Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1

Politeness without routines: a case study in Hobongan and implications for typology

100%
Perkins M.
Lodz Papers in Pragmatics
|
2016
|
vol. 12
|
issue 1
3-21
EN
In a partial report on field work conducted among the Hobongan in Indonesia during 2012–2015, I note that the language has very few idiomatic politeness routines (a couple of greetings with which to send people on their travels are notable exceptions). However, the language has many other ways to indicate politeness and impoliteness. One such strategy is lexical items to indicate curses; there are three lexical items that often combine with other terms to form idiomatic curses in the language, which suggests, in comparison to the idiomatic expressions of farewell, that impoliteness is more important than politeness, at least with regard to idiomatic expressions. Another strategy to maintain politeness is to participate in social rituals that can be observed but that do not necessarily co-occur with politeness routines. Although there are incantations, often associated with social rituals, they are too extensive to be considered politeness routines in the usual sense; impoliteness is indicated by a refusal to participate in the rituals. These rituals thus provide a fully pragmatic way to conduct politeness and impoliteness, not requiring stated terms. Perhaps the most common way to indicate politeness is through the use of many euphemisms, including ways to talk to and about people without using their given names (the use of given names is avoided in order to prevent evil spirits from being able to identify individuals); such euphemisms also include terms to avoid speaking directly about bodily functions and sexual activity that are not considered acceptable for polite Hobongan society. It has been noted that although a range of possibilities exist for politeness, including behavioral and pragmatic possibilities (Burdelski 2012; Brown and Levinson 1987), the concepts used in politeness and impoliteness analyses are often fuzzy (Eelen 2014). I suggest a typological approach to this clarification, perhaps ranking the importance of various politeness strategies in the languages of the world. For example, idiomatic politeness routines are ranked highly in English because they involve overlap between both lexical and situational information; by contrast, such idiomatic politeness routines are almost nonexistent in Hobongan, with situational politeness being more available.
2
Content available remote

Conceptualizing Measurement and Quantification in Hobongan: An Overview of the Lexicon and Uses

100%
Perkins M.
Anglica Wratislaviensia
|
2018
|
issue 56
231 - 247
EN
In this survey of the Hobongan lexical items, I identify patterns in the Hobongan understanding of measurement and quantification. In Hobongan, there are many terms for measurements, usually some form of estimation. Hobongan has a four-based counting system, and those forms are used to estimate (one is one or hardly any, and four is quite a lot) and function as articles in sentences. Hobongan has also borrowed more counting terms and has the lexical items necessary for precise quantification, but those quantifications are used primarily within certain domains, such as determining what they should be paid for gold that has been mined or what should be paid in fines after legal judgments. Estimates of measurements can reference common objects, such as segments of bamboo or the height of a standing human. Perhaps the richest aspect of the system is that of measurement, in which terms that provide ways to estimate temperatures, magnitudes, and other amounts can indicate the ways in which the Hobongan make estimates from contextual information and apply the terms in use. In Hobongan, measurements in the form of estimates are primary and obligatory. Quantification with numbers is exclusively a type of symbolic and symbolized reasoning that must be combined with the estimate terms in order to be acceptable and functional.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.