i n e r ve rl a g , l ,Ji e sbaden,
1979.The basjc point js that mar xjst
t e n m sca mej n to C h i n e sevi a Japanese
and under wentconsider ablechange
o n t h e w a y: " E j n e R e i h ema r xistischerTer mini, die aus demjapanischen
i n s c h in e si sch ei i b e rn o mmen
wur den,er hier ten in der Folge eine ver i i n d e r ich
l e sp ra ch l 'i ch eGe stalt,' ( f r om the pr eface) . The bookm ayser ve
a s o n e co n ti n o u sw a rn i n ga g ainst believing that Chinesem ar xist ter "m in o ' l o g yca n b e d i re ctl y u n d er stoodthe sam eway as it is in the west.
( 2 3 ) El d e rs, o p . ci t., p .p . 403 f.' , - - on vo- it com bjenla str ucutr e
du
l a n g u a g ee st p n o ch ed e l a p ens6ebuddhiste,ou-tout de vient un flottem ent
s u b j e c ti f" .
N a k a mu rao,p . ci t. p . 5 7 5 char acter izesthe Japanese
attitude in this
c o n n e cti o na s fo l l o w s: " T h us, the Japanesepeoplehave seldomconfr ont ej !
o b i e c ti ve re a l i ty a s sh a rp l y distinsuishedfr om knowingsubjects. This
a t t i t u d e ma yb e ca l l e d th e i r comm on
way of th' inking. It is often said
t h a t t he y a re p ra ct'i ca l a n d adept in techniquesof action, but that
t h e y a re ra th e r w e a kj n stu dying the objective basis of their pr act' ical
a c t i o n b e ca u seth e y a re to o anxiousto accomplishthe action. It ' is
p a r t i a l l y o w i n gto th i s ch a racter istjc that they havebeeninclined,
f o r c e n tu ri e s, to fo l l o w fo reign ideas with an uncr itjcal m ind".
T h i s j u d g e me n t,o f co u rse , pr esupposes,
that W ester nthought js som eh o ws u pe rj o r a n d d o e s n o t e x plain howNakam urwas
a ever able to wr ite
js
h j s s u pe rbb o o k - i n Ja p a n ese.Never thelessit
c' lear that a languag e
1i k e E n gilsh , fo r j n sta n ce , has gr eat capacity for pr oducingabstr actjons ,
s i m p l y b y me a n so f q e ru n d s,adding- inq to ver bs, or addinq- ty to
m a n yn o u n so r a d j e ct'i ve .s
clear ly expr essed
t 2 4 ) In th e l ,Je stth i s g a p i s per hapsnowher eso
' in
m ana bov ew om en'
a s i n th e ve ry fi rst p a g e sof the Old Testam ent, Genesis,w' ith
' in Span' ishcomr ade' Genosse
can be
I t i s i n te re sti n g to n o te that
But this
com pafr er a.
u s e d b o th .i n ma scu l i n ea n d fem in' ine:com pafr er o,
d o e sn o t w o rk fo r th e b o ss: like' in Fr enchle chef does not havea
either ( it does in contempof e m ' i n i n efo rm, e l i e f-e d o e s not in Span' ish
but not above .
r a r y Ge rma nh, o w e ve r,d i e C hef.in) .Fem alesmaybe equa1,
and fem injne speec h,
F o r a n e xp l o ra ti o n o f d i ffe rences betweenm ascul' ine
par ler s f6m jnjns, Pa r i s ' 1983'
s e e v . A e b .i sch ear n d c. F o rel, Par ler sjnascvlins,
-9 -
( z s 1 H o w e veor n e su b d i vi d esthe chineselanguagecomm unity
it comes
o u t c on si d e ra b l ya b o veth e numberof peopletalking English ( 350 mill' i on) ,
(2 0 0 mi l l i o n ), A ra bic ( 120 m ill jon) , Por tugese( t' tS m illion) .
Sp a n - i sh
F i g u r esfro m T h e E co n o mi st,26Januar y1980, basedon a study m ade
b y L e Mo n d e .
t? 6 )
This is the theme of a f o rt h c o min g s t u d y , J o h a n G a lt u n g , S o c ia l
C o s mo
og
l y, A n A p p ro a chto C' ivj- li zati on Theor y.

Silver bell (1910)

Lake Maggiore Golf Destination Lake Maggiore Golf Destination

外国語活動教材集〔中央小2009〕 （PDF：1790KB）

在留資格確認書類届出用紙 - 早稲田大学 留学センター

ObjecDves Review JUnit Review Project 1 Notes Software TesDng

- Aquatic Commons

Why Cancer Treatment in Mumbai is Sought After

0. 1 M Kcl solution 0.25 N Potassium Dichromate

Collision with Fixed-Object Statistics