Read Structure,%20Culture%20and%20Languages-An%20Essay%20Comparing%20the%20Indo-European,%20Chinese%20and%20Japanese%20Languages.pdf text version

l ;.' .t

CUL A ND S T RUCT URE , T URE L A NG UA G E S A n E s s a y c o mp a rin gt h e I n d o -E u ro p e a n , B y J o h a n G a lt u n g a n d F u m' ik o s hjmu ra Ni Wis s e n s c h a f t s k o lI e q z u B e rl in l, J a llo t s t ra B e 1 9 10 0 0 B e rl ' in 3 3 J a n u a ry 19 8 3

-1 1 . I n tro d u cti o n

The purpose of this pap e r js t o e x a m' in e h e ro le o f la n g u a g e s t as carr"iers m a ti c will of social cosmo lo g y . I n d o in g t h is n o t h in g p ro b ' le in be assumed co n n e c t ' io nwit h t h e t e rm " la n g u a g e " : l' imit s

we 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 th e y are spoken, men and wo me n ro u n d t h e wo rld . T h e t it le by a the subject but at the samet ime in d ic a t e s t h a t it is f a irly

b r o a d: "Indo-E uropeanlanguag e s " s t a n d s f o r a ma jo r f a mi' ly o r "cl an " of languagesout of wh jc h we a re p a rt ic u la rly t h in k in g o f the o nes we happento be familia r wjt 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 n n d E n g lis h a n d Du t c h ; F re n c h , a Ital'ian and S panish and the Ro ma n n g u a g e s g e n e ra l; Ru s s ' ia na n d la in 'langua g e s . so m eother S lavon'ic He n c e' it ' is o n ly o u t o f t ra d it io n in l i nguistics that we use th e t e rm " ln d o -E u ro p e a n " . S ' imi1 a 1 1 y w the word "Chinese" also stan d s f o r a f a mily o f la n g u a g e swit h c o mmo n r i t i n g a n d ce r ta'in common characterjstic s a lt h o u g h it is Ma n d a rin Ch jn e s e weh a v e h a d in m i nd, and "Japanese"stan d s f 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 nesewhich jtself is a f a 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 e la ti 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 . )rt Then there 'is the idea o f c o s mo lo g y (. l is t a k e n h e re t o me a n I n t h a t e x p lic a t io n o f t h e is co n cept somethingmore than [ ' J e ' lt a n s c h a u u n g ' in d ic a t e d . F irs t , the r "e is the qual if ier "deep " - p o in t in g t o t h a t whjc h ' is n o t o n "d e e p structure" and "deep c u lt u re " . the surface, that which is d e e p e r d o wn , imp l ic 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 js t h e ju xta-pos'ition of "structure" a n d " c u lt u re " , d ls o f o u n d in t h e ti tle of this essay. They a re 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,

-2 n o n e of them preceding the ot h e r in a t e mp o ra l o r c a u s a l s e n s e , th e r e by rejecting both the " ma t e ria lis t " p o s it io n t h a t s t ru c t u n e ( p a r ti cularly soc'io - econo micf o rma t io n ) s h o u ld s h a p e c u lt u n e o r the "i deal ist" posjtion that c u lt u re ' is p rima ry a n d ' is ma t e ria l iz e d 'in str ucture - positions hel d , re s p e c t ' iv e 1 y , jn c e rt a in t y p e s o f I ib e r a l and l,larx'ist thinking, ' in t h e we s t (. 2 )T hp o rit ' io n t a k e n h e re . i s n o t necessarily agnostic ' in t h e s e n s e t h a t ' 5 in c e we d o n o t k n o w w hich one comesfirst we sho u ld t a k e n o s t a n d o n t h e ma t t e r" , b u t tr ea ted I ike a chicken and e g g p ro b le m. Ra t h e r, t h e p o s jt io n

is th a t both structure and c u lt L rre a re a p p a rit io n s o f t h e s a me de e p e r lying phenomenon here re f e rre d t o a s " c o s mo lo g y " . B u t t h a t ph e n o menon is'Ueeper lying"n o t in t h e s e n s e o f b e in g lo c a t e d s o me wh er e be h in d, be1ow, beneath or be y o n d s t ru c t u re a n d / o r c u lt u re . Ra t h e r, is deeperin the sense of b e in g ' in t h e m b o t h , b u t o n ly t o t h e exten t that the structure an d c u lt u re in q u e s t io n a re " o f t h e s a me ki nd "o "of the samefamily" - jn o t h e r wo rd s a re ma n ' if e s t a t jo n s o f th e sa me,cosmology. right h a n d a n d my le f t My h a n d a re b o t h p a rt s - b u t o n e u s u a lly of m e , so are my thoughts an d my me n t a l a c t iv it y it

do e s not see anyone of these a s b e jn g t h e c a u s e o r t h e e f f e c t o f t h e othe r but rather as aspecbof " me " . T h a t " me " c a n b e c o n c e jv e d o f in a m a terial , organic / genet ' ic s e n s e a n d / o rin a n o n -ma t e ria l me n t a l/ ge n e tic sense.One day we m ig h t p e rh a p s b e b e t t e r t h a n we a re t o d a y a t seeing relations and simi la rit je s see such similarities, b e t we e nt h e t wo . I n s o c io cu ltur al matters, however, t h e a s s u mp t io n h e re is t h a t we c a n a lre a d y for in s t a n c e a s is o mo rp h is ms e t we e nwh a t is b usu a lly referred to as struct u re a n d a s c u lt u re , a n d t h a t ' is e x a c t ly w ha t cosmology(or more p re c is e ly s o c ia l c o s mo lo g y )' is a b o u t . Howcan'languages"beca rrje rs o f ' b o c ja l c o s mo lo g y ? ' I n mo s t u s a g e s

o f the terms languagesare s e e n a s p a rt s o f t h e c u lt u re o f t h a t n a t io n , o r l an g u age community.A s such t h e y s h o u ld o r mig h t e x p re s s , wh e n lo o k e d at a long particular djmens io n s , s o me Da s lc assumptions that of cultur e, carried by the very la n g u a g e ' it s e lf . to the term "structure": B u t t h e s a mea p p lie s lang u 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 e ceivers of verbal com mu n jc a t ' io na n d t h e y s t ru c t u re t h e re a lit y l wh ich they try to mirror in t h e ir e x p re s s io n s b e c a u s ea n Y ' la n o u a g e system 'itself in its syntax , h a v es t ru c t u re s t h a t t h ro u q h s e ma n t jc r u le s 'induce structures on th a t wh ic h is re f le c t e d . P e rh a p s jt s h o u ld

-3 b e p o inted outthat in saying t h is we d o n o t c o n c e ' iv eo f t h e wo rd s

"str u cture" and "culture" as v e ry s e p a ra b le . 0 n t h e c o n t ra ry , t h e re is str ucturcin culture, and e v e ry s t ru c t u re h a s o r is a c u lt u re . The r e ason for this is that t h e t e rm " s t ru c t u re " i' s jn f a c t a mb ig u o u s : 0n th e one hand jt often ref e rs t o ma t e ria l a rra n g e me n t s ,s u c h as u r ban arch'itecture; on the o t h e r h a n d it re f e rs te r n t o a n y k in d o f p a twhich can be express e din a lo g ic a l f o rm, in t e rms o f a s e t

of ele ments and a set of rela t io n s a mo n gt h e s e e le me n t s .Ma t h e ma t ic sis a n ab stract language carrying s t ru c t u re s jn t h is p u re f o rm.

So, the point is that

a

la n g u a g e t a k e s s t ru c t u ra l a n d c u lt u ra l

sta n d si and partly in order n o t t o h a v e t o s a y wh e t h e r t h e s e b u ilt -in Do s'itions are inherent'ly mo re s t ru c t u re o r in h e re n t ly mo re c u lt u re , w eu se a term that carries the s e d e e p a s p e c t s o f e ' it h e r: c o s mo lo g y ( e xa ctly which aspects will b e e la b o ra t e d b e lo w). Ho we v e r,in s a y in g th is jt should also be po'in t e d o u t t h a t exp r e ssions aretoo strong. Ra t h e r, " s t a n d " o r " p o s jt jo n " a s o n e m' ig h t t a lk a b o u t " bja s e s " both

in cer tain directions, predis p o s in g t h e me mb e rs o o n e la n g u a g e c o mmu ni t yt,o a c t , f to th ihk'and perceive the wo rld ' in c e rt a in d ire c t io n s ra t h e r t h a n o the r s. A fter al I languages a re t o a la rg e e x t e n t mu t u a lly t ra n s la t a b l e , with more or less suc c e s s . T h e y a re n o t d is c o n t in u o u s wjt h e a ch othe r . A person deeply steep e d in o n e ' la n g u a g e c o mmu n it y a n s u rf a c e c fr o m i t and get sufficient d e p t h in a n o t h e r t o s e rv e a s a liv ' in g b rid g e we e n the two. He is notcutof f f ro m a n y o t h e r la n g u a g e , in p rin c ip le . But then he 'is al so markedby h j s I a n g u a g ee x p e rie n c e f o r ' lif e a n d mor e s o t h e 'lo n g e r . he has lived in a part jc u la r la n g u a g e c o mmu n ' it y T h is wo u ld a c c o u n t f o r a cer tain bias.0r, to weakenth e e x p re s s ' io ns t ill mo re : f o r c e rt a in co m p a ti bjl'ities. B e'inga part o f o n e la n g u a g e c o mmu n it yis n o t in com p a ti ble with the type of cos mo lg yp re v a le n t in a n o t h e r la n g u a g e com m u n ity. B ut hav'ing been train e d in o n e ' is h ig h ly c o mp a t ib le wit h the cor r esponding cosmolgy; it c o me se a s y , b y it s e lf , s o a s t o b e co n sid e r ed normal and natural, s o a s n o t t o s t a n d o u t ra d ia t in q in com p a ti bility. predis p o s e s , t h a t is a ll we a re t ry in g t o s a y ; Language i t do e s not determine 'in any u n a mb ig u o u s y . wa

- 42 . C o smo l o g yi me n s'i o na n d language d s analysis

No attempt will be mad eh e re t o ju s t if y t h e s ix d . ime n s io n s u se d in the present and re la t e d e s s a y s f o r a n a ly s is o f c o s mo lo g ie s , vl z.;

)TA LL

TIME KNOI^ILEDGE PERSON- NATURE PERSONPERSON PERSON -TRANS PERSONAL

js Th e general assumpt'ion th a t t h e s e s ix d ime n s ' io n s re if n o t a at least necess a ry in o rd e r t o d e s c rib e a c u lt u re , a n d m o r e p artjcularly a macro-cu lt u re , a c iv jl iz a t io n . E a c h c u ' lt u re is se e 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 is to what extent la n g u a g e sa re c a rrie rs o f t h a t s t a n d o r p o siti on. Given the point of depart u re o f t h js e s s a y t h is me a n st h a t w e sho uld try to say somethin ga b o u t h o w t h re e la n g u a g e so r la n g u a g e gr o u p s relate to six dimens io n s , in o t h e r wo rd s 1 B c o mb ' in a t io n s a s in the followinq table: Tab le 1. The frameworkfor c o s mo lo g y / la n g u a g e n a ly s is a su fficjent,

E u p ean ro

Sp a ce T'i m e Kn o wl edge Pe r so n tu re -Na

i Ch n e s e

J ap a n e e s

P e r s o- P e rso n n P e r s o-T ransp e rso nIa n

-5 Obviously, an explorato ry t a s k o f t h is k jn d c a n b e c a rrie d o u t vertically or horizontally . T h e v e rt ic a l a p p ro a c hwo u ld give a presentation of the la n g u a g e s , ru n n in g t h ro u g h t h e ga m u t of cosmologyanalysis. T h e h o riz o n t a l a p p ro a c h , wh ic h i s the one that wjll be cho s e n h e re , wo u ld t a k e o n e c o s mo lo g ic a l dim e nsion after the other an d c o mp a ret h e la n g u a g e so n t h e m, pr o ce eding from the E uropeanv ia t h e Ch in e s e t o t h e J a p a n e s e . Th e advantageof this appro a c h is t h a t it c o mp a re sla n g u a g e s ,k e e p in g the cosmological d'imen s ' io n c o n s t a n t , ra t h e r t h a n t h e e q u a lly in t e r e s t i n g b u t d 'ifferent task of relatin g c o s mo lo g ic a l d ime n s io n s , k e e p in g l an g u age group constant. sinc e b o t h a p p ro a c h e sa re s ig n if ic a n t h o we ver, we shall start w'it h t h e h o riz o n t a l a p p ro a c ha n d t h e n t o s a y s o me th in g about the language gro u p s a s a wh o lg . T h e f a c t o rs o f t h is e x e rc ise a r e then repeated'in table 2 t o wa rd s t h e e n d ; t h e re a d e r is re f e rre d to i t for a quick summary a n y t ime . at su m m arize using the vertjcal a p p ro a c h , in a n e f f o rt

-b-

3. Th r ee Ianguagegroups: a c o mp a ris o n SPACE Languages appear in two f o rms , v v rit t e n a n d o ra l; ' in s p a c e an d j n time, respectively. We a re u s e d t o t h in k in q 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 9 ,wherethinking in three -d ' ime n s io n a ls p a c e mig h t b e e q u a lly r e le va nt: a book is clearly t h re e -d ime n s io n a l. A n d we a re u s e d to th inking of speech as a s t rin g o f s o u n d s , s t re t c h e d o u t jn tim e , starting at one point in t ime a n d e n d in g in a n o t h e r. Actua lly, 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 pr e se nt purposes the arrange me n to f la n g u a g e in jt s wrjt t e n fo r m is 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 arrangemento f la n g u a g e in u s u a l o ra l f o rm is cor r e spondi y seen as a key t o h o wt ' ime s t ru c t u re d . ngl is A book printed in a E u ro p e a nla n g u a g e is a h ig h ly s t a n d a rd ' iz e d an d unambiguous arrangemento f o n e -d ime n s io n a l s p a c e jn t h re e dim e n sjonal space. The first p a g e is in f ro n t , t h e la s t p a g e 'i n th e back of the volume; t o a v o id a n y c o n f u s ' io n t h e p a g e s dr e sspially numbered and hen c 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 si n g le p a g e is f ro m le f t t o rig h t an d fr om top to bottom; anyo n e o f t h e o t h e r t h re e p o s s ib jlit ie s wo u ld bring considerable dis c o mf o rt t o t h e re a d e r u n le s s h e i s de l iberately in search of n o n -me a n in g . Not so wjth Chinese and J a p a n e s e .

For the latter

we ar e thinking in terms of t h e Ch in e s e c h a ra c t e rs , n o t t h e Jap a n eseuse 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 hir a g a na) and the Japaneseu s e o f " Ro ma n " h a ra c t e rs (in ro ma -ji) A s c o p p o sedto the E uropeanrigidit y t h e re js c o n s id e ra b le f le x jb il it y . In th e S ino-Japaneselanguag ec o mmu n it y , b o o k s y s t a rt in ma fr o n t or in 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-dimens'ionalprinted o r writ t e n p a q e t o a o n e -d ime n s io n a l Tho u g h it ma y we ll b e t h a t t h e re js a t p re s e n t a str in g can be found. te n d e ncy towards a reduction o f t h ' is v a rie t y in mo d e so f b o o k / p a p g l pr o d u ct'ion,vari ety sti I I the re j s .

However,there is more t o s a y a b o u t S p a t ia l a rra n g e me n tt h a n c a n b e sa id in terms of the opos it io n b e t we e nrig id it y a n d f le x ' ib il' it y no ti ng in passing that onc e t h e c h o jc e h a s b e e n ma d ea p a rt ic u la r C hin ese or Japanesebook bec o me s s rig id a s a n y E u ro p e a nt e x t . T h e re a is not only the possibil it y o f p rin t in q o r writ in g in v a rjo u s w ays; once a choice has bee n ma d e it ma y a ls o b e p o s s ib le t o re a d i n various ways. A E uropea ns e n t e n c e re a d b a c k wa rd s ,f ro m rig h t on one linerltay giv e s o meme a n ' in g ,b u t u s u a lly b e s o s y n t a c t i c a l ' l y in co r rect that "it w'il1 be r e je c t e d b y a n y la n g u a g e -s e n s jt jv e min d . A Eu ropeanpri nted page rea d v e rt j c a l l y , f o rin s t a n c e b y re a d i n g to l eft the first or the last word s o n e a c h lin e , f ro m t o p t o b o t t o m o r p ro b a b ly b y mo s t me mb e rs f o fr o m bottom upwardsto the t o p will

th a t language communitybe re je c t e d e v e n b e f o re t h e e x p e rime n t ha s s tarted (the reader is e n c o u ra g e dt o t ry t h ' is p a g e , f o r in s t a n c e ). 0f course the samemay b e t h e c a s e f o r Ch ' in e s e n d J a p a n e s e . a H owever,itcanbeattempted, a n dp o s s ib ly wlt h mo re s u c c e s s . A n d wh a t is to the point: the compos e ro f t h e p rin t e d p a g e , t h e a u t h o r a n d i or th e printer,may arrange t h e c h a ra c t e n in s u c h a wa y t h a t a d d it io n al m ea njngsmay comeout of non -c o n v e n t io n a l re a d in g o rd e rs . I n f a c t th e r e are examplesof high- 1 e v e 1 a c h ie v e me n t sin a rriv in g a t seve ral meanjngsthis way, e v e n c o mb in in g d ia g o n a l re a d jn g a s a po ssibility, even off -diagon a l re a d in g t . " b t c o u rs e , ' in t h e We s t t h is 'i s knownas games, immortaliz e d t h ro u g h t h e c ro s s wo rd -p u z z 1 e s . Bu t i n S ino-Japanesespace it ma y a ls o p o in t t o a d if f e re n t wa y o f co n ceiving space, replete wit h me a n in g , ' in a le s s u n a mb ig u o u s a rra n q e me n rs a n u e t o u n d . (4 ) c a n d l inear fashion. E ven circ u la r

However,there is more t o it t h a n t h a t . T h e s u m t o t a l o f me a n . in q s a r r ived at by read'ing a row o r a c o lu mn b a c k wa rd sa n d f o rwa rd s , d o wn wards upwards, or do in g t h is f o r t h e wh o le p a g e , f f id y s e rv e a s or p o 'in ters to a meta-meaning .I f we ll c o mp o s e dh e s u m o f o n e t partial dim e ns'ional, meaning sma y b e mo re t h a n t h e s e t o f t h e p a rt s , an d the step from meaningst o me t a -me a n ' inma y b e a c c o mp a n ' ieb y g d so m ekind of quantumjump'in c o n s c io u s n e s s .T o t h e e x t e n t t h a t t h is i s th e case'it'is obvious t h a t o n e p a g e ma y c a rry mo re " in f o rma t io n " tha n would usually be the ca s e in a E u ro p e a nb o o k .

-B A nd yet, there is still mo re t o it t h a n t h is . A . p rin t e d page

i n Ch'inese Japanese,wit h c h a ra c t e rs a rra n g e d , u s u a lly v e ry or ne a tly,'in rows and column s c a n b e c o mp a re d o a c o m' ics t r" ip wh e re t pictures are arranged in ro ws a n d c o lu mn s , u s u a lly wit h c h jld re n a s r eceivers 'in E uropean u n t rie s . A s f o r t h e c a rt o o n s t h e re c e jv e r co ca n grasp what is happenin go rc f f rmu n ic a t e da t a me re g la n c e . O n e se co nd or two spent on a D o n a ld Du c k c a rt o o n will t e ll t h e re a d e r is ab o u t ; a f t e r t h a t h o lis t ic p e rc e p t ' io n , h e or she may then proceed t o t h e d e t a ils in a mo re re g u ' la r, I jn e a r fa sh ion. S omething the s a me ' is 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 of scr i pt: since the characte rs a re id e o g ra n sa q u ic k s a mpin g o f l id e o grams,in a more or less ra n d o mf a s h io n , b u t we ll-d is t rjb u t e d pa g e owill qive a good not'io n o f t h e c o n t e n t s b e f o re over the ( or onlooker) what it

m o r e systematic reading is in it ' ia t e d . B u t t h ' is me a n st h a t t h e re i s the possibi l ity of proc e e d in q ' ina mo re h e rme n e u t ic ama n n e r l js usually the case w it h re s p e c t t o E u ro p e a n th a n writ in q s , f ro m a gr a s p o f th e totality to concernwit h d e t a il, 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 s a mp lin g a n d back to detail again,an d s o o n . 0 f

sam eeffecteould be obtained u s in g E u ro p e a ns c rip t ,

a w ord 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 Ch'inese character, o n e re a s o n b e in g t h a t s o ma n ywo rd s ar e not - ljke nouns, verb s , a d je c t iv e s , a d v e rb s - c a rrje rs o f mu c hm e a n ' i n q b u t are connectives, fill'inq- jn wo rd s h p a rt ic u la r s y n t a c t ic wit a ls o f o u n d in c h in e s e a n d fu n ct'ions, and so on. S uch wo rd s a re

Jap a nese, but the eye of the re a d e r will 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 w' it h me a n in q . Hence, the messages abo u t o rg a n iz a t ' io n o f s p a c e a re a c t u a lly qu 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 ha n d w'ith Ch'inese and Japan e s eo n t h e o t h e r. T h e re is t h e d js t in c t io n be tw een rigid'ity and f lexib il it y ' in t h e p ro je c t io n f ro m t h re e d'im e ns'ional one-d'imenso n as p a c e . T h e re is t h e u s e o f f le x ib il jt y to l i n o r der to arrive at more v a rie t y . T h e re is t h e p o s s ib i' lit y o f m e ta-meanings 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 as wa y o f procedingin printed o r writ t e n s p a c e . A n d f in a lly t h e re i s the potential forholistic a n d h e rme n e u t ic a l re la t ' io n s t o spa ce, ergendered by 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 pl i sti c i n th e i r sp a cestr uctur e r elative to the m uch or ecomplex m b and Japanese. u s e o f sp a cema d e y C h i n ese

TIM E S omet h in go f t h e s a mema y b e s a id a b o u t the organ'izat'ion t' ime , a lt h o u g h le s s c le a rly s o . of Th e object'ion to any expiora t io n o f t h is is ' imme d ' ia t e : T h e re is so m eth'ing abso'lute about time , ' 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 ca n 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 downo a n d o o n . s However,even if we do n o t s e e mt o b e v e ry c t o o da t n ia s t e rin q c h ro n o ' l o g i c a 1 tim 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 o the strjngs of words. The a p p ro o rla t e q u e s t io n t o a s k s e e mst o b e : G'ivena set of words,can the y b e o rg a n iz e d in 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 i1 it y s o th a t more than one permutat io n is le g it ima t e ? A n d jf t h e la t b e r is th e case could it 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 ning, jf only a subtle c h a 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 , limit e d b y the set of a ll poss'ib1epermutations, mig h t c a rry a h id d e n me s s a g e ,a me t a m ea ning?In other words: T o wh a t e x t e n t is a la n g u a g e so rigid that it permits o n ly o n e wo rd o rd e r: o F s o f le x jb le t h a t 'it permits several word orde rs o u t o f t h e ma t h e ma t ic a lly o s s ib le o n e s ? p And then, beyond that: not o n ly wh e t h e r la n g u a g e is f le x ib le o b u t a ' lso w h e t h e r alter native 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 , e ve n meaningsthat compleme 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 initial word order. P o e t ic 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 perh a p s s u rmjs 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 w h e re a sa la n g u a g e lik e Ch in e s e mig h t b e ve r y flexible. i,le have not c o mea c ro s s e f f o rt s r e se arch done in this field. t o c o n f irm o r di sconfi rm such hypothes s , a 1t h o u g h t h e re mu s t h a v e b e e nmu c h i T h e G e rma n rd o rd e r wjt h n o t o n ly wo on e v erb but often several v e rb a l f o rms mo s t ly a c c u mu la i. in q t t h e e nd o f a th e sentence does not seemto s t a n d mu c hre a rra n g e me n t h o u t wit tr a n sgressing the borderlin e 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 , similar rigidities se e m o b e mu c h s s p re v a le n t ' in Ch in e s e . le t

- 10 It should be emphas'ized t t h e me a n in g , o f c o u rs e , c h a n g e swit h tha the permutation, as it also , in g e n e ra l, will d o wh e n t h e re a d in g is direct'i o n , a s me n t jo n e d a b o v e . I t s h o u rd b e no ted,however, that the po in 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 uchfurther than what was d is 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 sDa ce: It i s now a question o f a l I p e rmu t a t ' io n s n o t o n ' ly f o rwa rd , an d backward, upwards down wa rd s . or Imagine that somestat is t ' ic a l s t u d y h a d b e e n u n d e rt a k e n , o r do n e in a different

co u ld be rrrdertaken, and pro v e d t h e h y p o t h e s is b ), a n d la rg e t o b e cor r e ct. LJhatwould be the imp l ic a t ' io n s o f t h a t ? T h a t t h e re is a t le a st a potentia'l f lexibil it y . wh e t h e rit is re a l ly ma d eu s e o f j s a n other matter. B ut in m a 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 p o tent'ial 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 thereby also with time.

KNOt^/LEDGE

W eshall tr y to discuss this subject

un d e r three headjngs: predjc a t iv e v s . re la t io n a l; a b s t ra c t v s . con cr ete and prec'ise vs . va g u e . B y a n d I a rg e t h e . id e a wo u ld b e tha t Indo-E uropean languagest 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 t h r e e dich o tomously expresseddjlemma 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 E u ro p e a nla n g u a g e s is a lre a d y s e e n in the ty p'ical sentence structu re : t h e re is (u s u a lly )a s u b je c t , a n d so m ething is predicated of t h a t s u b je c t - a q u a l. if je r (a d je c t iv e ) an d /or a verb, w'ith or w'it h o u t q u a l if ie r (a n a d v e rb ) . I n o t h e r w or d s: something is atrjbut e d t o s o me t h in g , p re d jc a t e d o f s o me th in g . In fact, this struct u re is s o d e e p ly in g ra in e d in me mb e rs of th eselanguagecommunit ieh a t it is p ro p a b ly s e e n a s t h e n o rma l ts wa y i n which humanthought c a n b e e x p re s s e d , t h e re b e in g n o a I ter na ti ve . chinese and Japanese, ho we v e r, a re e x a mp le so f a lt e rn a t iv e s .

T h e c h i n e sep h i l o so p h e rch angtung- sur { 5J..,r elational pr esentatjon a s m uch rei mp o rta n t, e ven to the point of being typical of mo e c h i n e se'l a n g u a g stru ctu re . He quotesMenc' ius:,hum an natur e towar ds ' t h e go o da s w a te r d o w n w ar ds", fair ly optimjstic view of human a n a t u re , b u t cl e a rl y re l a tj onal. The gener al str uctur e wouldbe a quar tet, A : B = X :Y , w h 'i chi s a mu ch mor ecomplex thought str uctur e than p r e d ica ti n g so me th i n g f a subject, p( S) .W fr at says js that ther e o it a r e t wo re a l ms o f C i sco u rse,one or them r elating to human beings

- 11 a n d the other one to physi c a l n a t u re . T wo e le me n t s a re p ic k e d o u t of either, they are rela t e d t o e a c h o t h e r wit h jn b o t h typ e s of discourse,and then t h e re la t jo n s a re re la t e d s o a s to arrive at a quaternary re la t ' io n s h ip . T h e imp o rt a n t t h in g a b o ut this relation is tha t it p re d ic a t e s n o t h in g in a n y p re c is e se n se of any ofthe terms; jt o n ly s a y s t h a t t h e f o u r t e rms p ar e related to each othen in a c e rt a in wa y . Wh e re a s re d ic a t iv e l an g uagewould tend to be mo re s t a t ic , a t t rib u t in g s o me t h ' in g to someth'ing for ever ("I a m a b o y " ), re la t io n a l la n g u a g e k e e p s

th e absolute propertjes or p re d ic a t e s o p e r' , a n d p u t s t h e e le me n t of invarjance at a higher le v e l o f a b s t ra c t io n . I t is g a lile a n ra t h e r r4 \ tha n aristotel ian; Fqn!t'Lon s b e g rif f ra t h e r t h a n S u b s t a n z b e g rif f Y ' I n t h i s s e n s e , h e n ce, Chinese hasa muchmo re a b s t ra c t la n g u a g e s t ru c t u re th a n E uropeanlanguages- a n d s in c e t h is p a rt ' ic u la r c h a ra c t e ris t ' ic o f C h i ne se s ta ke n o ve r b v i J a p a n e s e' it w' il I a l s o b e a p p l ic a b le to the latter. A nd the qua rt e t is a v e ry f re q u e n t t o . r. (7 )

An'interesting aspect o f t h is h a s t o d o wit h t h e d if f e re n c e b e tweenthe connective that is u s e d t o p re d ic a t e s o me t h in g ,lik e " I am a bo y", in turopean langu a g e s (b e , s e in , 6 t re , a n d s o o n ) a n d i n C hinese (shih L

a" - {

and h

b

) o r^ in lu p u * r. f q g ! -q a n d a ru , ). Wh e re a sjn E u ro p e a nla n g u a q e st,h e s e

co n n ectives are asymmetric ,in Ch in e s e a n d J a p a n e s e , p e rh a p s pa r ti cularly the former,they a re s e e n a s mu c hmo re s y mme t ric . I t js I wh o possess boyishness,as e x p re s s e d in t h e s e n t e n c e a b o v e ; jt is not "boy" which poss e s s e sI -' is h n e s s . I n Ch in e s e a n d Ja p a nese, however, this dis t in c t ' io n is mu c h le s s s t ric t . B o t h co n structions would be vali d ; p e rmu t a t io n s jn t h e s e n s e ma d e ab o ve are possible. Conno t a t io n s ma y b e d if f e re n t , t h e me t a m ea ningsmay be irnportant. I n s h o rt , a o re d ' ic a t ' iv e o ro p o s it io n m a y be r,al'idboth ways and he n c e b e c o me s l a t i o n a l a 1t h o u g h re i n th r's case binary, not qua t e rn u ry . (B ) This general emphasiso n re la t ' io n a l e x p re s s io n s ma y o la c e Jap a neseand Ch'inese closer t o d ia le c t ic re a s o n in g t h a n is t h e c a s . ef o rEu p o p e a n A t t h e f irs t la n g uages. P red'icat'iveexpre s s ' io n st e n d t o b e c o me re s t a t jc , mo m or e "unary", hence less ma lle a b le , le s s f lu id . gla n ce this may seemto be e x a c t lV t h e o p p o s ' it e o f t h e n e x t

po in t, the predilectjon for a b s t ra c t e x p re s s jo n in I n d o -E u ro p e a n la n g uagesas opposedto con c re t e e x p re s s io n s in Ch jn e s e a n d Ja p a nese; but that is only a t t h e f irs t g la n c e .

a6

-

t/

-

It is often po'inted out t h a t b o t h Ch in e s e a n d J a p a n e s ea re ve r y concrete languagesand t h a t me mb e rs f t h o s e la n g u a g e o com munities aredissatisfied wit h a n y t h in g b u t h ig h ly c o n c re t e de scriptions, forinstance in t h e f o rm o f p re c is e e x a mp le s . T h e i de o grams, the characters t h e ms e ' lv e s , h a v e e ry c o n c re t e o rig in s v altho ugh someof that may h a v e b e e n lo s t t h ro u g h t h e mille n n ia . Bu t then there is anotherpoin t wh ic h h a s n o t b e e n lo s t : t h e re ar e no artjcles in Chinese, a s a ls o jn J a p a n e s e ,a n d t h e Ch jn e s e ia n g uage, from the E uropea np o in t o f v ie w, h a s a n a lmo s t in c re d ib le l ack of inflect'ion in gende r, c a s e o r t e n s e , a n d wit h re g a rd to si ngular vs. plural. disti nctjons 0f c o u rs e t h is in n o t , v a y a n st h a t s u c h me cannot be expre s s e d , o n ly t h a t t h e y a re n o t b u ilt

i nto single words with appro p ria t e p re f ix e s a n d s u f f ix e s o r s imjl ar n reans,butare derivedfro mt h e c o n t e x t . B u t it d o e s me a nt h a t th e distinction betweena t re e , t h e t re e a n d ju s t s imp ly ' t re e ' do e s not mcur automatjcally \ . v h t re e is a n y t re e , " t h e t re e " . is t h a t pa r ti cular tree,whereas 'tree ' ' is t re e -js h n e s s - a n a b s t ra c t p ro p e rt y , o ln li for the lasting controversy b e t we e nn o min a lis ma n d re a lis m. ' ' " ' of a tree, I i ke boy'ishnes s ;a n u n i v e rs a l a s p e c t o f t re e s , ng

Thjs becomes muchmore ' in t e re s t in g wh e n in s t e a d o f t re e s o n e l oo ks as such concepts as " f re e d o m" a n d " e q u a 1 it y " . I n ma n y E u ro p e a n l an g uagesthese words can be e q u ip p e d wjt h a rt r' c le s , b u t ' in g e n e ra l a p p e ar without, denoting abst ra c t c o n c e p t s . T h e y s t a n d f o r e s s e n c e s , for somethingessentjal that ma y o n ma y n o t b e s a id t o e x ' is t o r be pr esent in, for instance , c o u n t rie s . A s s u c h t h e y a re t h e t o o ls o f a bstract reasoning, they c a n b e u s e d a s s u b je c t s , a n d s o me t h in g lo ca n be predicated of them, t h e p re d ic a t e s c a n b e c o mp a re d , a n d n g p ch a in s of deductive reason in g c a n b e e s t a b l' is h e d . [ u ro p e a n s , e rh a p s pa r ti cularly and t h e F re n c h c a n g o o n f o r a c o n s ' id e ra b le the Germans l en g th of time discussing th e re la t io n b e t we e n " f re e d o m" a n d " e q u a lit y " l wi th o ut ever havj ng to use a s i n g l e e x a mpe . l' lo t s o i n Ch in e s e a n d Jap a nese:The languagewill f o rc e a c e rt a in c o n c re t e n e s s o n t h e l an g uage users or at least t e n d t o b e n d t h e m' in t h a t d ire c t io n . "You meanlike in - - -?" w o u ld b e t h e t y p ic a l q u e s t io n a s k e d to s by a Sino-Japanese an In d o -E u ro p e a n p e a k e r wh e n t h e a b s t ra c t disco urse has gone on for s o met ime a n d t u rn e d ' in t o u t t e r me a n in g ( 11) I essness from the poi nt of v i e w o f c o n c re t e n " r, .

-

tJ

-

In r e spect of these two aspec t s o f t h e e y o is t e mo lo g ic a l d ' ime n s io no f lan g u a g e o the q r ound has already been pre p a re d jn lin g u is t ic d e v e lo p me n tf o r t h e e t n e r q e n c e f ba sic characterist'ics of oc c ' id e n t a l in t e lle c t u a l s t y le : a t o mis t ic e s s e n t ia ljs m

(.1 ? r.a i r.u ti veexpr essions m it deta per an d deducti ve'.'lyredi;cati ch*"nt ot

on e s ubject from another in o rd e r t o a s s lg n a t t rib u t e s ; pe r m its deductiv'ismas a log ic a ' l o p e ra t io n , u n e n c u mb e reb y a n y d Rela t ' io n a l e x p re s sjo n s a re mu c h le s s p e rmis s ive r n isplaced concreteness. of atom'ism unless 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 comp'lex unjtfromth e re s t r ela tjonal e n ti ty tetrad. To attrib u t e 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 wr'll be more proble ma t ic , h o we v e r. A n d jf in a d d it ' io n

is e sse ntial'ism less develop e d d e d u c t iv e re a s o n in g wo u ld b e imp e d e d . At this point the third a s p e c t e n t e rs wit h f u ll f o rc e . E u ro p e a n

l an g uagesare constructed i n s u c h a wa y t h a t t h e y a t le a s t g iv e th e impressjon that people in s u c h la n g u a g e c o mmu n it je sc a n a rriv e a t ve r y precise conclus'ions t h a t a re o p e n t o f a ls if ic a t jo n ; if t th e y cannot be "confi rmed" h e y c a n a t I e a s t b e " d i s c o n f j rme d ' lT h e tend t o b e a p re d ' ic a t jv e s t a t e me n t , a would pr o p osjtion,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 con clusjon itself of"tr ue vs. false" (or the we a k e r f o rm o f t h a t d ic h o t o my ,c o n f irme d $ fi r m ed] Not so in Ch'inese/ J a p a n e s e . h e v a g u e n e s o f t h e a lI u s jv e , T s 'l a iter ary sty'le, of ten referre d t o b y ln le s t e rn e rs s " p o e t ic ' j h a s b e e n th e c onstant themeofcomm e n t u rJ l3 / , a ls o s h o wsu p wh e n J a p a n e s e le a r n foreign languages: ex p re s s io n s s u c h a s " ma y -b e " , " v ie l 1 e ic h t " , t'pe u t-6tre" pop up very of t e n i n o rd e r t o re f ' le ct t h e v a g u e n e s s f o d Jap a nesediscourse. A ques t jo n I ik e " Wh e n o e s t h e t ra ' in I e a v e ? " t h e a n s we r " t h e t ra i n an by a Norwegi husband'is I i k e ' ly t o e ' l' icj t le a ves, frdy be, around noo n " - wh e n t h e t ra jn in f a c t (f ro m a We stern point of view!) lea v e s a t 1 2 . 0 0 , s h a rp . I n t h is , it sh o u ld be noted, js 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 also in the self-presen t 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 statemen t ' is t o p re s e n t o n e s e lf a s a ru le r o f the universe, or at least a s 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 oad (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 1 y . ; Deductivism presupposesp re c is e n e s s ,if n o t t h e wh o le p u rp o s e o f d eductivism is lost. A nd t h e p u rp o s e ' is t h is : f ro m c le a r, p re c is e pr e m isses via the jron laws o f d e d u c t iv e ' lo g ic t o c le a r, p re c is e con clusions. It seemsthat b o 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-

14wo u ld be very imperfect vehic le s f o r s u c h t h o u g h t f ig u re s , b y P e o p le i n th e West seen as necess a ry c o n d ' it io n s f o r s c ie n c e in t h e We s t e rn sen se. The units on which pro p o s it io n s a re b u ilt si m ple subjects th a n predicat'ive. There is lit t le a re n o lo n g e r ra t h e r The bas'ic f ig u re s o f t h o u g h t a re re la t io n a l

o r n o t h in g o f e s s e n c e swh e re

th e l ogical nature of the'ir in t e rc o n n e c t io n c a n b e e x p lo re d , a n d bo th beg'inning, the mjddle a n d t h e e n d o f a n a rg u me n t a t iv e c h a in rather than p re c ' is e . Wh ic h , o f c o u rs e , o n ly p o in t s wo u ld be vague to other types of intellectu a l s t y ' le s , mo re h o lis t ic , mo re d ' ia le c t ic ; all the time keeping in m'in dt h a t b o t h t h e Ch jn e s e a n d t h e J a p a n e s e 'l an g uagesare capable of ser v in g a s c a rrie rs o f b le s t e rn s c ie n t if ic th o u gh! only that 'it comesle s s e a s ily s jn c e t h a t t y p e o f t h in K in g h a s not developed together wit h t h e la n g u a g e s t ru c t u re .

PERSON NATURE -

T h e re is mu c h le s s t o s a y a b o u t t h is d e p ' ic t e d in e a rlie r

dim e nsion.0n the one hand s o ma n yo f t h e Ch in e s e c h a ra c t e rs a re con crete,taken from natural o b je c t s t h a t we re ver sions of the characters. I t is e v e n f o u n d ' in f a mi" ly n a me st o d a y in Japanese,for instance: T a n a k ame a n in g " c e n t ra l p a d d y " ,I n o g u c lll m ea ningthe"mouth ofa boar" . T h e a b s e n c eo f c le a r d js t in c t jo n s all b e t we e n ab str act and concrete prope rt je s , o r a s p e c t s ,o f t h e s a met e rm ma k e s things more equal. The re is le s s o f a wo rld o f t h e c o n c re t e b an d touchable, "nature" to wh ic h t h e h u ma n o d y wo u ld a ls o b e lo n g , on th e ore hand and on the o t h e r h a n d a wo rl d o f t h e a b s t ra c t , t h a t w h'ich can not be touched, o f e s s e n c e sa n d e v e n s o u ls , t h e e s s e n c e beings. B oth are c o n c re t e , b o t h a re t h e s a me . of h uman In Europeanlanquagesby the s a met o k e n , t h e re is a ls o a c e rt a in p e rs o n i f i c a t j o n o f n ature through the use of g e n d e rs o t h e r t h a n n e u t e r in r eferences to nature (la nat u re , d ie Na t u r) a n d p a rt s o f n a t u re , su ch as anything in the bios p h e re . Ne v e rt h e le s s , jt js c le a r t h a t e sse ncesand abstract'ions a re a t t rjb u t e d t o h u ma nb e in q s a n d t h in g s morethanb t h e a n ip : a l p la n t a n d min e ra l " k in g d o ms " . cr ea ted by humans It j s typical that "foxine s s " is a n a t t rjb u t e o f c e rt a in h u ma nb e ' in gs r ather than of a fox. S o by a n d la rg e \ v e wo u ld b e in c lin e d t o s a y t h a t the differences betweenthe la n g u a g e f a mjlje s will p o in t ' in t h e be d'ir e ct'ion of making human in g s d ' if f e re n t f ro m n a t u re in t h e Eu r o peanlanguages, more s'imila r in Ch in e s e a n d J a p a n e s e .T h e s t e p fr o m essence (abstractjon) t o s o u l is b u t a s h o rt o n e , a n d t h ' is js

15 m w h a t 'i s a l re a d y b u i l t i n to the languages or pho' logica11y.

PERS ON P E RS ON top ic, T h ' is a g a in is a f a irly c o mp re h e n s i v e d e f jn e d ,

imp o rt a n c e t o s o c ia l s c ie n t is t s and of course of imme n s e

sin ce this is where social re la t io n s a re b e in g imp l ic it ly

s or by certa'i n tendencies bi as e s a l re a d y b u i I t i n t o t h e 1a n g u a g e . ' in g e n e ra l i,r lsh al l try to discuss th'is imp o rt a n t a s p e c t o f c o s mo lo g y e an d cial cosmologyin part ic u la r, u n d e r t h re e h e a d in g s : c o 1le c t iv is t so VS. i ndividual ist, vertical v s . h o liz o n t a l a n d in s id e v s . o u t s jd e t e n d t o p ic k u p t h e f o rme r the g eneral thesis being tha t J a p a n e s ewill

a t h e a d of these three d'ilemm a s n d E u ro p e a nla n g u a g e s h e la t t e r, b with Chinese be'ing moreinS e t we e n u t t e n d ' in gin t h e J a p a n e s ed ' ire c t io n .

Let us start with the c o ' lle c t iv is t

v s . in d iv id u a l is t d ime n s ' io n v ie w u s e f u l wa y o f

metaph o ric a l b u t ' in o u r an d wjth a somewhat

ap p r oaching the problem. Ima 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 c ommunity where 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 newcomeris completely ig n o ra n t o f t h e la n g u a g e , u n d e rs t a n d in g n ot h i n g . It comesas a f low of sound s , u n d ' if f e re n t ia t e d , mo re o r le s s l' ik e a w aterfall, like t.he chirp in g o f b ird s , t h e g ru n t in g o f a n ima ls . tJo u ld there in all of this 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 e r e r listening to the phenomeno n -t hn e wc o mewo u ld re c o g n iz e a n d t h e n r er e cognize 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 ep e at,with a questioning e x p re s s io n ' in h is f a c e , t ry in g t o e lic it som etype of interpretation? Here three candjdates a re s u g g e s t e d : t h e " I ' in t h e E n g lis h ' la n g u a g e , a n d t h e " h a ' i" jn la n g uage, the "wU-men" the Ch ' in e s e in th e J apaneselanguage. The f irs t o f t h e s e is s imp ly in t e rp re t e d : it 'is th e assertive first pers o n s in g u la r p ro n o u n , t h e s y mb o l o f in d 'ividual ism and selfassert io n , e v e n c a p it a l jz e d in writ jn g (' l " ) o so th at it stands out, shou t jn g it s me s s a g e f in d iv id u a l is m t o a n y e ye trained on this phenome n o n ' ina p a g e f ille d wit h E n g lis h p n in t. The second one is als o a s s e rt iv e , jt is t h e f irs t p e rs o n p 1 u r a1 pronoun, "we". The in d iv id u a l s p e a k e r p re s e n t s h ims e lf ( o r h erself, but then Chine s e d o e s n o t re f lo c t g e n d e r) a s

16a pa rt, even a particle in a g ro u p , t h e c o lle c t iv e l, J e .T h is we js a subject, a potential or e v e n a c t u a l a c t o r. A n d t h is d if f e rs fr om the ubiquitous "hai" fo u n d in J a p a n e s ed is c o u rs e , s o me t ime s ( i nco rrectly) translated int o t h e E n g lis h " y e s ' J a n d ' it s e q u iv a le n t s i n other languages. One int e rp re t a t io n o f t h is " h a i " , wh jc h a c c o rd in g to the tone in which jt js u t t e re d a ls o ma y c o mec lo s e t o " n o " , w ou ld be something like this : " 1 a m t u n e d ro n y o u , I a m re c e iv in g th e signal s you emit, I am s wit c h e d o n " t . ' ' 1 t ma y , h o we v e r, a ls o ha ve a connotation of subs e rv ie n c e a s it js t h e u n d e rd o gra t h e r th a n the topdog who has to c o n f irm t h a t h e is t u n e d in , t h a t t h e swj tch rema'inson . l^lhen q u e s t i o r , o l^ a s e m'-i the t o p d o g u t t e rs qu e stion,th'is may release a c a s c a d e o f " h a i " a mo n gu n d e rd o g' l is t e n e rs , ' an d the questi on 'is of ten f o rmu la t e d i n s u c h a wa y t h a t t h e ' rh ai rl can be given jn affirmat'ive in t e rp re t a t io n . I n s h o rt , " h a i" s t a n d s fo r some kindofvve-ness only t h a t jt js re la t io n a l b e t we e nt h e s e n d e r a n d the receiver, a symbol t h a t t h e y a t le a s t f o r t h e t ime b e in g con stitutea languagecomm u n it y ,a re la t io n , n o t o n ly a g ro u p o f p e o p l e .

This can then be contra s t e d wit h t h e we ll-k n o wn J a p a n e s e r elu ctance to use the first but also to someextent'in a n ti - i nd'ividualism built'into p e rs o n p ro n o u n , p a rt ic u la rly in t h e s in g u la r , t h e p lu ra l. O n e ma y e v e n t a lk a b o u t a n

t h e lin g u is t jc h a b it s . I mp e rs o n a l exp r essions can be used: Ins t e a d o f s a y in g " I a m q o in q t o Yo ko hama tomorrow" one m' ig h t s a y " t o mo rro w - t o g o t o Y o k o h a ma the r e is a p1an")'Rdflexive v e rb s ma y b e u s e d ' imp e rs o n a liz in g th e actjon, or at least putt in g t h e a c t ' io n a wa y f ro m t h e s p e a k e r. 0f course, this is not u n k n o wnjn o t h e r la n g u a g e s , f o r in s t a n c e i n Spanish. A managerof a ja m f a c t o ry in Ch i' le o n c e h a d t h e p ro b le m tha t a worker had lost a the rmo me t e rin t h e ja m (wh ic h h a d t o b e tr ea ted at very defjnite te mp e ra t u re s ). I t wa s a n imp o rt a n t a c t , e ve n a grave one as the thermo me t e rmig h t d is in t e g ra t e in t o t h e ja m . The worker, muchto the irrit a t jo n o f t h e ma n a g e ro u t t o d is t rib u t e g u i1 t, expressedwhat had ha p p e n e d o t b y s a y in g " Y o p e rd i e 1 t e rn m om etro" but by saying "e1 te rm6 me t ro s e p e rd id " - " t h e t h e rmo me t e r lo st itself". Obviously this c o u ld b e in t e rp re t e d a s a n e x c u lp a t o ry fo r m ulation, and as such ve ry u s e f u l in a s it u a t io n lo a d e d wit h ten sion. It should be pointe d o u t t h a t in a la n g u a g e lik e No rwe g ia n the corresponding reflexive s e n t e n c e wo u ld b e a wro n g ly f o rmu la t e d sen tence, making this type o f d e p e rs o n a liz a t io n d if f ic u lt . I n E n g lis h

-

41 lt

g "t h e th e rmo me te ro t l o st" does not expr essthe sam e:the ther mometer b e i n q a su b j e ct ca p a b l eo f ' losinq itself.

Still another way in w h ic h t h is s u p p re s s io n o r d e n ig ra t io n in J a p a n e s ewo u ld b e t h ro u g h

o f the'indiv'idual expresses it s e lf 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 should at least b e n e g a t iv e ; t h e o p p o s it e b e in g un b e arab'lyself-assertive. A n d t h a t b rin g s o u t h o w l, rle s t e rn e rs i n thejr 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 l au d atory, 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 s a s a lwa ys 'in command the s'it u a t io n (I a mg o in g t o Y o k o h a ma of tom o rrow),and with themse lv e s jn 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 jm e nsion: not only avoiding in d iv id u a l is t e x p re s s ' io n s , b u t ma k in g f u 1 1 u se of collectivist expres s ' 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 fo r m of the f jrst person p. lu ra l p ro n o u n , b u t o f s o me ' id e n t if ie d c o lle c t i v i t y n a m ed,to wh'ich one belong s . A l^ le s t e rn e rmig h t p re s e n t h ims e lf a s "Joh a n Galtung from the Un jv 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 at t rib u t e , fa m 'i1y nameand then institut io n a l com e sthe collectivity t h e f irs t n a me , t h e n t h e b e lo n g in g n e s s . A J a p a n e s ewo u ld

do j ust the opposite: "Univ e rs i t y o f O s lo ' s G a lt u n g J o h a n . F i rs t " defi n in 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 of w ork, then a genitive po s 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 "no ") , then the family namet o s y mb o liz 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 We s t e rn e rwo u ld b e " mv s e lf " . [^/here would a Chinese b e lo c a t e d o n t h is d ime n s io n ? P ro b a b ly i som ewheren -between capab le o f u si n g f i rs t p e rs o n p ro n o u n s , , bo th in singular and plural, th e l atter. of not using them, letting b u t wit h a c e rt a in p re d ile c t io n f o r 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 lly , 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 o f Ch in e s e a lre a d y h ' in t e d a t s e v e ra l t ime s . C hin ese is a languagewhich c a n e a s ily b e s t re t c h e d b o t h in t h e We sternand'in the Japanes ed ire c t io n , a la n g u a g e in t h e mid d le , w6n (middle la n g u a g e ) a s o n e mjg h t e x p e c t f ro m a a r eal zhb'ng zr r 6n ggud (middle kingdom). 1 t t a k e s le s s d e f in it e s t a n d s .

. 18 Let us then look at the n e x t a s p e c t , v e rt ic a l v s . h o riz o n t a l. N o l anguage is jnsensjtjve t o v e rt ic a l s o c ia l d is t a n c e (" c la s s d if f e ren c e " , t e rn i) a n d h o riz o n t a l s o c ia l d 'istance, the distance to fo re ig n e rs o f v a rio u s k jn d s , t h e d if f e re n c e jt y b e tw een'insjde and outside (t rre t a n g u a g ec o mmu n ), t o b e d . is c u s s e d be lo w. E ach social layer has it s wa y o f u s in g t h e la n g u a g e , it s p a r ti c ular vocabulary, 'its o wn g ra mma t icp a ra d . ig ms , io ma t ic e x id pr e ssions, perhaps syntax, e v e n s e ma n t ic s , ' it s in t o n a t io n . T h e socja l group at the top'is u s u a lly a b le t o d e f in e t h e wa y it speaks th e language as the "correct " u s a g e , t h e o t h e rs b e in g d e v ia t io n s a n d a berrations, even jncor re c t , e v e n " v u lg a / ' . 4 1 s o , t h e s o c ia l g ro u o i n the centre of the languagec o mmu n it y ,wh e t h e r jt js o r n o t t h e s o c 1 a l gr o u p at the top, js usu a lly a b le t o d e f in e ' it s u s a g e o f t h e "sta n d a rd " , a n d o t h e r u s a g e sa re d e f in e d la n g uage as "national", a ltho ugh this is a somewha ljmit in g t

e a s "vernacuIar". A nd this b e c o me s v e n mo re t h e c a s e f o r wo rld o la n g uagessuch as E ng'lish. Na t ' io n a 1 1 y t h e r g ro u p s t h a n t h o s e a t t h e top a nd/orin the centre ma y f ig h t , e v e n s u c c e s s f u lly , f o r e q u a l s u c h a s E n g l a n dh a s , r i gh ts within the total a ll 1 lan g u a g e c o mmu n it y .B u t in t e rn a t ' io n a 1 y

it seemsto be taken for gr a n t e d t h a t t h e c o u n t ry o f o rig in ,

the rjght to define c o rre c t u s a g e a n d o t h e r c o u n t rie s n o n e ,

r e g a r dless of how muchthe la n g u a g e is a " wo rld la n g u a g e " . F o r t h a t rea s o n En q lish could be seen a s b e lo n g in g t o t h e wo rld , ju s t a s a "na ti onal lanquage" is 6 ljte. more a n d mo re s e e n a s b e in g a p a rt o f a p a rt s o f t h e n a t io n , n o t o n ly t h e n a ti onal heritage, meaningb y t h a t a ll the language. Standard Oxbridge or "K in g ' s " E n g lis h ; Ha n n o v e rG e rma n ,t h e Fr en ch of the Toura'ine, the I t a lia n o f T o s c a n a / Umb rja , h e S p a n is h t o f Salamanca,the Chjnese of B e ijin g , T o k y o J a p a n e s e- a ll o f the se are examplesof the pa t t e rn ju s t me n t io n e d , t h ru s t ' in g we d g e s between "standard" an d " v e rn a c u la r" , " d ia ' le c t " . I n d o in g s o geogr apllvis equipped with a v e rt ic a l g ra d ' ie n t , c la s s if y in g d ' is t ric t s as w ell as jnd'ividuals. There js mo re o v e r t h e ' in t e ra c t iv e a s p e c t of thjS , al S O found 'in al 1 la n g u a g e s : s p e e c h d if f e rs a c c o rd in g t o so cia l relat'ions, one does no t t a lk in t h e s a mewa y t o t h e F o re ' ig n M i n'ister and to his driver. A n d ' it is n o t o n ly a q u e s t io n o f wh ic h p e r so nal pronoun i s used (i n E n g li s h t h e d if f e re rrt ia t io n c a n b n a d e y rle a n s b of la st nameor first Si e or du mig h t u s e namer e s p e c t iv e ly , wh e re a G e rma n a French y9!! 0r t u ; it js _ . a ls o a q u e s t io n o f t o n e o f

A ll users could be s e e n a s h a v in g mo re e q u a l r' ig h t s in d e f in in g

i vo ice , and the choice of vo c a b u lu ru l' f l s e n t e n c e s p o k e n u p wa rd : b e com e s longer: oFt"tdto;the sa mec o n t e n t e x p re s s e d d o wn wa rd s y ma

-1 9 Ho rjz o n t a l la n g u a g e , t o e q u a ls , ma y De l oca ted somewhere betwe e n . B u t t h a t d o e s n o t n e c e s s a rjly d e f . in e it in a s the national language. I t ma y b e v e ry lo c a l. T h e s 1 a n g , ja rg o n , a r g o t, of equals may vary b e t we e nc ra s s e s a n d f ro m p la c e t o p l* -" (t z 1 T his, honever, is a un' iv e rs a l p h e n o me n o n lt h o u g h it d if f e rs a in degree from one languagec o mmu n it yt o t h e o t h e r. T h u s , in N or wegianthere'is certain] y n o t mu c h le f t o f t h js k in d o f d -if f e ren ti ation particular'ly afte r t h e s e c o n d p e rs o n a l p ro n o u n s in g u la r "d u " is now almost un-ivers a l;" De " h a v in g a ' lmo s t d . is a p p e a re d . But Japaneseas a langua g e g o e s f a r b e y o n d t h is , e v e n t o t h e po in t that one might talk ab o u t f o u r d ' if f e re n t la n g u a g e s : a d o wn w ar d language,an upward lang u a g e , a v e ry mu c hu p wa rd la n g u a g e , a n d a horizontal language. T h e s y n t a x wil' l d if f e r, a n d s o will t h e co n crete words used,even to c o n v e y mo re o r le s s t h e s a meme a n ' in g . the Japane s eh a v e t o k n o wwh e re t h e y s t a n d in re la t io n to ea ch other before correc t v e rb a ' l c o mmu n ic a t io n a n s t a rt . T h e p ro v er b i a l c a ct o f introduction to each o t h e r, wit h t wo J a p a n e s eg e n t le me n , b o t ho f t h e m dr e ssed in black, approachin g e a c h o t h e r, g ra d u a l' ly b o win g d o wn w i th straight'legs and straig h t b a c k s : e X p e rime n t ' in g h t h e wit r ela ti ve anale at the hips t ill t h e y , b y u t t e rjn g s o u n d s o f b e lo n g in g n e s s C on sequently, be come shonter, more direc t .

an d n ames,have found out wh a t will po cket of the jacket a visit in g

b e t h e c o rre c t re la t iv e a n q le ; u n d e rp'inningthe mutual pres e n t a t io n b y f is h in g o u t o f t h e b re a s t c a rd (a e n e ra lly o f t h e s a me

si ze) becomes meaningful. I t is a p re c o n d it io n f o r t a lk . But can they not simp'ly ma k eu s e o f h o ri z o n t a l ' la n g u a g e ? h a t T 'i s the language of mass commu n ' ic a t io no f n e ws p a p e rs ,ra d jo a n d T V , , to be used in impersonal re la t ' io n s wh e re t h e s e n d e rs d o n o t k n o w wh o the receivers are, only t h a t t h e y will b e s c a t t e re d a ro u n d j. n Jap a nesesociety in such a wa y t h a t n o n e o f t h e t h re e v e rt ic a l l an g u agescan be used.0f c o u rs e t h is wo u ld h a v e b e e n t h e a n s we r jf Jap a nesehad been a Western la n g u a g e ; it wo u ' ld h a v e mo v e din t h e s a me

d i r e c ti o n , I i ke N o r^ w e g i an has

a t a mo re s u p e rf ic ja l

I e v e l. B u t t h e

othe r Japanese languagesare t h e re , c ry in g t o b e u s e d , d e f in in g socia l relations of superord in a n c ea n d s u b o rd in a n c e . O n e d a y t h e y m a y b e given up, horizontal J a p a n e s ema y s p re a d a t t h e e x p e n s eo f t h e v e r t i c a l ve r sions of Japanese B rrt t h a t d a y is p ro b a b ly s t ill f a r a wa y .

-2 0 This, however, does not me a nt h a t h o riz o n t a r la n g u a g e ' is n o t use d in personal relations, 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 ay use this type of horizo n t 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 endingon gender, dge, o c 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 lo ca tion (and probably also o t h e r f a c t o rs ). A g a jn t h is me a n st h a t o f b e ' lo n g in g n e s s l an g uage becomes symbol o f s o c ia l a t t rib u t io n , a

a s well as relationship in a mo re v e rt ic a l s e n s e . A lmo s t e v e ry l i ng u'ist'ic act def jnes attr ib u t e s a n d re ' la t ' io n s , me a n in gt h a t th e spoken and written lang u a g e ' is n o t o n ly a s o c ia l a c t jn t h e usu a l sense of being interac t iv e o b u t in t h e s e n s e o f p o in t in g o u t, underlining, even ree n f 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 ; wit h o u t tha t map territorial locat ' io n a n d re la t io n wiil g e t 1 o s t , a n d t h e i nd ividual Japanesewould f e e l a t a lo s s . T h is , in c id e n t a l 1 y , will also be a leason why J a p a n e s eo f t e n k e e p q u ie t in c o n t e x E wh er e lr lesternerswould 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 ing one's languagewith 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 b e a s jn 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 onese lf ) a s t h e o p p o s it e mjs t a k e . Wh e nin d o u b t, keep qu'iet, wait and s e e, wai t a n d I ' is t e n , t ill s o me b o d v e lse defines the situat'ion. However,a1'l of thi's i s mo re t h a n me re ly a n a n a lv t ic e x e rc is e . The r e js a concreteappljc a t io n o f t h e p rin c ip le o f b u ' ilt -in ver ti cality, th a t morphologically t h a t is , in t h e J a p a n e s ela n g u a g e could 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 po ssible 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 ? f o rms o f folinstance

On e basic aspect of revolutio n is t o b u ild d o wns o n re ver ti c alityo

re la t in g t o c o mma no v e r me a n so f d pr o d uction, or command r 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 ove the b iolog'icai sphere,Iinke d t o a ris t o c ra c y , o r in t h e s p h e re o f socjal reproduct'ion in g e n e ra l, ljn k e d t o me n it o c ra c y . T h e stu d ent revolution of the la t e 1 9 6 0 s c a n b e t a k e n a s a n e x a mp le . The 'b tudent revolution' is a c h a jn o f e v e n t s , wh jc h a c t u a lly s t a rt e d jn L a tj n A merica in the early 1 9 6 0 s , t h e n a p p e a re do n t h e t d e s t c o a s t of the United S tates in 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 then exploded in China d u rin g t h e Cu lt u ra l Re v o lu t io n 1 9 6 6 -6 9 , I a ter on to aopear i n lnle s t e rnE u ro p ea n d E a s t e rn Un t e d S t a t e s i

ts 1n

-

a4 al

in E astern E u ro p e (b u t n e v e r t o a p o e a r in a n y f o rm, i t seems, the S ov'iet unio n a n d ' in I s ra e l ). p ro f e s s o rs we re b u ilt in d o wn, other members the u n jv e rs it y we re t o s o mee x t e n t b u ilt u p , of po ssibly as a hoped for co n s e q u e n c e f b u ild in g p ro f e s s o rsd o wn . o On e way of do'ing this was b y c h a n g in g s p e e c h h a b it , a d d re s s in g t h e m with fewer honorifics, with le s s re s p e c t , e v e n wjt h d . is re s p e c t . I n som elanguagesthis couldb e a q u e s t io n o f c h a n g in g f ro m' , s ie , ' t o "du '! but without at the samet jme c h a n g in g f r: o m f a mi' ly la me t o f irs t n a m esince the latter migh t b rin g t h e c la s s e n e myu n c o mf o rt a b ly clo se. B ut in Japan no such at o mis t ic c h a n g e c o u ld b e d o n e . No t on ly language molecules, but t h e wh o ' le la n g u a g ewo u ld h a v e t o b e cha n ged. Horizontal langua g e , d ic a t in g a b e lo n g in g n e s st o t h e s a me in gr o u p,bordering on intimacy , wa s o u t . He n c e , t h e o n ly a lt e rn a t jv e to vert'ical up-languagewo u ld b e v e rt ic a l we stern mind it might be dif f ic u lt m ea nssince it goes so far f u lly d o wn -la n g u a g e .F o r t h e t o c o mp re h e n d a t t h js wh

an d then finally

b e y o n d a me re c h a n g e in p e rs o n a ' l

p r o n oun. There are stories o f J a p a n e s ep ro f e s s o rs h a v in g c o mmit t e d suicjde after having been e x p o s e dt o a n e x p e rie n c e o f t h a t t y p e . As a consequence one might d ra w t h e c o n c lu s ' io n t h a t t h js a p Dro a c his no t on ly too dramatic, but also n o n -re v o lu t io n a ry o r e v e n a n t i-re v o lu t io n a r y , un le ss one assumesthe d'ic t a t o rs h ip o f t h e p ro le t a ria t (" s t u d e n t ia t " ? ) as th e goal of a revolutiona ry p ro c e s s . A n a t ' io n wid eh o riz o n t a l socie ty would not at presen t f in d ' it s I in g u is t ic e x p re s s io n w. it h in Ja p a neselanguage,as jt is k n o wn , a n dt h is c o n s t it u t e s a ma jo r imp e d ' im e n t to a ny such change. whatev e r c h a n g e d o e s t a k e p la c e la n g u a g ewill com mand consciousnessin the s p e a k e r o f wh o js h ' ig h a n d wh o is lo w. An d when all djmensions of h ' ie ra rc h y h a v e b e e n e ljmin a t e d s o men e w o ne s w o u l d h a ve to take their p1ace. T h js h a d a c t u a lly h a p p e n e d n c e , a f t e r o th e fleiji revolution, placin g t h o s e wit h h ig h e r e d u c a t io n f p e 6 e lit e top a n d o t h e rs b e lo w a t v a rio u s le v e ls in a"d e greeocracy'las succes s o r o rd e r t o t h e p re c e d in g a rirt o . ru . y ! 1 8 ) a He n ce, it could very easily h a p p e na g a in , jf f o r n o o t h e r re a s o n , t h e n fo r p urely 1ingujstic reason s :v e rt . ic a l it y re p ro d u c e d b y 1in g u is t jc ne c e s s i t y . i nst'i tutions at the

In a sense the jnside-ou t s id e d is t in c t io n ver y bas'ic Japanesepeculiarit y :

a ls o p o in t s t o a

a s h a rp b o rd e rlin e b e t we e nJ a p a n an d the rest of the world, b e t we e n n ' ih o n (t h e O rig in o f t h e s u n )

a n d g a i -ko ku (o u ts'i d eco u ntr y,"abr oad") . Most im por tantis the way Theyar e ta' lked a i n w h i ch fo re 'i g n e rsre ta l ked about and addr essed. us' a b o u t, to a l a rg e e xte n t, as non- per sons, ingconstr uctionsthat co ul d al s o

b e approorjate for ta lks t anima ls a n d c o mmo d it ie s (J g )fh e f o re iq n e r Japanesea problem aris e s : wh e re d o e s s / h e f it jn t o t h e

Ja p a nesehiearchy? W hat kjn d 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 i s no answer to these impo rt a n t q u e s t io n s t h e n t wo p o s s ' ib iI it ' ie s rema'in: to use a fore ig n la n g u a g e ( o f wh ic h t h e J a p a n e s e ar e i ncreasingly capable), o r t o u s e n o la n g u a g ea t a ll, k e e p q u ie t . ttal smil e miqht b e o n e s o ' lu t io n i n t h a t k i n d o f A no n-commi still si tu a tion. Addedto thjs comesa b a s 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 ese from the point of v ie w o f t u ro p e a n la n g u a g e s : t h e ir in acce ssabjlity. 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 m se lve s would need the full d u ra t ' io n o f e le me n t a ry s c h o o l jn o rd e r to a cquire adequatemastery o f t h e ir o wn la n g u a g e , in o rd e r t o b e "a lp h abet'ized",whjchof cours e is a wro n g e x p re s s jo n s in c e t h e re a re c h a r a c t e r s ' la n g u a g e le a rn in g an d no alphabet ('bharacteriz e d " ? ). A s f o r mo s t increase wjt h jn c re a s in g a g e o f t h e s t u d e n t . th e djfficulties o follows that o n e a lmo s t h a s t o b e a me mb e r f t h o s e o me so cieties in order to beco me mb e rs f t h e la n g u a g e c o mmu n it ' ie-s n o t quite, but almost. A nd f ro m e le me n t a ry k n o wle d g e(e . g . o f t h e ( 2n\ fam o us lB 50"E haracters pres c rib e d b y t h e J a p a n e s eMin is t ry o f Edu cation aS the basic mus t f o r a n y J a p a n e s e )t h e re is a v e ry 1 o n g , G i ven this'it see mjngly endless ladder to c ljmb t o wa rd s h ig h e r le v e ls o r ma s t e ry ' ' pe r fecti on. Most Japanesea n d Ch ' in e s et h e ms e vle s wi I I n e v e r b e a b le to comevery high on t h o s e la d d e rs , t h e re b y re ' in f o rc ' in g wh a t eve r rank differentials th e re ma y b e wjt h in t h o s e s o c ' ie t ie s . This actua'l1y meansthat t h e in s ' id e -o u t s id e me t a p h o r is o n ly cor r ect up to a certain po in t . T h e re is a s t e e p d ic h o t o my b e t we e n spe a kers and non-speakerso f 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 talk e d a b o u t . B u t o n c e t h a t b o rd e rlin e h a s b e e n passed there are even c o 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 an d centre of I i ngui sti c comp e t e n c.e

lJ-

In E uropeanlanguagest h e re is h a rd ly a n y p a rt ic u la r d ' is t in c t io n b e tw eenhow insiders and ou t s id e rs a re a d d re s s e da n d t a lk e d a b o u t . l 4o r e over, the reaction to fore jg n e rs a q u irin g E u ro p e a nla n g u a g e s m ay differ from the reactio n s f o u n d in Ch in a a n d J a p a n . P a rt ic u la rly i n Japan a foreigner capable o f s p e a k in g a d e q u a t e J a p a n e s ema y b e o o r

u n e a s in . rr(. 2 1 il. r^ eve n s hould be, cons'ideredwit h a c e rt a in t a c it o ' in t o jn t e rn a l s o c ia l a rra n g e me n t s , sh e wi I I bring difficul ties i ne vjtably. Moreover, he or s h e p e n e t ra t e s ' in t o a c o rp u s m ysti c um, a society reserved f o r jn s ' id e rs . L in g u is t jc c o mp e t e n c e is no t enoughto acquire me mb e rs h ip ;v e ry c o mp le t e s o c ja l be lo n gingness includ'ing po s ' it io n ' in a J a p a n e s eo rg a n iz a t io n , pr o b ably also Japaneseeduc a t io n wo u ld b e re q u ire d . A n d e v e n if th e se membership criterial m i gh t st'ill a re f u llf r' lle d t h e ra c ia l d is t in c t ' io n s mig ht stand out, E as t a n d S o u t h e a s t A s ' ia n s t o s o mee x t e n t

exce pted. A ll of this actually o n ly u n d e rlin e s t h e mu c hmo re s o c ia l v ch a r a cter of the Japanese'la n g u a g e , e ry s imp le (f o r E u ro p e a n s )in t in g u i s t i c gr a m mar,very complex in soc ia l g ra mma r. o For the Chinese someth' in g f t h e s a mema y a p p ly a lt h o u g h t h e socia l grammar aspect of Ch in e s e is mo re c o mp a ra b let o E u ro p e a n la n g u ages. A civiljzation set t in g it s e lf a p a rt , d ra win q lin e s be tw eenthe Chinese on the o n e h a n d a n d t h e b a rb a ria n s (No rt h , t a s t , So u th and W est) on the othe r is n o t a c iv iljz a t ' io n t h a t wo u ld e a s ily ad m i t 02\ fo r e 'ignersi-dnd linguistic o b s t a c le s c a n b e u s e d t o k e e p f o re ig n e rs ou t. In a sense one might e v e n t u rn t h is a ro u n d f o r E u ro p e a n l an g uagesand say that the re l a t ' iv e e a s e w' it h wh ic h a t I e a s t s o me of th em can be aquired (suc h a s S p a n is h , t o s o mee x t e n t a ls o a Eng lish) S erV eS a meansto le t f o re ' ig n e rs in , t o b e c o me p a rt o f aS th e communitiyat 1arge. Th e re is e v e n c o n s ' id e ra b le s a t is f a c t io n wh e n a foreigner atta'ins 1in g u is t ic c o mp e t e n c e :s o mek in d o f o f t h e la n g u a g e , a n d mo re co n fj r matjon of the unjversa l v a lid it y exa m pleof this,with

so th e more exotic the fore ig n e r. F ra n c e is p e rh a p s t h e e x t re me the Fr e n c h s e e min g ' lyre g a rd in g t h e ir la n g u a g e as la langue un'iverselle. A n A f ric a n t a lk in g F re n c h p e rf e c t ly is on e more confirmation, walkin g o n t wo f e e t , o f t h a t p ro p o s it io n . Pr ecjsely the opposite may a p p ly t o Ch in e s e a n d J a p a n e s e .No t o n ly d o they not regard their lan g u a g e sa s u n iv e rs a l la n g u a g e s ; t h e y m a yn oteven want them to be u n ' iv e rs a l, b u t t o b e p a rt ic u la r, la n g u a g e s for themselves, not necess a rjly f o r o t h e rs . T h e s e la n g u a g e sa re jd e a l f o r of se ttin g the members the lan g u a g e c o n mu n it y a o a rt t o d e f e n d t h e ir id e n t i t y . The y a r e less adequate as offe n s iv e lin g u is t ic in s t ru me n t s t o c o n q u e r t h e w o r l d .

( ??\

- 24PERS ON TRA NS P E RS ONA L

Canone say that these languages take

a stand on the transperson a l, e v e n t h e t ra n s c e n d e n t a l I n a s e n s e ? yes, but perhaps only indjre c t ly s o . L o o k ' in qa t J a p a n e s e , f o r in s t a n ce , th e c oncreteness the lang u a g e , t h e re la t iv e a b s e n c eo f e s s e n t ja lis m , of m i gh t make the languag e le s s c a p a b le o f jmb u in g a n y t h ' in g w i th soul-ljke characteristic s o b e t h a t n o n -a n ima t eo r a n jma t e na tur e, and for the latter n o n -h u ma no r h u ma n .B e c a u s eo f t h is wit h o u t a n sym metry,with everything e me rg in g lin g u is t ic a lly

in n e r Wesen,one may of cours e c h o o s e e it h e r in t e rp re t a t jo n : t h a t hu m ans are without sou'1, or t h a t e v e ry t h in g e ls e js wit h s o u l; Jan p anese is so different f ro m E u ro p e a nla n g u a g e sb e c a u s eo f t h e d e o f o n e s e lf , t h a t t h is c a n n o t b e pe r sonification of personsqp a rt ic u la rly

wi th out i mp'l cati ons. i A t the sametjme the Jap a n e s ela n g u a g e h a s a s p e c ia l v a rie t y fo r talking "very much" upwa rd s . B u t t h a t la n g u a g e is n o t f o r t a lk in g with God, but for talking o r t h in k in g a b o u t , f o r in s t a n c e , t h e e x a c t ly b e c a u s et h e Em p eror. In other words, one mig h t s a y t h a t ver ti c al

l an g uage is so steeply vertic a ' 1 , a n d n o n e t h e le s s s e d o n e a rt h , t h e u pyramid remains a n o n -t ra n s c e n d e n t a l o n e . T h a t d o e s n o t m e a nthat the E mperorjs a p e rs o n , h e is p ro b a b ly a t ra n s -p e rs o n , o r w a s ; e m b o dying Japan and the Jap a n e s e . B u t h e is s t ill th a t Japaneseas such is e n t ire ly o f t h is wo rld , m e a n inqthat God has becom e o n -t ra n s c e n d e n t a l. A n d t h is me a n s n c o mp a t ' ib lewit h t wo b a s ic ch a r acterjstics of the buddh is t b e l ie f - s y s t e m: n o n -s o u l a n d n o n - God,meaningno person a l g o d . A ll E uropeanlanguages re 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 o f soul-like characterjstics . T h e re is a ' ls o a s p e c ia l la n g u a g e f o r t a lk i n g b ( so m emight say with) God: q u 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 , a lso used for k'ings, f ike t h e E n g lis h f o rms t h o u a rt , t h o u h a s t . Bu t this js certainly also a v a ila b le in J a p a n e s e ,me a n in gt h a t 'i n somefuture, when E mpero rwo rs h ip h a s c o mp le t e ly d is a p p e a re d th e n the'linguistic 21 st century will forms m ig h t b e re s u rre c t e d a n d f ille d wit h a m o n o theistic content. Thjs is n o p re d ic t ' io n t h a t J a p a n ' in t h e becomeCh ris t ia no r t ' lu s lim, o n ly a n in d ic a t io n th a 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 con cerned. lhere is enough v e rt ' ic a lit y t o s e rv e a ls o t h is p u ro o s e . B u t a s it stands today social co l le c t ' iv is m a n d n o n -t ra n s c e n d e n t a l v e rt ' ic a 1i t y v a r e e minently compatible wjt h b u d d h is mo f a ma h a y a n a a rie t y . A n d t h a t c o l le cti vism or anti-individua lis m, wo u ld s t a n d ' in t h e wa y o f O c c ' id e n ta lr e l ' i g ' i o n s . pa r ti cularly of indjvidual iz in g P ro t e s t a n t Ch ris t ja n it y . (2 3 )

- 25-

4 . C o ncu s'i n I o It'i s n o wti me fo r a n attempt to pu11all of this together and th e f i r s t ste p i s th e su mma ryresented' inTable 2, which is noth' ingother p t h a n T ab l e 1 w 'i th th e co n cl usions the analys' isin section 3 in highl y of c o n c e ntra te d , p 'i g ra mma ti c m. In contr ast with the explor ator y e for h o r i z o nta 'la p p ro a ch se d j n the pr eceding u section,1et us nowtr y to r e a d T a b l e 2 ve rti ca l l y to s ee what this tells us about the lanquaqes a s c a r r i e rs o f co smo l o g y. Both spaceand t' im ear e enl As r e ga rd 5th e E u ro p e a na n guages: d o w e d i th re l a ti ve l y ri g i d and r ather sim ple str uctur es. Ther e w i s a po i n t o f d e p a rtu rea n d a point of ar r jval, what js in- between i s I j n e a r a n d re l a ti ve l y ri gid, unam biguous. knowledge uctur e The str c o m es u t a s p re d i ca ti ve (attr jbutjve) , and at the same im eabstr act o t' a n d pre ci se . In sh o rt, th e r ight type of language for both atom jstic, the oer son- natur e d i c h o to mo ua n d d e d u cti ver easoninq. As concer ns s

dim e nsion the lang u a g e sa t le a s t p e rmit c o n c e iv in g o f na tur e and humans differe n t (a lt h o u g h n o t v e ry c le a rly s o ), a n d as i f we now makea jump-also ma k e it p o s s ib le t o c o n c e jv e o f G o d a n d hu m ans different, as the lat t e r e q u ip p e d wit h a s o u 1 ,p o s s ' ib 1 y r ela tjng to a possible God. I n s h o rt , t h e re ' is a h ie ra rc h y wit h be'in g s , t h e n n a t u re ; G o d b e in g a b s t ra c t , G od o n top, then human e sse nt'ialist f although equip p e d wit h h u ma n e a t u re s . A t t h e in t e rt h e re is a p re d jle c t io n fo r i ndividualism but then t h e re a re n e v e rt h e le s s o p e n in q s f o r v e rt ic al a s w e l pe r sonal level the language sa re f le x jb le : a s horizontal relations, and n o s h a rp d is t ' in c t io rs b e t we e nin g ro u p s a n d o utgroups. One may conclude in say in g t h a t t h e s e a re la n g u a g e st h a t a re co m p at'iblew'ith E uropeanun iv e rs a lis m, in c o rp o ra t ' in g t h e re s t o f jn soc'ial fo rma t jo n s t h a t a lt h o u g h in d iv id u a l is t a re th e world, acco mmodating both to Th is flexibility ve rt ' ic a l a n d h o riz o n t a l a rra n g e me n t s . lin e a r, c e n t ra lis t . is lost wh e n o n e lo o k s a t t h e o rg a n iz a t jo n o f

spa ce, time and knowledge:a ll o f t h e m rig id ,

As r e g ards Japanese, here'in a s e n s e we f in d e x a c t ly t h e o p p o s jt e p a t t er n ' wh e re t h e o rg a n jz a t io n o f s p a c e , Th e r e js considerable flexibilit y tim e and knowledge,asexpres s e d in lin g u ' is t ic p a t t e rn s , a re c o n c e rn e d.

- 26Tab le 2.

L a n g u a g ea s C ar nier sof Cosm ology: Summ ar y s A

i E u ro p e an

Sp a ce I 'inear rigid guo I unambi u s I inear

r inid

Ch 'n e s e i fl exi bl e i a mb g u o u s me t a -me a n ig s n f le x ib le

fl exi bl e am ibguou s metamean i ngs

f le x ib le

m eta- meaningsme t a -me a n in g s

Kn o wl edge

p re d i ca tjve a b stra ct

nr o. i cp

re la t io n a l c o n cre t e vague n a t u re a n d n u ma n s a me s

re l a t i o n aI conc te re vague n a t u re a n d n u ma n s a me s

P e r so- N a tu n re

nature an d humans f e rdif ent

Pe r s o n -P e rso n i nd'ividua l i s t

vertjcal a n d horizontaT ingroup an o outgroup symbol: I

-_--.-;persona I

c o lle c t iv is t

ver ti cal and hor i zontal ingr ouponlY

i c o lle c t iv ' is t a n t i-' in d iv id u a lis t v e rt ' is 3 l ma in 1 y h o riz o n t a l p o o rly in g ro u p o n lY

l r sym bol w6- m ens y mb o : h a ' i

P e r so n -T ra n s- soul vs. b o d y

no soul d'ichotom y God vs. hu ma n s n o G o d di chotomy

-2 7

-

Ne jther space, nor time, no r k n o wle d g eis e q u ip p e d wit h a c le a r cen tre, the latter becauset h e la n g u a g e is 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 d e d u ctive reasoninq 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 ectly formulated are tru e o r f a ls e a n d c o n t ra d ic it io n s wjll n o t a p p e ar. Then the transpers o n a l, p e rs o n a l a n d n a t u re s p a c e s a re m or e placed at the same leve 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 bet we 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 'inanimatenutrr.(. 2 4 ie rt ic a l it y , h o we v e r, is c le a r' ly e x p re s s e d i n socjal organization, and is we ll re f le c t e d jn o n e o f t h e wo rld ' s m o r e e x t r e m e l an g uages in th'is regard. An d t h a t la n g u a g e a ls o d ra ws a s h a rp l'in 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 ca ndjdate for a position a s u n iv e rs a l la n q u a q e . not on'ly

As reqards Chinese,nnyb eh is wo u ld b e t h e c a n d id a t e f o ru n jv e rs a lit y , t be ca useit

( rq\

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

hu m ankind?\'It is flex'ible b o t h we re s p a c e , t ime a n d k n o wle d g e c o n c e r n e d , is an d also in terms of rela t io n s t o n a t u re , t o o t h e r h u ma n e in g s b an d to the transpersonal. I t s t a n d s o u t a s t h e ric h e s t l an g uagefamily amongthe t h re e c o mp a re d n o t t a k in g s u c h , cl ea r stands, leaving opt io n s o p e n . I n a s e n s e it ' is t o s o cja l c o s m o ' l o o y w ha tthe Russian language is t o p h o n e t ic s . B u t t h e re is o n e ra t h e r ba sic shortcoming: the inac c e s s ib ilit y - Ch in e s e t e n d s t o re ma in a n i ngroup language for that re a s o n . Ho we v e r,wh a t a b o u t t h e v a q u e n e ss a n d a nrb'igujty? This is not n e c e s s a rily a n o b je c t ' io n . O n e miq h t a rg u e , a s a re a lit y is a mb ig u o u s n d h e n c e C hin eseoften tend to do, th a t i na d e quately mirrored in o v e r-p re c is e s t a t e me n t s .

, C on clusion: languagesare c a rrje rs o f c o s mo lo g )ta lo n g s id e t h e o rg a n iz a t io n o f s p a c e a n d t i m e , ' la n g u a g e c o mmu n jt y ; an d so on\'"languagescondit jo nt h o u g h t in t h e r e ligion,

lc c \

technology, sp o rt a n d a rt ,

th e y do not determine thoug h t . T h e y in d u c e a n d c o n d ' it io n s t ru c t u re s ; la the y do not determ'inethem. A n d c u lt u re / s t ru c t u re c o n d ' it ' io rs n q u a g e s;w e a v in g all of this together, n o t s e a mle s s iy , b u t t o a f a n rily , a s c h e me o f th ings. A nd that is what c o s mo lo g y ' is a ll about.

N O T ES A fi rst ve rs'i o no f this paper , "Language uctur e and Social Str S t r u c tu re : th e C a seo f Ja p an"waswr itten in 1972and since that tim e b o t h o f u s h a ve b e e nd i scu ssingthese top' ics in lectur es and sem inar s , p a r t i cu l a rl y a t th e In te r-Univer sity Centne,Dubr ovnjk;Univer sit' i S a i n s Ma l a ysi a(l g l g ) ; 0 st-AsiatischesSem ' inarFr e' ieUn' iver sit?it, , Be r l ' i n (1 9 8 3 ). Wea re i n d e btedto discussants all places, and par tic u l a r ly to E i n a r F l yd a l a n d Yti, Cheung- Lieh. ' in ( 1 ) T h e co smo l o gp e rsp e ctivehas beendeve' loped a pr el im' inar y 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 rsj n We ste rn Histor y, And Som e Rem ar ks the Com ing on M Histor y, Com pan' ion 5 0 0 ", i n T h e N e w C a mb ri d ge oder n Volum e, Cam br idge, C a m bri d gU n i ve rsi ty P re ss, 1979,pp. 318- 362. e ( Z ) As a n e xa mp 'lo f a n e ffor t to give a m or esym m etr ic position e t o m ate ri a l /stru ctu ra l a n d non- m ater ial/str uctur alfactor s, see Johan G a l t u n g , " S tru ctu re , C u l tu re and IntelIectual Style: An EssayCom par i ng Appr oaches", Social Sc' ienc e S a x o ni c,T e u to n i c, Ga lI j c a nd Nippon' ic in (S , I n f o r ma t'i o n A GEL o n d o n nd Bever ly Hills) 20,6,1981, pp.B17- 55. a M a "v bth e b a si c p o i n t i s the r elative absence tense in Chinese/ e of less tim e- bound J a p a ne se k'i n g e e xp re s sions ma th than in past- or esentW f u t u r e co n sci o u s d o -E u ropean. er ner ijller , in "Spr ache In M und Natur b a u f f a ssu n g e 'i d e n S i o u x" , in Unter demPflaster liegt der Str and, r H . P . D u e rr, e d ., K ra me V e r lag, Ber lino 1981points out that Bibr i ' i n C o staR i ca cl a ssi fi e s th ' ingsas r ound, and in that categor yar e m n o t o n l y fru i ts a n d o ra n g es,but also year s, say' ing uch about how o t h a t l an g u a g e n ce i ve s f that par ticular un' it of t' ime. The basic tex t i n co ity, M IT Pr es s , Cambri dge, Thought t h i s f i e l d re ma 'i n s .L . b l hor,f Language, B and Real ( 3 ) A co n d i ti o n fo r th i s, of cour se, is the high 1eve1of flex' ibility i n t h e C h i n e se a n g u a g e ." Br oadlyit m aybe sa' id that any wor d m ay l d o d u ty fo r a n y p a rt o f sp eech within the limits set by its intninsic m e a n 'i n 9 i n d , p a rti cu 'l a r1 y, that what seem fir st s' ight to be ada at j e c t i v e s a re 'i n a ve ry l a rge num ber casescapableof use as nouns of a n d v erb s, a n d a l mo st u n 'i v er sal' ly usedas adver bs. " Inter nation al bV Br adleyGr aham, I n a d i scu ssi o no f " T h a t A wful Ger m an", H e r a l d T rj b u n e9 Ja n u a ry1 980( p.1a) ' it is pointed out howlong Ger m an by to w o r d sh a vea te n d e n cy b e, and that "these wor ds, accompanied even befor e the ver b, wh' ich, to cl l o n g e r mo d 'i fyi n g a u se s, alwaysseem com e a Ge n i n m a n y rma se n te n ce s ppear sat the end, whenone finally lear ns

- 2w h a t is h a p p e n i n g . l l e ca n not r es' ist including his r efer enceto M ar k " T w a ' i n":I h e a rd 1 a te 1 yo f a wor n and sor ely tr ied Amer ican student who u s e d t o f1 y to a ce rta j n Ger man d for r elief whenhe could bear wor u p u n d e rh i s a g g ra va ti o n s longer - the on' ly soundwas sweetand no p r e c i o u sto h i s e a r a n d h e afing to h' is lacer ated spir it. This was the w o r d da mi t. It w a s o n l y th e soundthat helpedhim, not the m eaning ( i t m e a n s re l y h e re w i th ) ; And soo at 1ast, whenhe lear ned that the me e m p h a s'i sa s n o t o n th e f i rst sylab' e , his only stay and suppor twas w l g o n e , a n d h e fa d e d a w a ya n d died."

R .A.D. Forrest'in The Chine s e L a n g u a g e ,F a b e r a n d F a b e r, L o n d o n 1 9 7 3 . ( 4) S ee Nakamurao Hajime, Wa y so f T h in k in g o f E a s t e rn P e o p le s :

Ind ia - China-T'ibet-Japan,Ho n o lu lu , T h e Un iv e rs it y P re s s o f Ha wa ii,

1 9 6 4 , p . 1 8 4 . S u chp a tte rn s, however wer e also found in ancient Gr eek . , I n g e n e ra '|,th e cycf i ca l n atur e of Gr eektime per spectiveis compatibl e w i t h t h i s typ e o f w ri ti n g , as it js for Ch' inese not meaning that by c y c l i c a l a s to ta l l y e xc'l u s ' ive I inear per spectives.For a gener al of d i s c u ssi o no f th 'i s se e Jo seph Needham , eand Easter nMan,London, Tim R o y a lA n th ro p o l o g i ca lIn si titute, 1965,par t' icular ly chapter VIII, "T i m ea n d H 'i sto ryi n C h i n aand the W est", pp.45- 52. ( 5 ) C h a n g u n g -S u n g",A C hinese ilosopher ' Theor yof Knowledge" T Ph' s Y e n c hi n g u rn a l o f S o ci a l Studies, Vol. I, n0.2, Beijing, 1939,p. ? 5. Jo ( W eh a vema d e se o f a tra n slation into Nor wegian, "Kinesisk og vestu f i g t e n kn i n g " , V 'i n d u e t,0 sl oo 1971,no. 1, pp. 1B- 28,' in tur n based o n a t ra n sl a ti o n 'i n to F re n ch,pubfishedin 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 'i ve f re a l i ty, essentially as statjc, or essentially o a s d y n a m'i c. cco rd 'i n g th e for m er per spectivebod' ies,or things, A to a t r e st, o r w i th p e rma n e nt char acter istics wer e mor er ea1, the tr ans i e n t b e i n g e p h e me ra '1 ccor ding the latter per spectivebodies, or A. to t h i n g s ca n b e se e na s re a l also whennot at r est because their movement i s a c co rd i n gto ce rta i n i n var iances( suchas the gali' lean law of motio n) . A p r e d " i ca te e fi n e s a su b j ect in an"invar iant way; a r elation places d ' i n va ri a n ce t a h i q h e r level . the a J e a n - Fra n E o iB i l l e te r, 'i n "Ding, der Koch, zer legt ein Rind", s As i a t i sch e S tu d " i e n /E tu d e s iatiques 36( 2) 1982,quotes Paul Va16r y, A S' , C a h i ers, B i b l i o th -e q u d e l a Pl6iade, Callimar d, Par is, 1973- 74 e on t h e r e l a ti o n b e tw e e n o u g ht and speech:"Les 3/4 de la m6taphysique th c o n s t itu e n t u n si mp l e ch a p itr e de I' histoir e du ver be Etr e". Va16r y

- 3-

p o i n ts o u t h o wth e ve ry c'i r cumstance that a cor r ect sentence an in I n d o - E u ro p e a n n g u a g e a s a nounand ver b imposes causal or der , la h a "N o t re p h ra seo ccj d e n ta l ec r 6e de la causalit6" ( p. BB) . T h 'i s b e co mep a rti cu lar ly impor tantwhenthe ver bs ar e tr ansjs t ' i v e . T h u s, i t co u l d b e a rguedthat the ver bs "d- evelopper " "fgr mer " and i n F r e n chsh o u l d b e i n tra n sitive only, not tr ans' itive. A constr uction s u c h as " L e s p a ys ri ch e s d dveloppent 1es pays pauvr es"shouldbe as i m p o ssi b l el i n g u i st'i ca 1 1 y as it seems be in social r eality. The to ' c o n s tru cti o nu si n g re fl e xj v e for m s, however , is valid both lingu' ist"ica11y a n d e mp i ri ca l l y: " i J se d 6 v eloppc","elle se for m e". This constr uction m i g h t so u n dso me w h a trti fi c' ial in English, however . a ( 7 ) Tw oe xa mp l e s f typ i cal quar tets: "no destr uct' ion,no constr uction" , o a n d "c o n stru cti o nIj ve s'i n destr uctjon". It does not say that ther e ' i s o r sh o u l db e d e stru cti o n or constr uction: what is po' inted out i s o n l y h o w i n ti ma te l y th e two ar e r elated. I yin' i yang chih wei lqp; ,' 0nedj p o s i t ive a n d n e g a ti vee l e ments aketao. ( Chang, m ,9p:_91! p.2Z) v i d e s i n to tw o " a n d " T w ou nite jnto one" ar e quar tets along this Iine. A s f o r q u a rte ts so a l so fo r duets: "cr isis" becomes "danger /oppor tuni ty " : s "c o n t r a d i cti o n " b e co me" spear /shield"; "thing" becomes "East/W est": b s is "c o s mo s" e co me" ti me /sp ace". "Unity of oppos' ites" the gener al fo r m ul a. ( B) A g a i n , i t sh o u l d b e e mphasized that ther e is no str ict dividing l ' i n e b e tw e e n d o -E u ro p e an In languages and these 0r ienta' l languages. I n R ussi a n" l a ma b o y" 'i s "ja m al' chjk", but the ' inver sion, "m al' chik j a " m i g h t co me o se r to the second cl inter pr etation m ent' ioned the in text. ( 9 ) T h e e xa mp l es ta ke n from I. Elder s, "Les r appor ts de la langue i j e t d e 1 a p e n sd ea p o n a i se s", Revue Philosoph' ique, 156, 1966,pp. No. 3 9 1 - 40 6 .E l d e rs p o i n ts o u t that k' i stands for the wooden ater ial m j 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 kj i s i n b l o sso m,the flower s of the tr ee m aybe in blossom . As a n oth e re xa mp 'lo f th e c oncr eteness the Japanese e of language he t a k e s th e w o rd tsu mi , w h i ch stands both for "s' in" and for the infr action

- 4-

o f a r e g u l a tj o n ; j u st l i ke kimochistands for m y "inner state" both ' i n t h e se n seo f " h e a l th " , and "m ood".To m ake clear what' is meantthe J a p a ne se o u l dh a veto u se concr eteexamples, r ely on the context. w or ( t O 1 T h i s d e b a te , th e n , a bout whether"essences" can be said to have p a n i n dp e n d e ne x'i ste n ce ri or to the things, ante r em, or on' ly in the t t h i n g s th e mse l ve s,n re b u s , is mor em eaningful i within the context o f I n d o -E u ro p e a n a n th e se Or iental languages. th ( 1 1 ) E l d e rs, o p .c'i t., p .4 05, makes the point that the examples e ar c a r r y i n g th e b u rd e no f p ro of: "La d:monstr ation, sens str ict du mot, au e s t s ou ve n tp re sq u e b se n te.Uneanalysedes concepts, une division a d u t h 6 mee t d e s d e fi n i ti o n s ne sont pas n6cessa' ir es, fois elles par qu' s o n t md me mb a rra ssa n te s. sont 1es exemples i 1e plus souvent e Ce e n t r a i n e n t I'a d h 6 si o n " E l d er s is pr obablynot him self awar eof hjs ow n . c u l t u r a l l i mi ta ti o n w h e nh e r efer s to what appear sto be deductive r e a s o n i n g s d e mo n stra tj o n sens str ict du mot". a "au ( 1 2 ) B o th a to mi sm n d d e d uct' ivism both be associatedwith Descartes . can a S e e nf r o m th e o u tsi d e th e se p' i11ar sof W ester n epistemology haveas t h e i r co n se q u e n ce a t e n ti ties ar e fr agm ented' into th smaller units t h a t a re th e n stu d i e d se p a r ately, and r elinked to each other deductjv el y . T h e r e i s a p ri ma cyo f l o g i cal over other ( "or ganic", "inner m eaning" ) l i n k a g e s. A g a i n We ste rn a n guages e not the sam e th' is r egar d. l ar in A s A r th u r K o e stl e r sa i d i n an' inter view sent after h' is death ( ' in hlest T G e r m an V ,4 Ma rch1 9 8 3 ): " Youcannot say in English ' die inner e L o g i k d e r E re 'i g n i sse '- th e r e is only one 1ogic", ( 1 3 ) Ja me s . Mi ch e n e r n the best- seller Sayonar a, A i Cor gi 1979, pp. 1 6 4 - 65 ,g i ve s so me xa mp 'l es the am b' iguities the Japanese e of of language, c o n c l u d i n g" j t i sn 't cl e a r, because m only guessing I' that' s what the s t r a n ge r me a n t- Ou r l i fe i n Japanjs one of implied meanings, hidden s i g n ' i fi ca n ce s."

-c-

( 1 4 ) T h e P o l i sh w o rd ta k ( "yes") m aybe inter pr eted the same WdY h a v in ga ve ry h i g h fre q u encyin polish par lance. In Nor wegian ' man! y6g6g p e o p 'l e se th e w o rd ri kti g ( ,,cor r ect,,)the sam e u way, m eaning "go on" o n o t " I h e re b yce rti fy th a t what you havesaid is cor r ect,,. ( 1 5 ) E l d e rs, o p _ . !., p . 398. As Elder s adds: ,,pour ci la femm e de c e t h o mme e st cl a i r q u e c' est son mar i qui vientpar tir en voyage,,. il H o w e ve ro ]d e rs a d d s th a t the youngergener at.ion those whohave E and b e e nmo rei n co n ta ct w i th for eigner s ( m eaning,l,,[ester ner s,,) isent ,' ut.il ' p 1 s so u ve n tI e s p ro n o n s u per sonnel . s,, I n g e n e ra l H i n d i se e ms havemost char acter istics in comm on to with I n d o - E u ro p e al n n g u a g en gener al, as it should;butthen ther e ar e a i c h a r a cte ri sti cs th a t a re mor ein the dir ection of Chinese and Japanes e. T h u s , " H i n d i sp e a ki n gIn d i ans havea tendency use the wor dsham, to "w e " an d h a ma ra oo u rs" w her eDanes " wouldsay f and m ine. I think this i s d ue to th e ci rcu msta n ce that Indians havea tender r cy see themto s e l v e s a s a p a rts o f a b 'i ggerunit, wher ethe Daneis inclined to put h i m s e l f i n th e ce n te r.,, F r o m" N o g l eB e tra g tn i n g e r over Spr ogets Medvir ken ved Dannelsen Ver dens bi l l edet,, at D a n ma rkse re rh d j sko l e , C openhagen, L 1gBZ, Finn Thiesen,p. 1gg. by ( 1 6 ) T h e fo l l o w i n g fo u r e xpr essions all stand for "welcom home", e b u t a t fo u r d i ffe re n t l e ve ls of social r elations: o k a e rj -a so b a seo ka e rj -n a saimase; ; okaer i- nasai; okaer i. 0f cour se, honor i fi c s , p o l i t en e ss ma ya l so b e a technjqueto cr eate djstance, Distanceand ve r ti c a l i t y ma yg o to g e th e r a s i n the im po' litepoljteness of bur eaucr ats. A n i s ol a te d vj l l a g e ma yd e fenditself against "intr uder s" with excess i v e fun of people. \ p o l i t e n e ss, w h i ch ma ya l so be a way of m aking / Be r n h ard K a rl g re n , i n S o u nd gnd Umbol in Chinese,HongKongUn' iver si ty as Pr e s s, H o n gK o n g1 9 6 2 , h a s this ir r esjstible anecdote an illustr ation i i es o f w h at C h i e se p o 1 te n e ss ' im p1 ( p. 9a) : n A vi si to r ca l l e d , cl a d jn 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 reception r oom.A r at, which had beendisp o r t i ng i tse l f u p o nth e b e ams above, insinuating' its nose into a jar o f o j l w h 'i ch a s p u t th e re for safe keeping,fr ightened at the sudden w i n t r u s 'i o n o f th e ca 1 'l e r, ra n away,and' in so do' ingupset the oi1- jar , w h ' i c hfe l l d i re ctl y o n th e c aller , str iking him a sever eblow, and r u i n i ng h i s e 'l e g a n tg a rme nts with the satur at' ionof the oil. Just as t h e f a ce o f th e g u e st w a s p ur ple with r age at th' is disaster , the host r the after wh' ich e n t e r e d , w h e nth e p r" o p e salutatjons wer e per for med, g u e s t p ro ce e d e d e xp l a i n the s' ituat' ion. ' As I enter edyour honour abl e to beam,I inadver tentl y a p a r t m e n a n d se a te dmyse l f underyour honour able t

-o-

t e r r i f ie d yo u r h o n o u ra b l e at, which fled and upset your honour able r o i 1 - j ar u p o nmy me a n n d 'i nsignificant cloth' ing, which is the r eason a o f m y co n te mp ti b l e p p e a rance your honour able esence., a pr in ( 1 7 ) T h i s se e ms b e w h er esocio- linguistics enter s with par ticular to f o r c e n o t so mu che xp l o ri ng the social sign' ificanceof the djffer ences A b e t w ee n s w i th i n l a n g u a g es. bookwith the attr active title Language a i n J ap a n e se o ci e ty: C u rrent Issues in Sociofinguistics, F.C.C. S noth' ing P e n g ,e d i to r, U n i ve rsi ty o f TokyoPr ess, Tokyo, 1975conta"ins to o f d i r e ct re ve re n ce th e pr esent explor ation. Discontentis also

for m ulated by S . Takdjr A l'is ja h b a n a , ' in h is T h e F a ilu re o f Mo d e rn

L i l g u 'i sti cs'i n th e F a ceo f Linguist' ic Pr oblem s the TwentiethCentur y , of K u a l aL u mp u r, n j ve rsi ty o f M alaya1965. He points out that "while U politics - even soc' iology t h e o th e r so ci a l sci e n ce s, I jke economics, inter ested' in natjonal and jnter nat'i onal a n d a n th ro p o l o g y a re j n tens' ive1y d e v e l o p me n t, ctu ra l l i nguistjcs and phonology havem or eand m or e stru i s o l a te d th e mse l ve s m socjal and cultur al pr ob' lems- " ( p.8) and fro i "Wh a t they/the Ieaders of de v e lo p in g n a t ' io n s / n e e dis n o t d e s c rip t jv e , bu t prescr pt'ive linguistics. It is thus v e ry re g re t t a b le t h a t p re c is e ly ' in t h e s e

p r o c e sse s n d p ro b l e ms a t ar e cr ucial for the languages develop'i ng th of a which can be for m ulatedsuccinctly a c o u n trj e s, p ro ce sse s n d p r oblems and m oder n' ization, oder n inguistics, m f i n t h e te rms sta n d a rd i za ti on t h r o u g h 'i ts sta ti c, fo rma l and m icr o appr oach,is least able to contr i l' b u t e " (p . 1 5 ). In o th e r w or ds, ' lingu' istics becom esike botany. Howm e v e r , A l i sj a h b a n ad o e s n o t discuss howlanguages aycannydevelopmental mi c o d e s,w h 'i ch g h t b e a mor eim por tantaspect of the inter face betwee n ' l a n g u a g ea n d d e ve l o p me n t s pr than the linguistic engineer ing oblems A l i sj a h b a n ah a s 'i n min d . ( 1 8 ) T h e p re ce d i n g rd e r was by and' lar ge by bjr th, the sh' i- no- ko- sho o ( s a m u ra '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 ro ughdegr ees,the point being not the r ank' ing d o f t h e p e rso na cco rd i n gto subject or gr ade, but of the univer sity acc or di n g t o p re st'i g e . S e eJo h a nGa1tung, "Social Str uctur e, Education in The Caseof Japan", Essays Peac e St r u c tu re a n d L i fe -1 o n g E d ucat' ion: 1976,chapter 11. R e s e a rchV o 1 , III, E j l e rs, Copenhagen, ( 1 9 ) T h u s, " P r^o fe sso r l tungis giving lectune thene" wouldbe Ga j ra d ek6gish' iteor ar em asuif Gal tung wer e a Japanes e: w " ' "G a t un g -se n se 'iaa ch l k6 as "G a l t un gw a a so ko d e g i sh iteim asu" he is not. The total lack of s' th h o n o ri fi cs ma ke s e e xp re ssion im ilar to one that could also be used of f o r d og s. T h a t th i s cl e a r demar cation the nai- gai distinction m ioht be p a i n f ul fo r th e Ja p a n e se ife of a ga' i- jin goeswithout saying. w

-7

-

( 2 0 ) It sh o u l d b e p o i n te d out that this ' is a m' inim um, although and j t a s su re sso me mp e te n ce mayalso ser ve to r einfor ce the class it co s t r u c tu re o f a so ci e ty ru n as a "degr eeocr acy", defjning a minimum by f o r t he l o w e r ra n ks o f T h e social or den. SeeA Guideto Reading & W r i t ' in gJa p a n e seT h e 1 .8 5 0 Basic Char acter s , and 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 chanacter s d e s i g n a te d y th e Mi n i stry of Education the basic r equir em ent b as ( f o r t he si x Y e a rso f e l e mentar y school" p.7) . D e r k Bo d d e ,C h i n a 's C u l tu ral Tr ad' ition, Dr yden essHinsdale, Illinois Pr 1957h a s th e fo l l o w i n g to say about class differ ences' in Chinese( p. 1 3) : e ve n a n a ti ve C h i n e se equir es year s of study to m asterthe wr itten r (a l a n g ua g e l so co mmo n lkn own liter ar y or class' ical Chinese) .Andy et y as

il ---

s o g r ea t w a s th e p re sti g e of the ljter ar y language that until r ecently a l m o st e ve ryth 'i n g a s w rj tten in it, aside fr om fictjon and dr ama( wh i c h w f o r t h e ve ry re a so nth a t they followed the colloqu' ia1idiom, wer e look ed d o w n 'i n tra d 'i ti o n a l C h 'ina) . on ( ? 1 ) T h i s p a rti cu l a r th e meis elabor atedat some length by RoyA. Mill er i n J a pa n 'sMo d e rn Myth , T h e Language Beyond, eather hill, Newyor k &T ok y o, and W . 1 9 8 2c h .B ,p .1 5 7 A fo re i g n e r capableof some , phr asesin Japanese ver y is m u c h p re ci a te d a fo re i g n er capableof r ea11ytalking Japanese ap is n o t . Bu t th i s d o e s n o t o n 'l y apply to language but also to insight in m a t t e rs Ja p a n e sen g e n e ral. A for eigner whohas under stood little i a o f J a pa ni s co mp l i me n te d ; whenthe under standing star ts gett' ing deep pr h e i s fe a re d . We ste rn n i ver sal' ism oduces eigner s with a ver y h' igh u for j n si g h t i n th e We st; they ar e welcom ed pr aised although level of and ( positions. Japaneseand Chinese)par t i u s u a l ly a cco rd e d n l y se co ndar y o c u l a r i sm p ro d u ce s stro n g inside- outside, nai- gai divide: for eigner s a a r e t o b e ke p t a t a d 'i sta n ce.All of ch. B ' in M iller ' s bookdeals with thi s . js ( ? 2 ) 0 f co u rse , d fl y l a n g u age also the car r ier of a cer tain cultur a l c o d e a 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 other cultur al codes. But Chinese and Japan es e a r e a lso d i ffi cu l t, i n th e senseof tim e- consum ' ing, lear n for an to of a d u l t wi th n o p ri o r kn o w l edge the language. Howeveras a sem i- sec r et , l a n g u a g e e y a re ve ry a d e quate: networ kof Chinese( or Japanese) a th a b r o a d ,e g C h i n e se e l o n g i ngto the same b clan, or Japanese belonging t o t h e sa me mp a n y, i l l to some w extent be shielded off fr om peeping co T h e Ja p a nese W e s t ern ye s. e could colonize Taiwan( 1894- 1945) and / K o r e a(1 9 1 011 -1 9 4 5 )a l so 1inguistically, using Chinese char acter sas a b a s is; b u t i t i s d o u b tfu l whetherthey could havedoneso' in countr i es w j t h oth e r syste ms f w n i ti ng. o

- B-

A n i n te re sti n g stu d y a b o u t Chinese ar xist ter ms has beenm ade W olfgang m by L i p p ert, E n tste h u n g n d F u nktioneiniger Ch' ines' ischerar xjstischerTe r m j nj u m ^ F r a n z S te i n e r V e rl a g , Wi e s baden, 1979.The basic point js that m ar xist t e r m s ca mei n to C h i n e se a Japanese vi and under went consider able change o n t h e w a y: " E i n e R e i h emar xistischerTer m ini, die aus demjapanische n i n s c hi n e si sch e i b e rn o mmen den,er hielten in der Folge e.inever L wur t i n d e rl i ch esp ra ch l 'i ch e stalt" ( fr om the pr eface) . The bookmayser ve Ge a s o n e co n t'i n o u s a rn 'i n g gainst believing that Ch' inese ar xist ter m iw a m n o l o g yca n b e d i re ctl y u n d er stood the sam e way as it js in the west. ( 2 3 ) E l d e rs, o p . ci t., p .p .403 f." - - on voit combien str ucutr e du la l a n g u a g e st p ro ch ed e l a pens6e e buddhiste,od tout de v' ient un flottem ent s u b j e c ti f" . attitude in this o N a k a m u ra ,p . ci t. p .5 7 5 char acter izesthe Japanese peoplehave seldom confr onted c o n n e cti o n s fo l l o w s: " T h us, the Japanese a subiects. This fr o b j e cti ve re a l i ty a s sh a rp ly dist' inguished om know' ing way a t t i t u d e ma yb e ca l l e d th e ir comm on of th' inking. It is often sa' id of t h a t th e y a re p ra cti ca l a n d adept in techniques act' ion, but that t h e y are ra th e r w e a ki n studying the objective bas' isof their pr act' ica1 the action. It is th a c t ' i o n b e ca u se e y a re to o anxiousto accomplish p a r t i a 'l 'l y o w 'i n g th j s ch ar acter istic that they havebeenincl ined, to f o r c e n tu ri e s, to fo l l o w for eign ideas wjth an uncr itical mind". that W ester n o thought ' is someT h i s j ud g e me n t, f co u rse , pr esupposes, h o ws up e ri o r a n d d o e s n o t explain howNakamur a ever able to wr ite was Never theless is clear that a language it' h i s s up e rbb o o k -'i n Ja p a nese. l i k e En g l i sh , fo r i n sta n ce, has gr eat capacity for pr oducinq abstr acti ons , s i m p ' l yb y me a n s f q e ru n d s,adding- ing to ver bs, or addino- ty to o m a n y o u n so r a d j e ct'i ve s. n so nowher e clear ly expr essed ( 2 4 ) In th e tJe stth 'i s g a p is per haps js, w in Genes wjth manabov e om en' a s . i n th e ve ry f.i rst p a g e sof the Old Testament, can com r ade, Genosse be I t . i s j n te re sti n g to n o te that in spanish But this o, a u s e d b o th i n ma scu l i n e n d feminine: compafi' er compader a' not havea d o e sno t w o rk fo r th e b o ss: like in Fr enchle chef does ( it does in contem poe' f e m i n j n efo rm, e l i e fe d o es not in Spanish ither maybe equa1,but not abov e. d , r a r y Ge rma nh o w e ve r, i e Chef.in) .FemaleS and femininespeec h' masculine o F o r an e xp l o ra t'i o n f d i ffer ences between par r er s mascur ins, par r er s f6min' ins,P ar .i s , 1983' a s e e V . A e b i sch e r n d c. F or er,

-9 -

H o w e veo n e su b d 'i vi the ch' inese anguage r des I com m jun i t com es ty o u t co n si d e ra b l y b o veth e num ber peopletalking English ( 350 m ill i on) , a of S p a n i sh(2 0 0 mj l l i o n ), A rabic ( 120 m ' illion) , Por tugese 115 m illion) . ( F i g u re sfro m T h e E co n o mist,26Januar y1980,basedon a study m ade b y L e Mo n d e . ( 2 6 ) T h 'i s i s th e th e meo f a for thcom ing study, JohanGaltung,soc.ia l C o s qg ]o g y, n A p p ro a ch Civ_L' lization A to Theor y.

( 2 5)

Information

37 pages

Report File (DMCA)

Our content is added by our users. We aim to remove reported files within 1 working day. Please use this link to notify us:

Report this file as copyright or inappropriate

1179693

Notice: fwrite(): send of 212 bytes failed with errno=104 Connection reset by peer in /home/readbag.com/web/sphinxapi.php on line 531