Abstract
Following Evans et al. (2018a, 2018b), I use “engagement” to refer to grammatical encoding of the relative accessibility of an entity or state of affairs to the speaker and addressee. I refer to what is thereby encoded as the “engagement function”. How neatly does that function map on to grammatical categories of particular languages? Here I address that question with respect to the Papuan language Ku Waru, focusing on spatial and epistemic demonstratives, and definiteness and indefinite marking. I show that forms within each of those word/morpheme classes do serve engagement functions, but in cross-cutting and partial ways. I show how the engagement function is also achieved through poetic parallelism, prosody, gaze direction and other aspects of bodily comportment. In the examples considered, the engagement function is realised through interaction between those extra-linguistic features and the grammatical ones. The main thing that is added by grammatical engagement marking is an explicit signalling of the intersubjective accord that has been achieved on other bases. I hypothesize that that is true of engagement overall, and conclude by suggesting some ways to test that hypothesis and to advance the understanding of engagement more generally.
References
Clark, Herbert. H., Catherine R. Marshall. 1981. Definite reference and mutual knowledge. In Joshi, Aravind K., Bonnie Lynn Webber, Ivan A. Sag (eds.), Elements of Discourse Understanding, 10-63. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Davis, Henry, Carrie Gillon, Lisa Matthewson. 2014. How to investigate linguistic diversity: Lessons from the Pacific Northwest. Language 90, 180–226.Search in Google Scholar
DuBois, John W. 2014. Towards a dialogic syntax. Cognitive Linguistics 25, 359-410.Search in Google Scholar
DuBois, John W., Rachel Gloria. 2014. From cognitive-functional linguistics to dialogic syntax. Cognitive Linguistics 25, 351-357.Search in Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 2013a. Definite articles. In Dryer, Matthew S., Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. (Available online at http://wals.info/chapter/37, accessed on 2018-12-08.)Search in Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 2013b. Indefinite articles. In Dryer, Matthew S., Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. (Available online at http://wals.info/chapter/38, accessed on 2018-12-08.)Search in Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 2014. Competing methods for uncovering linguistic diversity: The case of definite and indefinite articles (Commentary on Davis, Gillon, and Matthewson). Language 90, 232–249.10.1353/lan.2014.0070Search in Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas R. 2012. Nen assentives and the phenomenon of dialogic parallelisms. In Schalley, Andrea C. (ed.), Practical Theories and Empirical Practice: A linguistic perspective, 159-183. John Benjamins Publishing Company: Amsterdam.10.1075/hcp.40.07evaSearch in Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas R., Henrik Bergqvist, Lila San Roque. 2018a. The grammar of engagement I: framework and initial exemplification. Language and Cognition 10, 110-140. doi:10.1017/langcog.2017.21.10.1017/langcog.2017.21Search in Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas R., Henrik Bergqvist, Lila San Roque. 2018b. The grammar of engagement II: typology and diachrony. Language and Cognition 10, 141-170. doi:10.1017/langcog.2017.22.10.1017/langcog.2017.22Search in Google Scholar
Fox, James J. 2014. Explorations in Semantic Parallelism. Canberra: Australian National University Press.10.22459/ESP.07.2014Search in Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy. 1978. Definiteness and referentiality. In Greenberg, J. H., C. A. Ferguson, E. A. Moravcsik (eds.), Universals of Human Language: Syntax, 292-330. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Hanks, William F. 1990. Referential Practice: Language and Lived Space among the Maya. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar
Hanks, William F. 2005. Explorations in the deictic field. Current Anthropology 46, 191-220.Search in Google Scholar
Hawkins, John. 1978. Definiteness and Indefiniteness. London: Croon Helm.Search in Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman. 1960. Closing statement: Linguistics and poetics. In Sebeok, Thomas (ed.), Style in Language, 350-377. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics (volume 1). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Merlan, Francesca, Alan Rumsey. 1986. A marriage dispute in the Nebilyer Valley (Western Highlands Province, Papua New Guinea). In Stephen Wurm (ed.), Papers in New Guinea Linguistics (Series A, No. 74), 69-180. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar
Merlan, Francesca, Alan Rumsey. 1991. Ku Waru: Language and Segmentary Politics in the Western Nebilyer Valley. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511518218Search in Google Scholar
Rumsey, Alan. 2010. ‘Optional’ ergativity and the framing of reported speech. Lingua 120, 1652–1676.Search in Google Scholar
Rumsey, Alan. Forthcoming. Egophoricity, engagement and the centring of subjectivity. To appear in Bergqvist, Henrik, Seppo Kittilä (eds.), Evidentiality, Egophoricity, and Engagement: Descriptive and Typological Perspectives. Berlin: Language Science Press.Search in Google Scholar
Silverstein, Michael. 2004. “Cultural” concepts and the language-culture nexus. Current Anthropology 45, 621-652.Search in Google Scholar
Tedlock, Dennis. 1983. The Spoken Word and the Work of Interpretation. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.10.9783/9780812205305Search in Google Scholar
von Heusinger, Klaus. 2002. Specificity and definiteness in sentence and discourse structure. Journal of Semantics 19, 245-274.Search in Google Scholar
© 2019 Alan Rumsey, published by De Gruyter Open
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Public License.
