World Englishes: A Cognitive Sociolinguistic Approach (Applications of Cognitive Linguistics)

World Englishes: A Cognitive Sociolinguistic Approach

Hans-Georg Wolf Frank Polzenhagen

Mouton de Gruyter

World Englishes

≥

Applications of Cognitive Linguistics 8

Editors Gitte Kristiansen Michel Achard Rene´ Dirven Francisco J. Ruiz de Mendoza Iba´n˜ez

Mouton de Gruyter Berlin · New York

World Englishes A Cognitive Sociolinguistic Approach

by Hans-Georg Wolf Frank Polzenhagen

Mouton de Gruyter Berlin · New York

Mouton de Gruyter (formerly Mouton, The Hague) is a Division of Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin

앝 Printed on acid-free paper 앪

which falls within the guidelines of the ANSI to ensure permanence and durability.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Wolf, Hans-Georg, 1963 World Englishes : a cognitive sociolinguistic approach / by HansGeorg Wolf, Frank Polzenhagen. p. cm. ⫺ (Applications of cognitive linguistics ; 8) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-3-11-019633-7 (acid-free paper) 1. English language ⫺ Variation ⫺ Africa. 2. Africa ⫺ Languages ⫺ Influence on English. 3. Cognitive grammar ⫺ Africa. 4. Intercultural communication ⫺ Africa. 5. Sociolinguistics ⫺ Africa. 6. English language ⫺ Africa. I. Polzenhagen, Frank. II. Title. III. Series. PE3401.W65 2009 4271.96⫺dc22 2008046447

Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de.

ISBN 978-3-11-019633-7 ISSN 1861-4078 쑔 Copyright 2009 by Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, D-10785 Berlin All rights reserved, including those of translation into foreign languages. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Printed in Germany

Contents Acknowledgments ................................................................................... vii List of abbreviations ................................................................................. ix Preface ...................................................................................................... xi 1. Approaches to world Englishes: Paradigms, positions, and perspectives ................................................ 1 1.1. Cognitive Linguistics and the study of world Englishes ........... 1 1.2. The world Englishes paradigm .................................................. 2 1.2.1. Dominant perspectives in world Englishes research ................. 2 1.2.1.1. The English studies approach .................................................... 4 1.2.1.2. The English corpus linguistics approach ................................... 4 1.2.1.3. The sociolinguistic approach ..................................................... 5 1.2.1.4. Pidgins and creole studies ......................................................... 8 1.2.1.5. The lexicographical approach ................................................... 9 1.2.1.6. Applied linguistics approaches ................................................ 10 1.2.1.7. “Common errors” studies ........................................................ 11 1.2.1.8. The “ecology of language” approach ...................................... 12 1.2.1.9. Critical linguistic approaches .................................................. 13 1.2.1.10. The generativist approach ....................................................... 14 1.2.1.11. “Popularizers” and “futurologists” .......................................... 14 1.2.2. A critical appraisal of the world Englishes paradigm .............. 15 1.2.2.1. A critical assessment of the descriptivist approach to world Englishes ................................................... 16 1.2.2.2. A critical assessment of the critical approach to world Englishes ....................................................................... 20 1.2.2.3. A critical assessment of hybridizationism ............................... 26 1.3. The Cognitive Linguistic paradigm and the study of language variation ................................................................... 28 1.3.1. Cultural conceptualization research ........................................ 29 1.3.2. Cultural script research ............................................................ 35 1.3.3. Cultural keyword research ....................................................... 36 1.3.4. Social cognition research ......................................................... 39 1.3.5. Sociolinguistic metatheory research ........................................ 43 1.4. Scope, methodology, and the empirical basis of our study ..... 47

vi

Contents

2. The cultural model of community in African English: A comparative account ....................................................................... 57 2.1. Analytical tools: Conceptual metaphor, cultural models, conceptual networks ................................................................ 57 2.2. Aspects of the African community model ............................... 72 2.2.1. The reference point of the kinship-based community model .. 72 2.2.2. Relations of group membership: The identity dimension ....... 77 2.2.3. Relations of mutual obligations: The nurture dimension ........ 91 2.2.4. Spiritual relations: The cosmological dimension .................. 101 2.2.5. Relations of tensions: The occult dimension ......................... 120 2.3. Interim summary ................................................................... 158 2.4. The African community model and politics .......................... 159 2.5. Summary and implications of the analysis ............................ 178 3. Reflections on the study of intercultural communication ................. 3.1. Arguments for a hermeneutic approach to the study of intercultural communication .................................................. 3.1.1. Some general problems with current functionalist pragmatics ........................................................ 3.1.2. Gadamer’s hermeneutics and Cognitive Linguistics ............. 3.2. Foci of a hermeneutic approach to intercultural communication and a critique of functionalist positions ....... 3.2.1. Emphasis on meaning ............................................................ 3.2.2. The recognition of conceptualizations at group level ............ 3.2.3. Emphasis on succeeding communication .............................. 3.3. Intercultural understanding and the problem of relativism ... 3.4. Concluding remarks ..............................................................

183 183 183 184 188 188 195 201 202 207

4. Conclusion ........................................................................................ 209 Appendix 1: Dictionary sample ............................................................. 211 Appendix 2. Questionnaire .................................................................... 221 References .............................................................................................. 227 Index ...................................................................................................... 275

Acknowledgments

It should not be too immodest, in a co-authored book, to first of all thank each other for constant mutual support and inspiration. Our cooperation spans at least 7 years, in which we have produced a number of joint articles, and many of the ideas expressed therein found their way into this book. As to our appreciation of “third parties,” the person we wish to mention first and foremost is René Dirven, to whom we dedicate this book on the occasion of his 75th birthday. René is not only one of the shapers of the field of Cognitive Linguistics and a leading figure in widening its scope to applied, pragmatic, and sociolinguistic issues, but also shows an exceptional, if not unique, commitment to advance more junior colleagues, and readily grants them his persistent and ever-challenging academic guidance. He endorsed our proposal and gave shape to the book by encouraging us to base our investigation more on cognitive-linguistic than sociolinguistic grounds. We also thank Gitte Kristiansen, the series-editor in charge of our proposal, for her discerning observations and suggestions on the manuscript, and for her helpfully strict but at the same time patient handling of the editing process. We are indebted to friends, colleagues, and the anonymous reviewer of the manuscript for numerous thoughtful comments. And we are grateful to Steven Sorensen for meticulously proofreading the manuscript from a native-English perspective. Hans-Georg expresses further gratitude to The University of Hong Kong, his academic “exile” and “home.” The University of Hong Kong is an outstanding place to work and do research, not only in terms of funding and facilities, but also in terms of collegiality and intellectual excellence. Frank’s very special thanks go to his teacher Peter Lucko at HumboldtUniversity Berlin, to whom he owes much. Yet most of all, we are indebted to our loved ones. Without Maimouna’s approving of Hans-Georg’s move to Hong Kong, he would not have had the opportunity to continue work in the profession he was trained in; while without her strength and character to endure the times of separation, sustaining such a situation would not be possible. Frank is thankful to Céline and Nils-Joschka for having encouraged his half-year research leave to Hong Kong, during which the present book took shape. Their love and support are his most precious good every day.

viii

Acknowledgments

Further acknowledgments Some parts of this book use material from Polzenhagen, Frank and Hans-Georg Wolf (2007). Culture-specific conceptualisations of corruption in African English: Linguistic analyses and pragmatic applications. In: Farzad Sharifian and Gary Palmer (eds.), Applied Cultural Linguistics: Implications for Second Language Learning and Intercultural Communication, 125-168. [Converging Evidence in Communication and Language Research 7]. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. with kind permission by John Benjamins Publishing Company and Polzenhagen, Frank (2007). Cultural Conceptualisations in West African English: A Cognitive-Linguistic Approach. [Duisburger Arbeiten zur Sprachund Kulturwissenschaft / Duisburg Papers on Research in Language and Culture 69]. Frankfurt (Main) – Berlin: Peter Lang. with kind permission by Peter Lang GmbH.

List of abbreviations

AD APP BNC CEC CL CS DAE EAfrE ICE ICE-EA ICM L1 L2 NSM PDP PE RP RPWAE WAE WAfrE WE

Alliance for Democracy All People’ Party British National Corpus Corpus of English in Cameroon Cognitive Linguistics Cognitive Sociolinguistics Association for the Development of African Education East African English International Corpus of English International Corpus of English-East Africa Idealized Cognitive Model First language Second language Natural Semantic Metalanguage People’s Democratic Party Pidgin English Received Pronunciation Research Project on West African English West African English West African English World Englishes

Preface

With this book, we intend to make a substantial contribution to Cognitive Sociolinguistics (CS), an exciting new field within Cognitive Linguistics (CL), and at the same time advance and establish CS as a new paradigm within the field of world Englishes (WE). Our test case for the application of CS methods to world Englishes is the cultural model of community expressed in African varieties of English, aspects of which have been discussed from various angles in earlier works (see, e.g., Wolf 2001, 2003; Wolf and Polzenhagen 2007; Polzenhagen and Wolf 2007; Polzenhagen 2007). Here, we will not only unify our account and develop our description of this cultural model further, but we will also broadly outline a consolidated metatheoretical framework of CS and WE, and the repercussions our findings have for Cognitive Linguistics and the study of intercultural pragmatics. From the outset, CL has focused on the role people’s conceptualizations play in the shaping of socio-cultural reality and vice versa. In recent years, with the acknowledgment that the object of study is natural language, the issue of linguistic variation has come to the foreground in CL. As has been stressed by Geeraerts (2003b, 2005), taking seriously the “usage-based commitment” of CL inevitably leads to a Cognitive Sociolinguistics with an emphasis on the study of language variation. It thus seems reasonable to merge the focus on conceptualizations and on linguistic variation in a theoretically more encompassing concept of variation, in which linguistic variation is seen as an expression of conceptual variation. Cognitive Sociolinguistics, as defined by Geeraerts (2003b, 2005) and Dirven (2005), is equipped with the rich theoretical apparatus of CL and is methodologically open to various kinds of empirical approaches. Yet it is especially the incorporation of corpus linguistics into CS, coupled with “traditional” CL methods, that allows for a fine-grained analysis of variation in this wider sense. The use of corpus linguistic methods, as solid empirical tools, also distinguishes CS from Cultural Linguistics, another sub-branch of CL (see section 1.3.1). As both approaches share the interest in conceptual variation, we see their difference to be more methodological than programmatic.

xii

Preface

Given the methodological openness of CS just mentioned, the findings generated by cultural-linguistic research may well be situated within a wider cognitive-sociolinguistic framework. Although we do provide an overview of how the link between language variation and culture is addressed in Cognitive Linguistics and related fields, it is not the purpose of this book to present an integrated theory in that respect. We do, however, wish to highlight one important theoretical aspect, namely that the study of cultural variation intrinsically is an interpretative endeavor. So, if, on the one hand, the usage-based commitment of CL leads to a Cognitive Sociolinguistics, at the same time, the interpretative nature of the study of cultural conceptualizations leads to the recognition of the hermeneutical dimension of CL (see Harder 2007: 1256).1 This recognition is one reason for dealing with one particular model in hermeneutics, namely Gadamer’s approach, more extensively in the latter part of this book; another reason is that Gadamer’s ideas, in union with the methodological toolbox of CL, can overcome certain shortcoming in functionalist approaches to cultural variation. With the programmatic tenet of CL, i.e., its insistence on the interrelation of language, thought, and culture, coupled with the variationist commitment of Cognitive Sociolinguistics, it is compelling to apply the principles and methods of CL, or, specifically, Cognitive Sociolinguistics, to the study of WE. Our book argues for CS as a new model within the field of WE, because, as explained above, we deem CS as especially suited to investigate the cultural dimension of variation. WE is a testing ground par excellence for the programmatic extension of CL. In this field, variation can be studied among different varieties of one language, which still share a common lexical core. This eliminates problems of translatability and comparability which occur when variation across different languages is discussed. Furthermore, these varieties are firmly rooted in a whole range of different cultural settings and thus lend themselves to a comparative socio-culturally oriented analysis. Here, CL can contribute to a better understanding of cultural variation expressed in these varieties (cf. Dirven 2005: 39). Chapter 1 explores how the (meta)theoretical insights of CS apply to world Englishes in particular. First, we will introduce and categorize the various approaches in this field, with a special emphasis on works done on 1

We shy back from using the term “Cognitive Hermeneutics”, because our intention is not to establish yet another sub-field of Cognitive Linguistics.

Preface

xiii

English in Africa or African English.2 We will argue that these approaches suffer from theoretical and methodological restrictions, which impede a systematic and comprehensive investigation of culture. Although “culture” is a keyword in Western and academic discourse (see Bennett, Grossberg, and Morris 2005) and is, for the most part, recognized as a factor in the evolution of the various second language varieties of English (cf. the “Research Center for World Englishes” homepage), sociolinguists working on WE are having difficulties in tackling culture as a linguistic phenomenon or bypass the consequences of cultural contact altogether. In the second part of this chapter, we will survey the various strands within CL and cognate disciplines that have contributed to a wider understanding of variation. Thirdly, we will explain how these strands feed into our study and will introduce our methodological assumptions and empirical basis. Chapter 2 contains the core of this book, namely our cognitive-sociolinguistic analysis of the cultural model of community in African English. This model consists of a vast range of interrelated conceptualizations which form part of an overarching cosmology. Our analysis will concentrate on four conceptual and discursive clusters – which we will call “relations,” following anthropological terminology, see the sections 2.2.2 to 2.2.5. – of the community model, pertaining to group membership; mutual obligations within the community; spirituality, i.e., an extension of the ‘community’ into the realm of the supernatural; and tensions within the community, most readily perceived as witchcraft. As our data show, this model, in its generality, is common to and expressed in all regional varieties of African English. Thus, a side-effect of this book is a confirmation of claims regarding sub-Saharan Africa as a cultural unit (cf. p. 77). More importantly for the discussion at hand, though, our study, using a mix of methodologies, will demonstrate that cultural-conceptual variation shows in language to an extent other approaches in the WE paradigm cannot grasp. Chapter 3 will carry the insights gained from our cognitive-sociolinguistic investigation over to the field of intercultural pragmatics and to CL itself. We will argue that functionalist approaches do not suffice to capture the complexities of meaning that are played out in intercultural communication. Given the fact that a major part of world-wide intercultural 2

Terminologically, the construction “English in X” indicates a focus on the role of English in the sociolinguistic situation of individual countries or a continent, whereas the compound form places the emphasis on the variety itself (but also see Wolf 2001: 22-23).

xiv

Preface

communication is conducted in English, our application of cognitive-sociolinguistic methods to a second language variety of English is especially pertinent. At the same time, our call for strengthening semantic perspectives on intercultural communication reflects back on CL as a hermeneutic enterprise.

1.

Approaches to world Englishes: Paradigms, positions, and perspectives

1.1.

Cognitive Linguistics and the study of world Englishes 3

Over the last three decades, the field of linguistics saw a number of major and remarkable evolutions. Among the foremost developments is the emergence of two new and growing research paradigms, the Cognitive Linguistics framework and the world Englishes paradigm, which are now firmly established on the linguistic agenda world-wide. The driving forces that have led to the rise of the two frameworks are quite different. CL was proposed as a genuine theoretical paradigm, in explicit opposition to and out of disagreement with the then and still dominant framework of Generative Grammar. It is thus, most of all, an outgrowth of theoretically oriented discourse and of a paradigm shift within the discipline of linguistics itself, and unites linguists, controversies notwithstanding, who share a common theoretical perspective. The forces that led to the rise of the WE paradigm are crucially different in this respect. This research framework is essentially linguistics’ recognition of, reaction to, and reflection on drastic social and sociolinguistic developments brought about, first of all, by the dynamics of globalization. Unlike CL, it is not constituted by a common theoretical background. Rather, the common denominator of the WE paradigm is the joined interest in the linguistic effects and implications of these societal processes, and there is a high heterogeneity of theoretical perspectives. Until very recently, these two paradigms have evolved in almost complete isolation from each other. This is mainly due to the fact that the proponents of the WE movement did not have a background in CL, nor sought to draw from the insights developed in this field; in turn, the major carriers of CL had a strong theoretical orientation and a limited commitment to sociolinguistic issues. Over the last few years, however, some first attempts have been made to merge the two paradigms: CL scholars are turning to WE as a field for application of their approach, and, concurrently, linguists working on WE against a sociolinguistic background are beginning to seek theoretical support and inspiration in CL. Our book is 3

Some ideas expressed in this chapter can also be found in Wolf (2008fc).

1.

Approaches to world Englishes: Paradigms, positions, and perspectives

1.1.

Cognitive Linguistics and the study of world Englishes 3

Over the last three decades, the field of linguistics saw a number of major and remarkable evolutions. Among the foremost developments is the emergence of two new and growing research paradigms, the Cognitive Linguistics framework and the world Englishes paradigm, which are now firmly established on the linguistic agenda world-wide. The driving forces that have led to the rise of the two frameworks are quite different. CL was proposed as a genuine theoretical paradigm, in explicit opposition to and out of disagreement with the then and still dominant framework of Generative Grammar. It is thus, most of all, an outgrowth of theoretically oriented discourse and of a paradigm shift within the discipline of linguistics itself, and unites linguists, controversies notwithstanding, who share a common theoretical perspective. The forces that led to the rise of the WE paradigm are crucially different in this respect. This research framework is essentially linguistics’ recognition of, reaction to, and reflection on drastic social and sociolinguistic developments brought about, first of all, by the dynamics of globalization. Unlike CL, it is not constituted by a common theoretical background. Rather, the common denominator of the WE paradigm is the joined interest in the linguistic effects and implications of these societal processes, and there is a high heterogeneity of theoretical perspectives. Until very recently, these two paradigms have evolved in almost complete isolation from each other. This is mainly due to the fact that the proponents of the WE movement did not have a background in CL, nor sought to draw from the insights developed in this field; in turn, the major carriers of CL had a strong theoretical orientation and a limited commitment to sociolinguistic issues. Over the last few years, however, some first attempts have been made to merge the two paradigms: CL scholars are turning to WE as a field for application of their approach, and, concurrently, linguists working on WE against a sociolinguistic background are beginning to seek theoretical support and inspiration in CL. Our book is 3

Some ideas expressed in this chapter can also be found in Wolf (2008fc).

Approaches to world Englishes

2

explicitly meant to be a contribution to this evolution. It is, however, not just a call for exploring common ground between the two paradigms. To us, merging the two perspectives is more than a matter of possible inspirations that the frameworks may take from one another. Rather, we regard the synthesis of the two paradigms as a necessary and, in fact, an inevitable development. The aim of the present chapter is to give substance to this claim and to review the still small body of literature along these lines. The overall organization of this chapter is largely determined by the above observation that the CL paradigm is driven by a common theoretical vantage point and that the WE paradigm, in turn, is mainly constituted by the interest in a common subject. Accordingly, we first set out to delineate the dominant perspectives within the WE framework and then review studies that apply CL theory to WE.

1.2.

The world Englishes paradigm

1.2.1. Dominant perspectives in world Englishes research In the literature, the label world Englishes is mostly used to refer to the institutionalized second-language varieties of English spoken around the world, i.e., to what Kachru (1985) has called the “outer circle” of English, like Indian English or Nigerian English. A near-synonymous term is New Englishes (cf. Pride 1982; Platt, Weber and Ho 1984). Yet given the global spread of English, the term WE may also include the varieties of English emerging in what Kachru (1985) has called the “expanding circle” as, for example, Japanese English (cf. Stanlaw 2004). This more inclusive view is further justified by the fact that the border between the “outer” circle and the “expanding” circle is fuzzy and in motion. At the other side of the spectrum, WE may then be understood as encompassing the “inner circle” varieties as well, like, most prominently, British or American English. Here, too, the border between the “circles” is in motion. In a number of countries that would generally be regarded as belonging to the “outer circle,” significant groups of speakers have emerged or are emerging who speak English natively rather than as a second language (L2).4 Also, some varieties may be more typical examples for each circle than others, or may 4

Note, for instance, that in one of the numerous recent publications on WE, Melchers and Shaw (2003), a country like Liberia is placed with the “inner circle” of native-English countries (for a review, see Schneider 2005: 98).

Approaches to world Englishes

2

explicitly meant to be a contribution to this evolution. It is, however, not just a call for exploring common ground between the two paradigms. To us, merging the two perspectives is more than a matter of possible inspirations that the frameworks may take from one another. Rather, we regard the synthesis of the two paradigms as a necessary and, in fact, an inevitable development. The aim of the present chapter is to give substance to this claim and to review the still small body of literature along these lines. The overall organization of this chapter is largely determined by the above observation that the CL paradigm is driven by a common theoretical vantage point and that the WE paradigm, in turn, is mainly constituted by the interest in a common subject. Accordingly, we first set out to delineate the dominant perspectives within the WE framework and then review studies that apply CL theory to WE.

1.2.

The world Englishes paradigm

1.2.1. Dominant perspectives in world Englishes research In the literature, the label world Englishes is mostly used to refer to the institutionalized second-language varieties of English spoken around the world, i.e., to what Kachru (1985) has called the “outer circle” of English, like Indian English or Nigerian English. A near-synonymous term is New Englishes (cf. Pride 1982; Platt, Weber and Ho 1984). Yet given the global spread of English, the term WE may also include the varieties of English emerging in what Kachru (1985) has called the “expanding circle” as, for example, Japanese English (cf. Stanlaw 2004). This more inclusive view is further justified by the fact that the border between the “outer” circle and the “expanding” circle is fuzzy and in motion. At the other side of the spectrum, WE may then be understood as encompassing the “inner circle” varieties as well, like, most prominently, British or American English. Here, too, the border between the “circles” is in motion. In a number of countries that would generally be regarded as belonging to the “outer circle,” significant groups of speakers have emerged or are emerging who speak English natively rather than as a second language (L2).4 Also, some varieties may be more typical examples for each circle than others, or may 4

Note, for instance, that in one of the numerous recent publications on WE, Melchers and Shaw (2003), a country like Liberia is placed with the “inner circle” of native-English countries (for a review, see Schneider 2005: 98).

Approaches to world Englishes

3

be perceived as more central members of each category.5 The smallest possible common denominator of WE studies is thus their focus on the differences between and the local identities of the various regional/national varieties of English. With this focus, WE studies meet the assumption of sociolinguistics as the “linguistics of particularity” (Figueroa 1994: 5). Another current strand, the study of a “World English,” is, to some degree, opposed to this particularity perspective, in that “World English” is usually understood as some idealized norm of a uniform international and internationally intelligible English (see, e.g., Bolton 2003: 4; Seidlhofer 2003; Jenkins 2003). As noted in the introduction to this chapter, the WE paradigm is in itself highly heterogeneous. The approaches that may be subsumed under this heading on the basis of their common concern with English as an international language vary significantly with respect to their linguistic and philosophical bases, their theoretical footings, their methodologies, their scopes, and also their evaluations of the global role of English. For the purpose of our discussion, we will first provide a possible grouping of the various approaches. Beyond the heuristic value of such a classification, this will allow us to pinpoint our specific targets of criticism in our subsequent discussion. The issue of classification may be approached from a number of very different angles. One possible perspective is to group the various strands according to the traditions they represent and according to their main foci. An excellent recent survey of the field from this vantage point is given by Bolton (2003: 7-36; also see 2005). His resulting classification groups the research on WE into some 10 categories and sub-categories. As a starting point of our discussion, we present Bolton’s classification, in a slightly rearranged, modified and extended form. While Bolton’s undertaking was a characterization of the WE paradigm in general, without focusing on the literature on a particular region, we also apply this matrix to highlight past and present research in the field of our immediate concern, i.e., English in Africa. Relating works on English in Africa to these paradigms is important for understanding the way English in Africa is perceived, analyzed, and evaluated by scholars. Given the wealth of literature, we cannot be exhaustive, but will only mention works that we deem especially representative of 5

Cases in point would be, for example, Hong Kong English and Singapore English, with the former being more on the outer fringes of the outer circle, and the latter more on the inner fringes.

4

Approaches to world Englishes

the various categories and/or are relatively recent. Of course, not all of the works we cite fall squarely into one of the different categories alone, and some may be referred to more than once.

1.2.1.1. The English studies approach The “English studies” approach originated in English philology, the study of the history of English, and phonetics. It is exemplified by the work of British-born linguists such as Robert Burchfield, David Crystal, Sidney Greenbaum, Tom McArthur, Randolph Quirk, John Wells, and David J. Allerton. Following Bolton, one may also place related research done outside the Britain-based core within this camp, including the German strand of English studies, with scholars like Manfred Görlach and Edgar Schneider. African English and its regional varieties have received some attention in this approach: Spencer (1971) is a foundational collection of articles on English in West Africa, and Schmied (1991) is perhaps the most notable, if not only, book-length study with a continental scope that came out of this academic school. A book on one specific national variety of West African English under this heading is Jowitt’s (1991) study on Nigerian English. Besides, there are a number of book chapters, journal articles, and handbook entries providing general surveys that can be assigned to the “English studies” approach (e.g., Todd 1982; Hancock and Angogo 1982; Bokamba and Todd 1992; Mufwene 1992; Hansen 1993; Crystal 2003b: 361-362). Given that many of the authors mentioned here were the first ones to work on a given L2-variety of English, the studies they produced are often of an exploratory nature. The focus is mainly on linguistic usages and features in a broader varietal framework. Hence, this approach overlaps considerably with the linguistic features and linguistic situation approaches discussed below.

1.2.1.2. The English corpus linguistics approach This strand has grown from the early corpus-linguistic movement in the 1960s and is closely tied, also via some of its major representatives, to the “English studies” approach. As regards our immediate field of study, it has reached its preliminary peak with the International Corpus of English (ICE) project (see Greenbaum 1996; ICE 2002) which, with its comparative

Approaches to world Englishes

5

outlook, is the most important compilation of corpora for the study of WE so far. EAfrE is represented by a corpus of Kenyan and Tanzanian English (ICE-EA) compiled by a team led by Josef Schmied (see Hudson-Ettle and Schmied 1999, and ICE East Africa Homepage n.d. for details). First studies are available that make use of this corpus, in particular Schmied (2004), Haase (2004), and Skandera’s (2003) book on idioms in Kenyan English. WAfrE was to be represented by a corpus of Cameroon English (CEC) compiled by a team of Cameroonians (for details, see Tiomajou 1995). However, work on it stopped when the corpus was near completion, and the CEC was eventually not included in the ICE.6 Still, it is a valuable resource and it was drawn upon in a number of studies by the present authors (e.g., Wolf 2001, 2003, 2006; Polzenhagen 2007; Polzenhagen and Wolf 2007; Wolf and Polzenhagen 2007). Also within the framework of the ICE project, a Nigerian English corpus is currently prepared at the University of Augsburg by a team led by Ulrike Gut, and a South African English component (ICE 2007). In section 1.4., we will give a more detailed description of the African English corpora, together with a discussion of corpus-based analysis and the use of corpora in the study of varieties.

1.2.1.3. The sociolinguistic approach This is in itself a heterogeneous category. Its common denominator is the footing of this type of research in the more general sociolinguistic or language-in-society tradition. Extending Bolton’s (2005, 2003: 7-36) subclassification, the following strands may be identified within this broad category: a. The linguistic features approach This approach takes a micro-sociolinguistic focus on linguistic variation in and among the different varieties of English. It overlaps, to a considerable extent, with the “English studies” approach (section 1.2.1.1.), but is also rooted in the tradition of European dialectology and lexicography and variationist studies in general. Prominent proponents include Peter Trudgill, 6

However, work lead by Josef Schmied, Chemnitz Technical University, is on the way to prepare the CEC for the “ICE-light” project (Gerald Nelson, personal communication).

6

Approaches to world Englishes

Jean Hannah, and Jenny Cheshire. African varieties of English have received a good deal of attention in this approach. Since the distinctiveness of African English is most conspicuous in the realm of pronunciation, it is no surprise that phonological studies make up the major part of this category (the study of lexical features could be included in this category as well, but, in accordance with Bolton’s classification, is treated separately here in section 1.2.1.5.). The foremost scholar on the phonology of the African varieties of English is, without doubt, Simo Bobda, who has gone beyond the description of individual varieties by taking a comprehensive comparative perspective (see, e.g., Simo Bobda 1995, 2000a, 2000b, 2001, 2003; Simo Bobda, Wolf, and Peter 1999). Recently, Talla Sando Ouafeu (2006) has taken the level of specificity in the phonological investigation of a world English variety to new heights in his book on intonational meaning in Cameroon English. The description of all the variant usages of a single national variety of African English has been attempted by Kujore (1985) for Nigerian English. Country-specific surveys have recently been given in Kortmann and Schneider’s (2004) Handbook of Varieties of English. They also provide overviews of the linguistic situation in the relevant countries and hence incorporate the perspective of the approach dealt with in the following section. b. The linguistic situation approach The specific focus of this research is on the linguistic situation in the WE regions. The framework includes, inter alia, a consideration of the historical development of the linguistic situation in a given territory, of the regional, social, and functional distribution of English and other languages spoken in that territory, language policy, and on speakers’ attitudes. It is often coupled with the “linguistic features” approach. Part 3 of Gramley and Pätzold’s survey (2004) can be mentioned here (2004: ch. 14), as well as Hansen, Carls, and Lucko (1996); both works also include sections on English in Africa. Schmied (1991) is still the only work that could be cited in this sub-category which has been dedicated to the whole of the African continent, although it places more weight on English in East Africa. Major recent studies on the linguistic situation in West African countries are Igboanusi and Peter (2005) on Nigeria, and Wolf (2001) on Cameroon; an ongoing PhD-project at Tilburg University by Juffermans aims at the investigation of the linguistic situation in Gambia. Maryns’ (2000) book on English in Sierra Leone is a combination of the “linguistic situation”

Approaches to world Englishes

7

approach with the “linguistic feature” approach. English in Sudan is dealt with in an article by Peter (2003). The linguistic situation in East Africa in general, with special reference to English and Kiswahili, is investigated by Mazrui and Mazrui (1993). A very good overview of the linguistic situation in South Africa can be obtained from the collective volume on this topic edited by Mesthrie (2002). For aspects on the linguistic situation in another Southern African country, namely Botswana, the reader can be referred to Nyati-Ramhobo (2006). Language attitudes in the whole of Sub-Saharan Africa are the scope of Adegbija (1994). c. The ‘socially realistic’ study of world Englishes This approached is linked, most prominently, to the work of Braj B. Kachru. It takes a macro-sociolinguistic perspective on the implications of the spread of English in culturally diverse settings and resulting issues of linguistic and literary creativity. We are unaware of studies on English in Africa that are explicitly and fully based on Kachru’s ideas, except for Bokamba (1992) – unlike many studies on English in Asia (see Y. Kachru and Nelson 2006, for an overview). Yet scholars looking from the Kachruvian angle at outer-circle varieties of English in general regularly turn to the literary debate between the African writers Chinua Achebe and Ngugi Wa Thiong’o on the role of English as a medium for cultural expression in second language contexts (see, e.g., the debate between Bisong 1995 and Phillipson 1996), and draw on findings from studies on African English produced in different paradigms to justify their arguments (see Kachru and Nelson 2006: ch. 14). In turn, terms like contextualization and bilingual creativity, which were proposed by Kachru (see below) have found their way into studies of English in Africa not explicitly coming from the Kachruvian school (see, e.g., Wolf 2001). d. The sociology of language approach The seminal figure in this field is Joshua Fishman. Authors here concentrate on questions pertaining to multilingualism, ethnicity and identity, language loyalty, nationalism, language and religion, language and education, language development and planning. By its very nature, this approach does not focus on one language alone but looks at the interplay and dynamics of language(s) and society. In the African context, works that do consider these questions with respect to the English language or have a strong English component would most prominently include Bamgbose

8

Approaches to world Englishes

(1991, 2000), Mazrui (1975, 2004), Mazrui and Mazrui (1998), but also Baldauf and Kaplan (2004), and recent articles in Pütz, Fishman, and Aertselaer (2006).

1.2.1.4. Pidgins and creole studies The inclusion of this category in the WE paradigm hinges, of course, on the understanding that the studies in question pertain to English-related contact languages, and that these varieties can be considered as varieties of English in a wider and general sense7 or even as part of the national varieties of English on structural and sociolinguistics grounds (e.g., Nigerian Pidgin English as part of Nigerian English). Studies in this rubric mostly make use of the theoretical apparatus developed in the “English studies” approach (see section 1.2.1.1.), the “linguistic features” approach, the “linguistic situation” approach, and the “sociology of language” approach discussed above in section 1.2.1.3., but also of the apparatus of the “lexicographical” approach described below in section 1.2.1.5. Major proponents of pidgin and creole studies include John Holm, Peter Mühlhäusler, Salikoko Mufwene, Suzanne Romaine, and Loreto Todd. In the African context, English-related pidgins and creoles are primarily a West African phenomenon, and these speech forms have been documented and analyzed in a whole range of studies. Book-length contributions to the topic of English-related pidgins and creole varieties in West Africa include Fyle and Jones (1980), Jones (1983), and Njeuma (1995) on Sierra Leone Krio; Eze (1980), Barbag-Stoll (1983), Elugbe and Omamor (1991), and Faraclas (1996) on Nigerian Pidgin English; Huber (1999) on Ghanaian Pidgin English; and Mbassi-Manga (1973), de Féral (1989), and Schröder (2003) on Cameroonian Pidgin English. Only smaller studies exist on the pidginized/creolized varieties of English spoken in Gambia and Liberia: Aku, the Gambian variety of Krio, has been dealt with by Dalphinis (1986) and Peter and Wolf (2003), and aspects of the various forms of creolized and pidginized English in Liberia have been discussed by Singler (1987, 1990, 1997). A comparative survey of the varieties of Pidgin English as they are spoken in Ghana, Nigeria, and Cameroon is given by Peter and Wolf (2007). 7

The inclusion of creole- and pidgin-related articles in the recent Handbook of Varieties of English (Kortmann and Schneider 2004) is based on this assumption.

Approaches to world Englishes

9

1.2.1.5. The lexicographical approach The focus of this approach is on the compilation of variety-specific dictionaries and glossaries. As regards African English, the present state of the art is quickly described. With Dalgish (1982), there is an early quite extensive compilation of English lexical material coming from the SubSaharan region; however, his focus is on Africanisms in native varieties of English, not on African English as such. South African English is perhaps, in lexicographical terms, the best documented variety so far, with two published dictionaries (Branford and Branford 1991; Silva et al. 1996). As regards West African English, a first milestone is Igboanusi’s (2002) dictionary of Nigerian English usage, which also incorporates the earlier research on the lexicon of this variety (e.g., Adegbija 1989; Igboanusi 1998). A similar attempt at a description of Nigerian English is being made by Blench (2005), but at present, only a partial initial draft is available. Lexical peculiarities of Ghanaian English are described, more recently, by Dako (2003, also see Dako 2001) and listed online in the Ghana Unofficial Dictionary (1999). Aspects of the lexicon of Cameroonian English are dealt with, inter alia, in Simo Bobda (1994c), Mbangwana (1989), Wolf (2001), Echu (2003), and comprehensively in Kouega (2006, 2007). Furthermore, on the internet, a list of Camfranglais items is available, which also contains items relevant to Cameroonian English (Cook Summer 2005).8 With respect to lexical peculiarities of the English spoken in Gambia (Peter, Wolf and Simo Bobda 2003), Sierra Leone (Pemagbi 1989), and Liberia (Hancock 1975; Schäfer et al. 2002) the available literature is still scarce. So far the least has been published on the lexicon of East African English. No comprehensive and systematic effort has been made yet to describe the lexical peculiarities of this regional variety as a whole. One finds an analysis of the lexicon of Kenyan English in Skandera (2003), and lexical data from East African English in general in short vocabulary lists in Hancock and Angogo (1982: 316-318), Zuengler (1983: 116-118), and Schmied (1991: 80-81), yet these authors’ aim is not primarily lexicographical; furthermore, on the internet, a glossary existed on the important topic of local alcoholic drinks in East Africa (University of Durham n.d.), which is, however, no longer accessible.

8

Camfranglais is an emerging variety which incorporates elements of various native languages, French, English, and Pidgin English.

10

Approaches to world Englishes

What is generally missing is comparative research on the distribution of lexical items in the various regional and national varieties. Items have been identified that are specific or typical of a particular country, yet it is largely unexplored whether these features are also exclusive, i.e., do not occur elsewhere in the region, or even beyond. This perspective is evidently crucial to the question about whether emerging national varieties, for instance Nigerian English, can indeed be delineated on linguistic grounds, or if one may at best speak of more global regional varieties like West African English or East African English. Some first steps towards a comparative account are made in Wolf and Igboanusi (2003), for Cameroonian and Nigerian English. A larger-scale research project with this objective (henceforth also referred to as RPWAE) is in progress at Humboldt University Berlin and The University of Hong Kong, in the framework of which a comprehensive dictionary of West African English is being prepared (see section 1.4.).

1.2.1.6. Applied linguistics approaches Again, this is a category that comprises a broad spectrum of research ranging from studies on problems of bilingualism and interference to pedagogical issues of teaching English in second language contexts. In this field of research, English is more often than not considered in relation to other languages that co-exist with it in the political or institutional setting under investigation. The most prominent name associated with this area is perhaps Henry G. Widdowson. Recent works in the applied linguistics branch of WE include Gnutzmann (1999), Seidlhofer (2003), and Weideman and Smieja (2006); the contribution by Brock-Utne (2006) in the latter volume deals specifically with Tanzania. Further recent case studies and articles focussing on language policy in Africa are available in DAE (1996), Alexander (2003, 2004), and Ouane (2003). A West African perspective on English language teaching is provided in a section comprising several articles in Bamgbose, Banjo, and Thomas (1995). Furthermore, with a critical view towards the norm-setting hegemony of native varieties of English, Atechi (2006) addresses issues of intelligibility and pedagogical implications for speakers of non-native varieties in general and Cameroon English in particular.

Approaches to world Englishes

11

1.2.1.7. “Common errors” studies This area broadly pertains to English language teaching and is thus related to the applied linguistics approaches. However, its target is on varietyspecific “mistakes,” not on general questions of English language pedagogy. The quotation marks in the previous sentence are used because in the field of WE, the notion of ‘mistakes’ is something of an embarrassment or at least a problem for those who propagate the acceptance of varietal norms and peculiarities. From an inner circle perspective and for English language purists, all forms that deviate from the standard of the native varieties (or even from British English, English English, the Received Pronunciation) may count as errors. Yet from a world Englishes perspective, the problem of errors is far more complex, as it is tied to the question of (endonormative and exonormative) standards and codification, one of the key and most hotly debated issues. The question of standards is likely to be never resolved, given its complexity and ideological charge, and the debate cannot be revisited here (for an overview, see Wolf 2001: 18-22; but also the Kachru – Quirk Debate in Tickoo 1991: 153-231; and Honey 1997: 243253). In contexts where L2-speakers of English are insecure about their second language skills and in absence of an endormative standard, there is a market for publications with titles like “The most common Hong Kong English language errors and how to avoid them” (Bird 2001). Interestingly enough, it is often proponents of the WE paradigm that are involved in projects designed to identify “errors” in L2-varieties with the aim to help learners to overcome them and hence to become more “native-like” (see, e.g., the website created by Bolton and Luke, under The Department of Linguistics, The University of Hong Kong 2005; Simo Bobda 1994b).9 However, if these are “common errors” – see the title of Jowitt and Nnamonu’s book (1998) Common Errors in English – one wonders to what 9

We do not raise this point to criticize our cherished colleagues in their effort to improve the language skills of L2 learners, given the existence of “linguistic apartheid” in terms of first and second language varieties of English described by Simo Bobda (2004). Yet we would like to draw attention to possible argumentative inconsistencies, i.e., on the one hand arguing for the legitimacy of WE varieties including their peculiar features and on the other hand identifying those peculiar features as mistakes that need to be rectified. But perhaps such inconsistencies cannot be avoided as long as variety-specific codifications are missing, and we ourselves are not free from them, for example, when it comes to correcting student papers written in English by Hong Kong students.

12

Approaches to world Englishes

extent these errors could be seen as part of a norm; in Jowitt and Nnamonu’s case, African English.10 Books that deal with errors by speakers of particular West African varieties are Simo Bobda (1994b) for Cameroon English, and Kujore (1985) for Nigerian English. On the other side of the continent, Hocking (1974) has collected East-Africanisms he deems as errors. In his effort to correct them, he explicitly prescribes a native-speaker usage, with British English or American English as the only acceptable norms (see Hocking 1974: 57-60).

1.2.1.8. The “ecology of language” approach This strand is not distinguished by Bolton, and research along these lines would fall into several of his other categories. This loose interpretation of the “ecology of language” approach is justified in the case of the numerous studies in which the “ecology of language” view is adopted as a convenient heuristic metaphor for the explanation of linguistic processes, such as language change and the emergence of contact languages; in these studies, one would find, for example, the use of terms like “language environment” or “linguistic landscape” rather than “linguistic situation.” A prominent example is the work of Mufwene (e.g., 2001), but ecological metaphors are omnipresent and spreading throughout the recent literature. However, when the ecological view is understood in a stricter, ecolinguistic sense (see, e.g., Fill 1993, 1996), it represents, also according to its selfdefinition, a distinct theoretical paradigm, which justifies a separate mention of this strand. Ecolinguistics has strong roots in the sociolinguistic movement, in particular through one of its forefathers, Einar Haugen (1972), yet it clearly goes beyond traditional sociolinguistic concerns in that it views language as part of an overarching ecology which comprises not only the linguistic and socio-cultural but also the natural environment (on the intellectual roots of ecolinguistics, see Mühlhäusler 2000).11 The WE branch of the ecolinguistic approach is most prominently represented 10

11

Jowitt and Nnamonu are fully aware of this problem. Their solution is to not list certain lexical deviations as errors, but they include, for example, the addition of plural-s to uncountable nouns, a common feature in L2-varieties of English (see Jowitt and Nnamonu 1998: vii). On the distinction between a metaphoric and literal ecolinguistic understanding, see Polzenhagen and Dirven (2008fc).

Approaches to world Englishes

13

by the work of Peter Mühlhäusler (e.g., 1995, 1996a, 1996b, 2001, 2003), whose focus is on English and English-related speech forms in the Pacific region. We are unaware of any comparable in-depth studies on African varieties of English along strict ecolinguistic lines. The African context has received attention by this strand primarily for its linguistic and biological diversity (see, e.g., Nettle and Romaine 2000; Skutnabb-Kangas 2000, 2003) and in studies that focus, more narrowly, on linguistic “ecosystems.” Ecolinguistics has a strong critical commitment and thus overlaps to a considerable extent with the category described in the following section (1.2.1.9.).

1.2.1.9. Critical linguistic approaches The explicit focus of these approaches is on socio-political, socio-cultural, and general ideological implications of linguistic and sociolinguistic developments. Unlike the Kachruvian ‘socially realistic’ approach (section 1.2.1.3.), which emphasizes actual and potential gains from the evolution of WE, critical approaches hold an essentially negative view of this process in terms of the perceived detrimental effect of English on indigenous cultures and languages. Proponents of the critical view have their philosophical background in a variety of traditions ranging from romantic thinking, neoMarxism to post-modernism. The critical approach has been applied, from a historical perspective, to the colonial period (e.g., Pennycook 1998), yet the main focus is clearly on current implications of globalization. Key notions include that of ‘linguistic imperialism’ (Phillipson 1992), ‘linguistic human rights’ (e.g., Skutnabb-Kangas 2000; Skutnabb-Kangas and Phillipson 1994; and Phillipson 2000), and ‘linguistic diversity’ (e.g., Nettle 1999; Dixon 1997; Nettle and Romaine 2000). Particular emphasis is placed on mother-tongue education (see, e.g., Ouane 2003a, 2003b, 2003c; and Pattanayak 2003a). There is a large overlap with ecolinguistically oriented criticism (e.g., Maffi 2001; Mühlhäusler 1996a, 1996b). For English in the African context, these critical views are echoed in Roy-Campell (2001), but also quite prominently by the writer Ngugi Wa Thiong’o (e.g., 1986a, 2005).

14

Approaches to world Englishes

1.2.1.10. The generativist approach The generativist program is explicitly non-sociolinguistic, or, perhaps more precisely, traditionally does not consider sociolinguistics as linguistics “proper”. Thus, the combination of generativist theorizing with a WE perspective is a limited one. However, a number of issues that are hallmarks of sociolinguistic research are also of immediate interest to the generativist endeavor, albeit from a more narrowly structural and/or typological perspective. These issues include, most prominently, second-language acquisition, code-switching, and creole linguistics, and they have received a great deal of attention in generativist studies. Furthermore, over the last decade, generativist linguists have begun to turn explicitly to regional and historical varieties of English as objects of study, and, generally speaking, the variational perspective is getting more and more prominent on the generativist research agenda.12 In turn, in the vast field of studies from authors with an explicit background in WE research, one can find the application of the generativist framework. There is, for instance, a strong generativist strand in pidgins and creole studies, with Bickerton as a key figure. With respect to our immediate concern, i.e., African varieties of English, the theoretical apparatus of generativist phonology has also been prominently applied to Cameroon English phonology by Simo Bobda (1994a) and Simo Bobda and Chumbow (1999), and to Nigerian English phonology also by Simo Bobda (2007), in order to explain regular and rule-governed patterns in these varieties.

1.2.1.11. “Popularizers” and “futurologists” The “popularizers” Bolton (2003: 28-32) discusses are McCrum, Cran, and MacNeil (1986) and Crystal (2003b [1995], 1997), and in the works of these authors, one also finds references to English in Africa (see Bolton 2003: 30; and above). Graddol is the only author mentioned by Bolton for 12

This development is reflected, beyond the body of individual studies, in Radford’s (1997) widely read introduction to the minimalist approach, which uses illustrative material from various varieties of English, and also by the fact that it is not unusual anymore to find a chapter on sociolinguistics in recent introductory text books written from a generativist perspective, e.g., O’Grady, Archibald, Aronoff and Rees-Miller’s (2004: ch. 15) widely used course book.

Approaches to world Englishes

15

the futurology of English, and indeed, for a projection of sociological developments on a global scale, Graddol, with his 1997 book The Future of English? and ongoing research (see Graddol n.d.) seems to have a monopoly in this area. For future grammatical developments of the English language, an article by Kortmann (2001) may serve as an example. Graddol is concerned with global trends, and does not specifically predict the future of English in Africa, and we are not aware of any author who has dealt extensively with this issue.

1.2.2. A critical appraisal of the world Englishes paradigm From a cognitive-linguistic point of view and for our present purpose, the different strands outlined in the previous section based on Bolton (2003, 2005) can be usefully placed in three prototype categories with partially overlapping clusters at their boundaries. The first category takes a descriptive perspective on WE. The focus is on linguistic variation per se and descriptions of either specific linguistic features of varieties, the linguistic situation in English-speaking countries, or language attitudes. At the core of this category is thus work done within the “English studies” approach (see section 1.2.1.1.), the “English corpus linguistics” approach (see section 1.2.1.2.), the “linguistic features” approach and the “linguistic situation” approach (see section 1.2.1.3.), the pidgins and creole studies (see section 1.2.1.4.), and the lexicographic approach (see section 1.2.1.5.). Furthermore, work from the “applied linguistics” approaches (see section 1.2.1.6.), the “common errors” studies (see section 1.2.1.6.), and the generativist approach (see section 1.2.1.10.) is partly placed within this category, but also studies along the lines of the “ecology of language” approach (see section 1.2.1.8.). The second category takes a critical perspective on WE and comprises approaches which emphasize actual or potential negative consequences of the role and spread of English and which, in their strongest version, subscribe to the view that the use of English alienates its second language speakers from the cultures of their mother tongues (cf. below). This category would primarily include strands situated in the “ecology of language” approach (see section 1.2.1.8.), the “critical linguistic” approach (see section 1.2.1.9.) and the “sociology of language” approach (see section 1.2.1.3.), but also studies from the “applied linguistics” approaches (see section 1.2.1.6.).

16

Approaches to world Englishes

The third category is the hybridizationist perspective, comprising the “socially realistic” study of world Englishes (see section 1.2.1.3.) and, partly, “applied linguistics” approaches (see section 1.2.1.6.). Constitutive of this category is the view of WE as culturally hybrid products of bilingual and bicultural speakers. It is important to stress that these categories are meant to characterize dominant perspectives rather than to give labels to individual authors. The generalizations that necessarily come with this broad classification may not do justice to scholars who find themselves in an in-between position. Note, however, that we explicitly view these categories as overlapping, i.e., for instance, the hybridization or the critical view do not at all exclude a descriptive commitment, although they may also come along without any strong descriptive element. Likewise, taking primarily the hybridization perspective is not even incompatible with considering or sharing some of the positions that are constitutive of the critical approach. Membership in these categories is often a matter of degree; there are central cases as well as those at the periphery. Individual and periphery instances do not impinge upon the heuristic value of the above classification. Furthermore and more specifically, as stated earlier, the categories allow us to pinpoint our criticism in the subsequent discussion. We argue that the approaches situated in the three categories, their numerous merits notwithstanding, have failed to adequately account for a crucial aspect of variation, namely the culturalconceptual dimension of WE, and that this failure is due to theoretical and methodological shortcomings inherent in these approaches. In our opinion, these shortcomings have led to a dead end in this respect and cannot be overcome unless a cognitive-linguistic perspective is taken.

1.2.2.1. A critical assessment of the descriptivist approach to world Englishes Descriptive studies of WE clearly dominate the field13 and they have given shape to the paradigm itself. Indeed, one can hardly keep pace with the constantly growing and meanwhile impressive body of descriptively oriented works that have been published on WE. 13

Brown’s (2001) survey of papers presented at past WE conferences and consultation of experts has shown this clear dominance of the descriptive approach.

Approaches to world Englishes

17

The first focus of descriptive work is on the various standard levels of linguistic analysis, in particular the phonetic/phonological, the grammatical, and the lexical features of WE. Here, the core of the studies has its theoretical and methodological footing in the structuralist tradition. Their perspective is thus to identify varieties as distinct linguistic systems in the structuralist sense, often with a comparative component. These studies attest to the broad range of varieties of English, and this approach deserves full recognition for bringing to light, legitimizing, and meticulously documenting the numerous varieties of English that exist. From a CL perspective, the core of the descriptive approach advocates, however, a far too narrow understanding of “form” and of what counts as “linguistic peculiarities.” This narrow understanding deliberately excludes important dimensions of variation, inter alia, “linguistic peculiarities” like cultural keywords (see section 1.3.3.), differences in prototypicality and entrenchment, and differences in frequency, traceable, e.g., in corpus analyses. Unaddressed are also crucial aspects of relations between linguistic units, beyond standard structuralist formal and semantic parameters. Specifically, little or no attention is paid to the fact that linguistic material from various domains is systematically linked through metaphoric and metonymic mappings, which constitutes a key dimension of relatedness.14 The methods developed in CL allow for a systematic investigation of these phenomena. Closely tied to the narrow understanding of formal variation is another crucial shortcoming of the descriptive approach. Extra-linguistic (e.g., socio-cognitive) data receives little or no attention in linguistic studies along this line. In this type of research, the cultural component of WE is at best seen as optional, in addition to or in service of formal descriptions, but it is certainly not granted legitimacy by itself. Cultural cognition is put out of the scope of linguistic analysis. A quote by Quirk (1981: 152), who, referring to Indian English, pointed out that “the natural processes of language-culture interaction have produced a large number of phonological, grammatical, lexical and stylistic features,” attests to this narrow focus 14

A view expressed by Huber, author of a book on Ghanaian Pidgin English (Huber 1999) exemplifies the descriptivist stance: In his review of Wolf (2001), he disagrees with Wolf on the viability of a cognitive-linguistic approach to WE. He forms his opinion on the basis of the alleged absence of “linguistic peculiarities,” i.e., formal differences, in the description of the worldview of Cameroonians expressed in their variety of English (Huber 2004: 209-210). This criticism attests to the narrow understanding of form and formal variation in the core descriptivist view.

18

Approaches to world Englishes

of linguistic interest. Quirk’s observation is most certainly true, but there is a substantial amount more to language-culture interaction in varieties of English than the production of novel linguistic features and variety-specific lexicons (also see Wolf 2001: 2, 2004: 135, 2008). In its neglect of sociocultural cognition, the descriptivist approach is heir to a strict Saussurean divide of language and culture, with language being seen as the only true object of linguistic analysis. In the Saussurean conception, language is regarded as a self-contained system of forms and meanings “où tout se tient,”15 which has severed language from the conceptual world of its speakers and the culture that offers them the models and frames to live, think and act in (see Dirven, Wolf, and Polzenhagen 2007). While the structuralist approach has evolved in many respects since its early Saussurean days, it still seems to be largely oblivious to the “cultural turn” in linguistics (see Auer 2000). In the specific case of descriptive work on WE, the neglect of cultural cognition is certainly striking. In a recently published resource book on World Englishes for students (Jenkins 2003), for instance, the keyword “culture” and its derivations cannot be found in the index at all. It is also absent from the index to the volumes 1-20 (198099) of the journal English World-Wide: A Journal of Varieties of English, certainly one of the main journals in the field and the prime outlet of descriptive work on WE. In the journal’s issues from 2000, 21(1) to 2004, 25(1), “cultural” appears only in the title of two paper, in Cheng and Warren (2001) and in Peeters (2004). With Malcolm and Rochecouste’s (2000) study on event and story schemas in Australian Aboriginal English, there is, however, one article with an explicit cultural-linguistic background (see section 1.3.1.). It is not our intention to question the right, desire, and need of a paradigm, a journal or an author to keep a tight and clear profile, nor do we, to repeat, imply any disrespect for the merits of the descriptive approach.16 15

16

On the origin of the phrase, see, e.g., LINGUIST List 14.1954. Note that the methodological and terminological apparatus used by descriptive studies is designed to capture language from this restricted angle, i.e., as a “linguistic system.” It does not provide the appropriate tools needed to address the conceptual level. The first author of the present book has taken the descriptive approach in several articles himself, and our current work on a dictionary of West African English (RPWAE) is a “prototypically” descriptivist endeavor (see section 1.4. for a description of this project). It is, however, also precisely in this work that we strongly feel confronted with the limits of descriptivism.

Approaches to world Englishes

19

Rather, we are concerned with delineating perspectives and with identifying dimensions that are neglected by a particular approach, and it is merely a statement of facts that the cultural dimension of language is outside the scope of the core of the descriptivist approach. Descriptivists provide at best a “thin” description (to pick up a Geertzian term) of linguistic items in their embeddedness in a socio-cultural context.17 CL explicitly seeks for a “thick” description. It explicitly rejects the view of language as a selfcontained system (cf., e.g., Langacker 2002: 1): For a cognitive linguist, meaning is “encyclopedic,” i.e., no principled dividing line is drawn between “linguistic semantics” and “world knowledge” (cf. Taylor 1993: 8), and “meaning” is equated with “conceptualization” (cf., e.g., Langacker 2002: 1). Culture, then, is not an external category in linguistic investigations; rather, it is an integral dimension of it. In particular, it is a central tenet of CS, as we understand it, that the conceptual content an item has for a particular socio-cultural group needs to be taken into account in studies on language variation. It is important to notice that this stance constitutes a veritable shift in perspective vis-à-vis descriptivist accounts.18 17

18

The narrow emphasis on “form” is also prominent in discussions of “international English” and in studies on the “intelligibility” of L2-speakers of English. The focus here is on syntactic divergence and phonological differences (see, e.g., Seidlhofer 2003; Atechi 2006). The category ‘culture’ hardly ever receives much attention in these discussions; or, worse, some even treat Western-based concepts as a kind of neutral base for an international English (see Johnson 1990). The discussion of an international English overlaps with studies of English as lingua franca interactions (see House 2003), and CL can make a valuable contribution to a meaning-oriented approach to intercultural communication as well (see chapter 3). Consider, as in illustration, the study of variety-specific lexical peculiarities of English items in the New Englishes. Many standard descriptivist accounts in the structuralist tradition, with their focus on “linguistic systems,” analyze these items, roughly speaking, in terms of “mother-tongue interference” and/or “semantic shifts/extensions” of common-core English items vis-à-vis (Western) Standard English. CL would seek to identify the conceptualizations underlying these items: Rather than speaking narrowly of “mother-tongue interference,” these items would be regarded as formally different manifestations of a common conceptual structure in the speaker’s mother tongue, on the one hand, and in the L2 variety of English, on the other hand. Respectively, rather than speaking of “semantic shifts/extensions,” the CL account would make clear that there are diverging conceptualizations underlying the use of an item in (Western) Standard English and the New English variety.

20

Approaches to world Englishes

The second focus of the descriptivist approach is not on the linguistic system as such, but is based on a broader, and thus less restricted understanding of “description,” namely that of the sociolinguistic situation in WE countries, and, from a more speaker-centered vantage point, of language attitudes and issues of linguistic identity. This research cluster has yielded comprehensive accounts of the sociolinguistic settings in which WE are embedded (see, e.g., Hansen, Carls, and Lucko’s 1996 introductory survey, and also the relevant studies cited from the “linguistic situation” approach in section 1.2.1.3.). One specific input the CL perspective can make to this field of study is the cognitive approach to social identity (see section 1.3.4.).

1.2.2.2. A critical assessment of the critical approach to world Englishes Critical studies generally take a holistic approach, in that they explicitly view languages as being inextricably linked to their socio-cultural, political, linguistic, and, sometimes also natural environment. One of their major objectives is ideological criticism. Ideologies targeted include (neo)-imperialism, (neo)-colonialism, elitism, and unecological thinking. At a more general level, the critical approach targets the processes of globalization, where the above ideologies are found to crystallize. In our discussion, we will not be concerned with these ideologies in themselves,19 rather we will focus on the more narrowly linguistic arguments put forward in critical studies. The strong misgivings critical authors have about globalization translate, in this approach, into a highly negative view of the role of WE. Three sets of assumptions made within the critical approach about WE stand out here. Their common denominator are the emphasis on indigenous languages and the view of English as a threat. The first set of assumptions derives from the key focus of the critical approach on linguistic diversity, and from its strong concern about what has 19

A discussion of these ideologies is far beyond the scope of the present book. Suffice it to say that we do share some of the general ideological criticism expressed by authors situated in the critical approach. There is no denying the fact that these ideologies exist and that their effects are as harmful as their basis is questionable. It is, however, at odds with the realities to reduce globalization to these ideologies. We also differ sharply from many critical authors as regards their assumptions about the role of language, and WE in particular.

Approaches to world Englishes

21

been termed, in biological metaphors, ‘language death’ and ‘language attrition’ among the lesser-spoken languages. Here, the global spread of English is perceived and presented as a major threat to world-wide linguistic diversity. The assumption goes that English replaces local languages at a massive scale, either completely or in specific domains, which affects, to put it in the logic of the biological metaphor,20 the “vitality” of local languages. This is essentially a sociolinguistic argument, since it makes claims about shifts in the sociolinguistic situation in the regions in question. Several points need to be made here. Factually, English is far less a replacement language than the threat rhetoric suggests. As Mufwene (2002), for instance, observes, the threat-scenario may apply to settings where English is spoken as a vernacular, i.e., especially in former “settlement colonies.” In former “exploitation colonies,” however, where the use of English was restricted to a small set of domains and a relatively small number of speakers, the situation appears to be markedly different. In such settings, the shift to dominant prestigious local languages as national languages rather than a shift to English constitutes a potential “threat” to small indigenous languages (cf. Mufwene 2002: 13). For the specific African context, this is clearly the more realistic picture, since exploitationstyle colonialism was the general pattern pursued during British rule on this continent.21 Examples of such dominant local languages include Haussa and Wolof in West Africa (on Wolofization in Senegal / Gambia see Peter and Wolf 2003), Swahili in East Africa (see, e.g., Mufwene 2002: 16; Batibo 2006: 271-275), Lingala and Munukutuba for Congo-Brazzaville (Khabirov 2004), and Arabic. The threat rhetoric is dubious in yet another respect: It takes a markedly negative and disrespectful stance towards linguistic choices made by speakers and speech communities. Generally, given the strong emphasis on diversity in the critical approach, it is altogether surprising that the emergence of the numerous local varieties of English is rarely acknowledged by proponents of this approach as a genuine 20

21

There is a strong trend in current critical approaches to adopt a biological/ ecological model of language inspired by ecolinguistics. Against the background of this model, the threat-view metaphorizes English as an alien species which invades and destroys local linguistic, cultural and biological ecosystems; see Polzenhagen and Dirven (2008fc) for a detailed discussion. The former British colonies in today’s Republic of South Africa are an exception, since there was considerable settlement-style colonialization. Likewise, Hong Kong does not readily fit the scheme, as it was neither a settlement colony nor an exploitation colony.

22

Approaches to world Englishes

and crucial dimension of diversification. They thus rather pass over the findings of those descriptivists who have worked out the innumerable novel linguistic features of the New Englishes. Also, the negative stance towards the spread of English obscures the fact that these second-language varieties are an enrichment of the linguistic potential of individual speakers as well as at the level of speech communities, which is again an aspect of diversification. Thus the claim made that English is a “killer language,” propagated, e.g., in Skutnabb-Kangas (2000), is often at odds with the sociolinguistic realities of the regions in question. The fact that this claim is currently popular and sweepingly made among linguists calls for metatheoretical criticism. The “scientific” models underlying analyses of sociolinguistic settings and developments, and the ideologies inherent in these models, need to be scrutinized. Here, CL lends itself for application, since it offers analytic tools for a critical assessment of ideologies and scientific models (see section 1.3.5.). The second set of assumptions is derived from the emphasis of the critical approach on socio-cultural identity. With respect to culture, authors in this camp are exponents of what Polzenhagen and Dirven (2008fc), leaning on Geeraerts (2003a), have termed the ‘romantic model’:22 Here, languages are seen primarily as the medium to express cultural identity and as a reservoir of cultural knowledge. Against this background, the indigenous languages are regarded as the authentic bearers of autochthonous culture. The same romantic stance, however, is not taken towards the second-language varieties of English. Rather, “English” seems to be treated as a monolithic entity which inextricably embodies a Western worldview and, with its spread, transports this worldview globally.23 The processes of 22

23

For fuller summaries and a critique of the critical perspective, also beyond the aspect of culture, see, e.g., Mair (2002, 2003); Lucko (2003); Wolf and Igboanusi (2006); Polzenhagen and Dirven (2008fc). To further illustrate the logic of this paradigm, one may loosely apply Reddy’s (1993 [1979]) metaphoric models of language, well-known within the field of CL: The critical view of English would roughly correspond to the conduit metaphor, in that English is seen as the container through which Western ideas are transported to other cultures, and changes of meaning are not admitted. The hybridizationist approach – and the position we espouse – would rest on the toolmaker’s paradigm, in which different (cultural) environments lead to changes in meaning and may result in difficulties in understanding (see chapter 3). Given that the third paradigm, descriptivism, is basically mute on the issue of culture, it cannot really be characterized in terms of Reddy’s models.

Approaches to world Englishes

23

globalization are seen as a homogenization of the world’s culture(s) in Western terms,24 as reflected in such notions like ‘MacDonaldization,’ ‘MacWorld,’ or ‘Englishisation’ (see, e.g., Phillipson and Skutnabb-Kangas 1999). The latter term makes the supposed agency of English in this process explicit. With Schmied (1991: 104), one may call this type of argument and the camp of its proponents “alienationist”: Essentially, the claim is made that the English language is the conceptual Trojan horse of Western culture and world-view, and that the adoption of English alienates its new speakers from their own original culture embodied by their mother tongue. This view thus rests on deterministic assumptions about the relation between culture, thought, and language.25 The camp metaphor used above is certainly justified, given the current heated debate on the role of English world-wide. It is all the more justified as the “alienationists” are in sharp opposition to other ‘camps’ in WE research. They are at odds with those descriptivists who document the various linguistic manifestations of the “indigenization” processes the New Englishes have undergone and undergo in their respective settings, manifestations which to a considerable extent go back to the cultural background of the speakers (albeit this background is not sufficiently accounted for in the work of the descriptivists). Alienationists are also fully at odds with hybridizationists (see below), whose very research program is to analyze WE as the product of socio-cultural fusion 24

25

The inappropriateness of this reductionism, which unduly cuts down globalization process to homogenization, is also noticed by authors situated in the critical approach themselves. Pennycook (2003a: 15), for example, explicitly rejects the simplistic homogenization view and takes a positive stance towards WE. Based on his postmodernist notion of ‘wordliness,’ he regards the new forms of English as transformed and reinvented by the local people to their advantage, thus recognizing the processes of diversification linked to globalization. This, however, does not place him among the hybridizationists, since he explicitly takes distance from this approach and cautions against what he finds an apolitical relativism of the WE linguistic hybridity advocates, in that they ignore “the broader political context of the spread of English” (Pennycook 2003b: 516). His critical commitment crystallizes in the very notion of ‘wordly English,’ too: These new forms of English are, at the same time, a means of resistance and a counter-force to globalization, as a defense of the “local.” See Holborow (1999: 80-86) for a longer critique of Pennycook; also see Wolf and Igboanusi (2006: 335-338, 348). Again, there are critical authors, most prominently Pennycook, who notice and challenge this “determinism of some critical approaches” (Pennycook 2001: 71).

24

Approaches to world Englishes

in English.26 Finally, it needs to be stressed that the cognitive-linguistic approach pursued in our book is in sharp opposition to alienationist claims, too. Although our theoretical framework has affinities to the romantic model, and converges with this tradition, to a significant degree, on the fundamental issue of relativism,27 we reject any deterministic link between culture, language, and thought. Our very endeavor in this book is diametrically opposed to alienationist claims, since we argue that cultural conceptualizations find clear expression in L2 varieties of English. When adopting and using a language other than their mother tongue, the speakers neither lose nor give up their culture-specific conceptual system. To claim that they do is, from a CL perspective, nonsensical. While the two sets of critical assumptions discussed so far treat the English language as detrimental to the linguistic landscape of the settings in question (as a “killer language” that threatens linguistic diversity), and as detrimental to the cultural landscape (as an “alienator” and “homogenizer” that threatens local culture(s)), respectively, the third set of assumptions made within the critical approach is rather peculiar to its ecolinguistically oriented branch and views English as detrimental to the natural environment of the regions it spread(s), too (also see Polzenhagen and Dirven 2008fc for a more detailed critical discussion). The most prominent proponent of this view is certainly Mühlhäusler (e.g., 1996a, 1996b, 2001, 2003). True to the spirit of ecolinguistics and true to a dynamic view of language, his concern is the question of “how languages adapt to changing environmental conditions” (Mühlhäusler 2001: 137), and local varieties of English in the Pacific region are among his main objects of investigation. His assessment of the role and the adaptation process of these varieties is, however, largely negative. According to him, “the fact that an increasing number of welladapted small local languages are being replaced by English is in all likelihood one of the reasons for global environmental deterioration” (Mühlhäusler 2003: 78). Specifically, he argues that the English language 26

27

However, both groups converge in their “liberationist commitment.” This commitment could be defined as “forms of linguistic beliefs and practices [... being] rooted in contexts of social injustice [... seeking] to transform these contexts radically in the interest of the speakers of the ‘other tongue’” (Bhatt 2001: 528). Here, the alienationsts concentrate on the endangered minority languages as “other tongues” – vis-à-vis English, while the hybridizationists focus on the liberation of the speakers of the non-standard forms of English. On the relativist component of our approach, see the outline of our theoretical framework in section 2.1. and the discussion in chapter 3.

Approaches to world Englishes

25

did not provide the lexical resources required to deal with the environment in these settings, and failed to sufficiently develop such resources. The resulting “mismatch” between language and natural environment is claimed to be responsible for man-made ecological disasters, e.g., the extinction of indigenous species (cf. Mühlhäusler 1996b).28 The full implications of his argument become apparent when he states that it takes about 300 years for a language to develop the necessary lexical resources to deal adequately with the environment (Mühlhäusler 1996b: 128). This amounts to saying that most, if not all, L2 varieties among the WE would disqualify as “ecologically adapted” (whatever the notion of an ‘ecologically adapted/ sound/correct language’ is supposed to mean), since the use of English on a broader scale by the indigenous population and the concurrent development of distinct varieties does often not date back more than 40 to 50 years.29 28

29

Mühlhäusler’s (1996b: 107) examples are instances of what he calls “metaphorical naming” of local species in the settlers’ English, e.g., of marsupials as bush rat or native rat, which, as he states, “having got that name were regarded very much like a rat in Britain: at best useless, at worst dangerous pests that needed to be eradicated” (our emphasis). Such statements have a marked deterministic flavor, as even more explicitly expressed by Wollock (2001: 255) when he argues, leaning on Mühlhäusler, that “language plays a key role in ‘misreading the environment’. An inappropriate linguistic construct of nature will lead to inappropriate actions, like deforestation” (our emphasis added). Attributing ecological disasters to language this way critically confounds the causalities. It is most certainly the case that specific ideologies bring forth specific expressions at the linguistic surface level (e.g., expressions that are generated by conceptualizations that are characteristic of a particular ideology) and a specific discourse. Linguistic analyses may thus be used in the critique of ideologies (see Dirven, Polzenhagen, and Wolf 2007 for an overview of CL work done in this field). However, human agents, not artifacts like language, are the true cause of ecological disasters, and “unsound thinking” is not brought forth by nor can it be attributed to a particular language. Speaking, using, or even adopting a specific language may not be equated with adopting a particular deplorable ideology. Furthermore, blaming and attacking languages in place of the targeted ideologies is at odds with the very endeavor of critical linguistics, since it conceals rather than enlightens the true causalities. For most of Sub-Saharan Africa, one could argue that distinct and recognizable national varieties fully emerged only with the end of colonialism, in that English was now institutionalized by the indigenous rulers (and not by the colonial ones any longer), alongside its increasing use in “new” media like radio, television as well as in newspapers and creative literature.

26

Approaches to world Englishes

1.2.2.3. A critical assessment of hybridizationism The third category within WE is “hybridizationism”; its key figure and founding father is Braj B. Kachru (see, e.g., 1983, 1985, 1986, 1994).30 Unlike in descriptivism, where “culture” receives little attention (cf. section 1.2.2.1.), the notion ‘culture’ is of central concern to hybridizationists; and unlike the alienationists, hybridizationists emphasize the structural and socio-cultural transformations English has undergone in the diverse colonial and post-colonial contexts. Both concerns are reflected in terms like nativization, Africanization, indigenization, and acculturation used in reference to the processes shaping the varieties of English.31 As theses terms suggest, the attitude of hybridizationists towards the New Englishes is, though not uncritical, basically positive. This positive attitude is also reflected in the key theoretical notions developed in hybridization-oriented research, e.g., the notion of the ‘creative bilingual speaker,’ who “created new, cultural-sensitive and socially appropriate meanings [...] by altering and manipulating the structure and functions of English in its new ecology” (Bhatt 2001: 534). Hybridizationism has close ties to the broader post-colonial cultural studies enterprise (see Dissanayake 1997), and to the study of post-colonial literature in particular (see, e.g., Ashcroft, Griffith, and Tiffin 1989, 1995 on this relatively new branch of literary studies). For hybridizationists, one of the foremost expressions and indicators of the acculturation of the English language, for instance, is the literary creativity by post-colonial writers in English (see, e.g., Lim 2002; Bhatt 2001: 537-538). Hybridizationists discuss and draw from the work by post-colonial literary theorists (see, e.g., Y. Kachru and Nelson 2006); in turn, the work by authors like Kachru is cited by post-colonial literary theorists (e.g., Ashcroft 2001: 56). While post-colonial literary theory is, in many respects, congenial to hybridizationist thinking, the actual limited recourse the former may take 30

31

Close to the hybridizationist approach, there is another specific take on WE that needs to be mentioned. Applying comparative-historical methodology to varieties of English and based on the close scrutiny of historical texts, Skybina (2004) interprets the modification of English into the different national varieties (based on the example of Australian English) as a reaction to the exigencies of the new physical surroundings. Some authors even speak of diverse “English languages [which] represent diverse linguistic, cultural and ideological voices” (Bhatt 2001: 527; our emphasis).

Approaches to world Englishes

27

to the latter points to a crucial problem of the hybridizationist approach. A quote from Ashcroft, whose notion of ‘transformation’ establishes a link between linguistic form and literary function, may serve as an illustration: The strategies by which a colonial language is transformed are extremely varied. Apart from direct glossing in the text, either by explanation or parenthetic insertions, such devices include syntactic fusion, in which the English prose is structured according to the syntactic principles of a first language; neologisms, new lexical forms in English which are informed by the semantic and morphological exigencies of a mother tongue; the direct inclusion of untranslated lexical items in the text; ethnorhythmic prose which constructs an English discourse according to the rhythm and texture of a first language; and the transcription of dialect and language variants of many different kinds, whether they come from diglossic, polydialectical or monolingual speaking communities. (Ashcroft 2001: 78; drawing from Ashcroft, Griffiths, and Tiffen 1989)

This quote reflects an understanding of linguistic variation similar to that of the descriptivists, with its emphasis on form and mother-tongue interference,32 i.e., when it comes to actual text analyses, literary scholars like Ashcroft seem to find no genuine suitable tools in the hybridizationist literature and tend to turn to the devices of the descriptivist framework. Indeed, as Bhatt (2001: 528) observes, methodologies that are sensitive to multilingual and multicultural realities” have been lacking within the hybridizationist enterprise. No wonder, then that the hybridizationist literature has been called “anecdotal” (Pennycook 2003b: 518, citing Das Gupta 1993) or referred to as a kind of “narrative linguistics” (Görlach 1999: 18). In many respects, hybridizationism is, among the three paradigms reviewed here, the one that is theoretically, though not methodologically, closest to a cognitive-sociolinguistic approach to WE. Kachru’s observation that second language varieties of English are “used in entirely different semiotic and cultural systems” (Kachru 1983a: 9; also see Malcolm and Rochecouste 2001: 261-262) is fully congenial to our own endeavor. Furthermore, the cultural-cognitive linguistic perspective is already implied in 32

And though Ashcroft (2001: 78) regards these forms are cultural reproductions by a process of “metaphorical embodiment,” and considers such uses of language as “metonymic” in that these culture-specific forms stand for the culture they serve to represent, ‘metaphor’ and ‘metonymy’ refer only to (symbolic) literary functions but not to some conceptual structure of the second language speakers.

28

Approaches to world Englishes

Kachru’s thought, and, in some passages, he even makes explicit that the cultural dimension of language has to be sought out at the cognitive level, e.g., when he speaks of “the underlying thought-patterns of bilinguals” being responsible for nativization (Kachru 1986: 160). The fact that the hybridizationist approach did not produce systematic empirical studies on the ways culture is expressed and manifest in the varieties of English suggests, one may argue, that the available descriptive tools of variationist sociolinguistics were not quite suited for that type of research. As we hope to show, CL provides a rich analytical apparatus that allows to systematically capture and account for the cultural dimension of language and language varieties.

1.3.

The Cognitive Linguistic paradigm and the study of language variation

As stated earlier, we see the turning of Cognitive Linguistics towards sociolinguistics as an inevitable evolution. In fact, it is a necessary and logical development, given the key tenets of CL. CL defines itself as a “usagebased” approach. On the one hand, this commitment delineates CL from paradigms where language use and language user are backgrounded or even fully out of scope, most notably Generative Grammar. On the other hand, it constitutes common ground between CL and linguistic approaches that share the emphasis on issues of language use, in particular functional linguistics and, which is our immediate concern, sociolinguistics in its various pronunciations. “Usage-based implies variational” as Geeraerts rightly stated in a programmatic talk (Geeraerts 2003b, also see Geeraerts 2005), and this places sociolinguistic issues right in the center of CL interests. A further key tenet of CL is the view of language as reflecting and being shaped by cultural experience at large. The study of culture has in fact always been part of the CL enterprise, and has been made programmatic in “Cultural Linguistics,” a recent explicitly socio-cultural strand within CL. The first comprehensive theoretical foundation of Cultural Linguistics was given by Palmer (1996; also see 2006: 13-20 on Palmer’s theoretical delineation of Cultural Linguistics within CL). Cultural linguistics rests on the very assumption that culture-based conceptualizations underlying language or language varieties are systematic and can be studied by means of the methods and theoretical tools developed in CL (see Palmer 1996,

28

Approaches to world Englishes

Kachru’s thought, and, in some passages, he even makes explicit that the cultural dimension of language has to be sought out at the cognitive level, e.g., when he speaks of “the underlying thought-patterns of bilinguals” being responsible for nativization (Kachru 1986: 160). The fact that the hybridizationist approach did not produce systematic empirical studies on the ways culture is expressed and manifest in the varieties of English suggests, one may argue, that the available descriptive tools of variationist sociolinguistics were not quite suited for that type of research. As we hope to show, CL provides a rich analytical apparatus that allows to systematically capture and account for the cultural dimension of language and language varieties.

1.3.

The Cognitive Linguistic paradigm and the study of language variation

As stated earlier, we see the turning of Cognitive Linguistics towards sociolinguistics as an inevitable evolution. In fact, it is a necessary and logical development, given the key tenets of CL. CL defines itself as a “usagebased” approach. On the one hand, this commitment delineates CL from paradigms where language use and language user are backgrounded or even fully out of scope, most notably Generative Grammar. On the other hand, it constitutes common ground between CL and linguistic approaches that share the emphasis on issues of language use, in particular functional linguistics and, which is our immediate concern, sociolinguistics in its various pronunciations. “Usage-based implies variational” as Geeraerts rightly stated in a programmatic talk (Geeraerts 2003b, also see Geeraerts 2005), and this places sociolinguistic issues right in the center of CL interests. A further key tenet of CL is the view of language as reflecting and being shaped by cultural experience at large. The study of culture has in fact always been part of the CL enterprise, and has been made programmatic in “Cultural Linguistics,” a recent explicitly socio-cultural strand within CL. The first comprehensive theoretical foundation of Cultural Linguistics was given by Palmer (1996; also see 2006: 13-20 on Palmer’s theoretical delineation of Cultural Linguistics within CL). Cultural linguistics rests on the very assumption that culture-based conceptualizations underlying language or language varieties are systematic and can be studied by means of the methods and theoretical tools developed in CL (see Palmer 1996,

Approaches to world Englishes

29

2006; Dirven, Wolf, and Polzenhagen 2007; Polzenhagen 2007; and Wolf and Polzenhagen 2007). In addition to its roots in the more narrow CL theory, Cultural Linguistics meets with cognitive anthropology (most notably via Quinn and Holland’s 1987 notion of ‘cultural model’) and places itself in the tradition of anthropological linguistics (cf. Palmer 1996: ch. 2).33 These latter roots, and the association with Dell Hyme’s “ethnography of speaking” approach in particular, constitute further significant common ground with the global sociolinguistic movement. Congenial to and partly intertwined with Cultural Linguistics, there are a number of further current and emerging strands in CL-based research on the cultural dimension of language and on language variation. In the following subsections, we will give a brief overview of these strands. Our survey is partly organized in terms of particular theoretical notions developed in CL itself or in congenial neighboring social sciences that were extended and applied to the study of sociolinguistic issues, and partly in terms of fields of application. In our survey we concentrate on the work done on varieties of English, and thus do not consider the meanwhile large body of literature written along these lines with a cross-linguistic focus. Also, we do not detail the theoretical issues and notions, as they are subject to a separate discussion in section 2.1., where we will outline the framework of our study.

1.3.1. Cultural conceptualization research Key notions of this type of research are ‘conceptual metaphor,’ ‘category,’ ‘cultural schema,’ and ‘cultural model.’ While ‘conceptual metaphor’ is a genuinely CL notion, the other theoretical concepts also draw from various congenial developments in neighboring social sciences. Specifically, research on cultural categorization has an explicit footing in work done in ethnosemantics, cognitive anthropology, and cognitive psychology in the 1970s. Relevant classics from the latter branch come from Eleonor Rosch, especially her work on prototypes and on basic-level categories. Relevant studies from ethnosemantics include Brent Berlin’s and Paul Kay’s classic work on basic-color terms and on folk taxonomy, respectively, and the rich body of literature on kinship terms. Finally, notions like ‘cultural schema’ 33

For comprehensive surveys on Anthropological Linguistics, see, e.g., Duranti (1997) and Foley (1997). Also see Keesing (1992, 1994). For a review from the perspective of CL, see Palmer (2007).

30

Approaches to world Englishes

and ‘cultural model’ are inspired by cognitive anthropology and psychology, in particular by the work represented by Holland and Quinn (1987), D’Andrade (1987), and by D’Andrade and Strauss (1992). These three branches, i.e., ethnosemantics, cognitive anthropology, and cognitive psychology, have been incorporated and elaborated in CL from the early days on (for reviews see, e.g., Lakoff 1987: passim and Palmer 1996: 18-22, 7696). Studies making use of the corresponding theoretical notions abound within CL; however, the New Englishes, so far, are only beginning to be explored from this perspective. The body of literature with this specific scope is still small, and only a few varieties have been looked at along these line. We may start our brief review with the work done on Australian Aboriginal English, represented by Sharifian’s (e.g., 2003, 2006) analyses of the category FAMILY. Since Sharifian derives his understanding of ‘category’ directly from Rosch (e.g., 1973a, 1973b, 1975, 1978, 1999), and since his emphasis is on kinship terms, which links up to the tradition of studies on kinship systems, his analysis may serve as a good illustration of the footing this type of research has in cognitive psychology and linguistically oriented anthropology mentioned at the beginning of the present section. Looking at the use of kinship terms in Aboriginal English, Sharifian finds clear evidence that this use is governed by the make-up of category FAMILY characteristic of Aboriginal culture:34 Basic kin categories such as ‘‘mother’’ and ‘‘father’’ may be used in Aboriginal English in a way which is consistent with the cultural categories of the speakers. The word ‘‘mum’’ may for example be used to refer to people who would be categorised as ‘‘aunt’’ in Anglo cultures. Here, the basis for categorisation is not biological as such, but rather based on cultural and social factors such as responsibilities and obligations as well as generational level. (Sharifian 2006: 15)

Further relevant examples include items like cousinbrother or cousinsister used to refer to “a cousin who is regarded as close as one’s brother or sister”; on the item cousin Sharifian (2006: 16) notes that it 34

Malcolm and Rochecouste (2000: 264) make the same point when they observe that, as recent research has shown, “even where Aboriginal English seems to employ the same vocabulary as Australian English, it is informed by a semantics deeply rooted in Aboriginal culture.” The meanings of specific everyday terms “are associated with different prototypes” and “there are contrasting schemas which lead to differing interpretations and uses of such terms.”

Approaches to world Englishes

31

may also be employed in Aboriginal English to refer to a much wider range of people than it is in Australian English. It appears that this cultural category is based more on the generation level rather than the actual kinship. That is, Aboriginal people might call all the relatives of their own generation “cousin.”

The analysis in terms of the Roschian concept of ‘category’ is embedded by Sharifian in a comprehensive theoretical framework of cultural conceptualizations. The use of lexical items (e.g., kinship terms) is associated with and evokes specific ‘cultural schemas’ (here, e.g., of solidarity, protection, and mutual obligations). This notion is, in turn, a loan from cognitive anthropology. Drawing from connectionism, cognitive anthropologists have defined schemas as “networks of strongly connected cognitive elements that represent the generic concept stored in memory” (Strauss and Quinn 1997: 6, leaning on Rumelhart, Smolensky, McClelland, and Hinton 1986). Picking up on various sources in cognitive anthropology, psychology, and CL, Sharifian (2003: 194-198) distinguishes several types of ‘cultural schemas,’ e.g., event schemas, role schemas, image schemas, proposition schemas, and emotion schemas. These ‘cultural schemas’ and ‘cultural categories,’ collectively referred to by Sharifian as ‘cultural conceptualizations,’ “embody group-level cognitive systems such as worldview” (Sharifian 2003: 190). Sharifian speaks of a general “Aboriginal conceptual system” which “strongly revolves around cultural conceptualizations of Family,” underpinning “Aboriginal behaviours, thinking, and speaking” (Sharifian 2004: 14). “Family,” in Aboriginal thought, is a wide network of relations, which goes far beyond the Western nuclear family, and is related to concomitant notions such as “home.” Parallel to this work on the family schema in Australian Aboriginal English, Hui (2003, 2004) presents findings on differences with respect to this schema between speakers of “Anglo Australian English” (her term) and Chinese Australian English. She observes that the evocation of the FAMILY schema in communications between speakers of these two varieties can lead to misunderstandings or even the breakdown of interaction due to these differences at the conceptual level. Also in the Australian context, and prior to the research surveyed above, Malcolm and Rochecouste (2000) have analyzed “event and story schemas” in Australian Aboriginal English discourse. They pick up on the notion of ‘schema’ as “a mental representation of regularity of our experiences” and as being part of the “conceptual system that emerges from everyday experience,” and use it in an explicitly discourse-oriented approach.

32

Approaches to world Englishes

According to Malcom and Rochecouste, these schemas organize perceptions and provide “bases for interpreting discourse” (Malcolm and Rochecouste 2000: 265, citing from Bregman 1990; Sweetser 1990; and Strauss 1992).35 The empirical basis used by Malcolm and Rochecouste (2000) is a corpus of forty oral narratives obtained from recording 5- to 13year-old speakers of Australian Aboriginal English. In this corpus, the authors identify and analyze four culture-specific ‘schemas’ that structure the texts: TRAVEL, HUNTING, OBSERVING, and ENCOUNTERING THE UNKNOWN. The following slightly modified excerpt from Malcolm and Rochecouste’s (2000: 278-279) analysis may serve as an illustration of this approach. Passages that are instantiations of the hunting and the traveling schema, respectively, are marked in bold face; italics indicate the discourse markers associated with the schema; the glosses in square brackets identify the relevant schema or the discourse marker. 1. My name is Dean Samuel. 2. And … couple o months back… [Time orientation] 3. Um … me an’ my dad…my brother… and my uncle…Normie … [Participant. orientation] 4. we went up to dis creek… (slight interruption) 5. went up to de creek [Travel]. [Moving segment marker “went up” Profiling marker “dis/de”] … 6. and we was lookin for some bimba … [Hunting] 7. but we never found any … 8. so we went an looks for some kangaroos … [Hunting] 9. and … went up the creek [Travel] [Moving segment marker] 10. and we saw… a goanna … and we shot it … 11. And it tried to go 12. an it ran … 13. an it tried to go in the ’ole … 14. but my brother grabbed it … 15. and … then … he ’old it there … 16. he moved some rocks away from the ’ole … 17. and pulled it out of the ’ole. 18. An’ when they chucked i’ out 19. they ’it it in the ’ead with the rock … 20. an it died… 21. an we … and we took it … [Hunting] 22. an put it in the car 23. and we went up the road … 24. we was gonna go the other way … 25. one way … 26. but … we turned around …27. an went back down dis road …28. and when we went to go through de creek … [Travel] [Moving segment marker] 29. we pulled up… [Stopping] [Stopping segment marker]. 35

A terminological note is at place here: “Cultural schema” understood this way corresponds closely to the notion of “cultural model,” which is more commonly used in CL. Strauss and Quinn (1997: 139-140, also see 49), for example, define “cultural models as complex cultural schemas.” For a further clarification of the terms ‘cultural model’ and ‘schema,’ see Polzenhagen and Wolf (2007). Malcolm and Rochecouste also refer to the work by Palmer (1996), Schank and Abelson (1977), and Wierzbicka (1992) and relate ‘schema’ to such concepts like ‘scenarios,’ ‘scripts,’ and ‘cultural scripts.’

Approaches to world Englishes

33

Malcolm and Rochecouste (2000: 285) relate these schemas to ancestral survival strategies of a hunting-gathering people, “such as observation, orientation to time and space, avoidance of isolation from the group, persistence in hunting down game and caution with respect to the unknown.” They argue that “English-speaking Aboriginal children are pervasively influenced” by these schemas and seem to “view their own experience in terms of prototypic behaviours which have been maintained for many centuries.” This yields the specific discourse features exemplified by the excerpt cited above.36 Our own research on African English presented here in chapter 2 and in a series of earlier and parallel publications (see, e.g., Wolf 1999, 2001; Wolf and Simo Bobda 2001; Wolf and Polzenhagen 2007; Polzenhagen and Wolf 2007; Polzenhagen 2007) is congenial to the work done on L2 varieties of Australian English. It represents the second larger-scale application of the cultural-conceptualization approach to L2 varieties of English.37 With Bolton and Wolf (2005), Wolf and Polzenhagen (2006), and Wolf (2008fc) some initial findings are also available on Hong Kong English. Again, it is the family domain where noticeable difference to Western varieties of English can readily be traced. The key role of the family in Chinese culture is a well-known fact; in Confucian thought, for instance, three of the five central relations (father – son, brothers – sisters, husband – wife, master – servant, friend – friend, see World Religions n.d.), pertain to the family. As Hui (2004: 17-18) observes, “Chinese people foreground families in conceptualisations or knowledge configurations to the extent that Chinese families serve as an analogy for wider human relationships in 36

37

Malcolm and Rochecouste (2000: 284-285) point to the implications such findings have for an informed educational strategy: The focus on lexical and syntactic variation alone is too narrow in its scope to capture the full range of language-related cultural factors that impede Aboriginal students’ performance. Apart from Medubi’s (2003) paper on conceptual metaphors in Nigerian Cartoons, we are unaware of any other related approach to African English. There is, however, a cognitive-linguistic research project formerly led by Hans-Jörg Schmid at the English Department of the University Bayreuth, which, as one of its components, set out to apply prototype theory comparatively to several African languages and varieties, and also to Nigerian English [for the outline of this project, see www.uni-bayreuth.de/sfbs/sfb-fk560/e-teilprojekt-b6.html]. However, other than a paper presented at the 8th International Cognitive Linguistics Conference (Schmid and Kopatsch 2003), we could not find any material produced by this group on African English.

34

Approaches to world Englishes

the culture.” A comprehensive analysis of relevant metaphors in the Chinese language is given by Liu (2002: ch. 6). The following examples from Hong Kong English gathered by one of the present authors confirm the point made by Hui and Liu. The first two express the conceptualization THE NATION IS A FAMILY: … cannot be tolerated by the sons and daughters of the Chinese nation (Chinese official on Taiwanese demonstrations for the right to hold a referendum. Radio and Television Hong Kong, Oct. 27, 2003, 8:00 news). We receiving gifts from our poor cousins [in Mainland China] (Lee, Martin C.M. 2003: 12. “What can I do for Hong Kong?” Distinguished Alumni Lectures. The University of Hong Kong)

The following examples are instantiations of SOCIAL UNITS ARE FAMILIES: What unites us is a shared vision to be the most admired airline in the world as well as a strong sense of “family” belonging. (Homepage of Cathay Pacific Airways) The legendary Jockey Club ‘Team Spirit’ makes our group of employees more like a family than a workforce. But we’re no ordinary family. (Homepage of the Hong Kong Jockey Club) To build a family of students, staff, parents, alumni, members of the Court, Council and HKU Foundation, benefactors and friends of the University, by facilitating interaction, dialogue, trust and cooperation among all members of the family. (Homepage of The University of Hong Kong) Most corporations adopted a parental approach, a father-child arrangement. That means the boss would take good care of their employees and did not want them to speak up. (South China Morning Post, Oct. 2003: 8) We are a family. (A worker to a co-worker, Troublesome Night 3, Meih Ah Laser Disc Co. Ltd. 1998)

Here, one can observe strong parallels to the findings on African culture presented in chapter 2. A different cognitive-linguistic angle at Hong Kong English is taken by Grundy and Jiang (2001). Using Blending Theory and Cognitive Grammar, they analyze a salient ideological cultural model in specific Hong Kong English constructions belonging to a grammatical category they label the “bare past.”38 38

See Dirven, Polzenhagen, and Wolf (2007) for a synopsis and further explanation of the ideological model in question.

Approaches to world Englishes

35

To the best of our knowledge, further L2 varieties, however, have not yet been analyzed from the specific perspective of cultural conceptualizations. As regards native varieties of English, many of the numerous CL studies on English could of course be mentioned under the present heading, since they either contain a more or less explicit cultural component or may at least be interpreted from a cognitive-sociolinguistic perspectives. It would go far beyond our scope to review this body of literature, and it should suffice to mention, as examples, the studies by Kövecses (e.g., 1995b, 2003) and Csábi (2001) for American English, which have an explicit focus on cultural models.

1.3.2. Cultural script research The cultural-script approach is linked, first and foremost, to the work by Anna Wierzbicka and Cliff Goddard. It could have been placed with the research outlined in the previous section; however, we deem it justified to give the cultural-script approach a separate treatment, on two grounds. First of all, this approach has an outspoken commitment to and focus on what is referred to as “semantic primes and universals,” a commitment that is not necessarily shared by authors situated within the cultural-conceptualization paradigm reviewed in the previous section. Secondly, the cultural-script approach has developed, based on its notion of ‘semantic primes,’ a genuine and distinct meta-language (Natural Semantic Metalanguage, NSM), which again is not commonly used outside this approach. A full theoretical explication of ‘semantic primes and universals’ and the notion of ‘cultural scripts’ advocated by this approach is given in Goddard and Wierzbicka (1994) and Wierzbicka (1996), a brief overview can be found, e.g., in Dirven and Verspoor (2004: 131-134), and the relationship between CL “proper” and the NSM framework is discussed in Goddard (2006). The scope of cultural-script research is generally cross-linguistic. Studies along these lines that deal with the African cultural setting include Ameka’s (2002) and Ameka and Breedveld’s (2004) work on the West African language Ewe. However, there are also findings produced by this approach that are immediately relevant to the study of L2 varieties, e.g., the work by Wong (2004) on Singapore English and by Harkins (1990, 2000) on Australian Aboriginal English. Using NSM, Harkins (1990: 302) gives the following descriptions of prominent Aboriginal concepts, namely that of ‘being ashamed’ and ‘shame’:

36

Approaches to world Englishes X is ashamed X feels like someone who thinks: people can know something bad about me people can think something bad about me because of this I don’t want people to know this about me I don’t want people to see me because of this X feels something bad because of this X (is) SHAME X feels like someone who thinks: I am here: this is bad I don’t know what things are good to do here Something bad could happen because of this People can think (and say?) something bad about me because of this I want not to be here because of this I want not to say anything because of this X feels something bad because of this

As Sharifian (2003: 197) notes, this script is associated with particular situations (e.g., meeting people for the first time, having done something good or bad, being faced with persons of respect even when they are close relatives). The explication cited above reflects that emotions are “rooted or associated with certain conceptualisations which may prove to be culturally specific” (Sharifian 2003: 197). Harkins (1990, 2000) calls her application of NSM “practical semantics,” as such analyses could be put to use in educational settings and other cross-cultural contexts.

1.3.3. Cultural keyword research Anna Wierzbicka is also prominently linked to the notion of ‘cultural keyword,’ and the title of her 1997 book Understanding Cultures Through Their Key Words is programmatic. According to her, keywords “can be studied as focal points around which entire cultural domains are organized” (Wierzbicka 1997: 16). Through an exploration of these focal points one may “show the general organizing principles which lend structure and coherence to a cultural domain as a whole, and which often have an explanatory power extending across a number of domains” (Wierzbicka 1997: 16-17). The validity of this assumption has been aptly demonstrated, not only by Wierzbicka herself and her followers (see below). A notable study of cultural keywords outside of the immediate NSM camp is the one by

Approaches to world Englishes

37

Cortazzi and Shen (2001), who investigated six important keywords in “Confucian heritage cultures” (Cortazzi and Shen 2001: 125) from a contrastive language awareness perspective. Cortazzi and Shen’s focus was on the difficulties learners of a language may have in understanding the central meanings of key cultural lexical items and perceiving interconnections. The six Chinese cultural keywords they included in their study were ren (humanity), li (politeness), xiao (filial piety), de (virtue), he (harmony), junzi (a decent person or saint). Questioning participants about “definitional elements” in translations, they found significant differences between native speakers of Chinese, English-speaking learners of Chinese, and English speakers without knowledge of Chinese not only in terms of understanding these lexical items individually, but also in terms of being aware of interrelated and overlapping meanings, constituting part of a belief system more or less alien to cultural “outsiders.” Cortazzi and Shen selected their keywords on the basis of a survey of literary sources, and they took their definitional elements from “English language introductions to Chinese philosophy and literature,” “classical translations of Chinese literature into English,” ”cross-cultural studies defining items in English,” “Chinese literacy primers for children,” “standard Chinese dictionary definitions,” and “individual native-speaker insights” (Cortazzi and Shen 2001: 132). The study by Cortazzi and Shen shows that, methodologically, a problem for cultural keyword research is to decide on what counts as such a keyword. Wierzbicka (1997: 16) states that “there is no ‘objective discovery procedure’ for identifying” a cultural keyword. As further indicators of the link between culture and vocabulary, besides cultural keywords, she mentions “cultural elaboration,” i.e., an expansion of vocabulary for certain areas of experience,39 and word frequencies (Wierzbicka 1997: 1015; also see Rigotto and Rocci 2005: 127). Yet “cultural elaboration,” word frequencies, and cultural keywords are not independent lexical indicators of this link, as Wierzbicka’s account suggests. As the data presented in chapter 2 make clear, and as the studies by Wolf (2003, 2006), Wolf and Polzenhagen (2007), and Bolton and Wolf (2005) reveal, related lexical items or items belonging to a specific domain often cluster in collocational patterns, and many of the items forming these clusters are cultural keywords themselves; in turn, cultural keywords can straightforwardly and 39

From a critical linguistic perspective, this point is also made by Fowler (1991: 82), who states that “clusters of related terms are found to mark out distinct kinds of preoccupation and topic.”

38

Approaches to world Englishes

objectively be defined on the basis of frequency. In fact, frequency in a target corpus in comparison to frequency in a reference corpus is one of the statistical variables in determining “keyness” in the keyword function of WordSmith.40 Relying on corpus programs like WordSmith to objectively determine keywords by statistical methods does not preclude a thorough semantic analysis of the keywords in question to corroborate their cultural importance (cf. Rigotto and Rocci: 2005: 127), as the following chapter hopes to demonstrate. Wierzbicka (1997) was not the first to introduce the idea of ‘cultural keywords,’ and she acknowledges Evans-Prichard, Parkin, Moeran, and Williams in her explanation of the principle. To this list, one needs to add Firth (1957 [1935]: 10), who refers to the “contextual distribution of sociologically important words, what one might call focal or pivotal words.” For his time and society, he mentions “the study of such words as work, labour, trade, employ, occupy, play, leisure, time, hours, means, self-respect in all their derivatives and compounds,” as well as “words particularly associated with the dress, occupations, and ambitions of women, or the language of advertising, especially of quackery, entertainments, food, drink, or of political movements and propaganda” (Firth 1951 [1935]: 13). Outside of the field of linguistics, Williams’ (1985 [1976]) book on keywords is perhaps the best known; it has been further developed by Bennett, Grossberg and Morris (2005) recently. Williams’ Keywords and the New Keywords by Bennett, Grossberg, and Morris are distillations “of the variety of meanings – past and present – attached to a range of terms that played a pivotal role in discussions of culture and society, and of the relations between them” (Bennett, Grossberg and Morris 2005: xvii). New Keywords is based on the OED and other national dictionaries of English as well as on specialized dictionaries (Bennett, Grossberg, and Morris 2005: xxii). The 142 entries range from “Aesthetics” to “Youth.” Stubbs (2001: ch. 7) picked up on the ideas expressed by Williams and Wierzbicka, and, in a number of brief case studies (partly drawing from other authors), sketches the discourse expressing “evaluative moral views about different groups of people” on the basis of the keywords ethnic, racial, and tribal; heritage and care; standard, proper, and trendy; and little (Stubbs 2001: 145; also see Stubbs 1996: ch. 7; Tognini-Bonelli 2001: 40

The other variable is the specification of the minimum number of occurrences for an item to count as a keyword, i.e., the setting of a threshold, by the user (see Scott and Oxford University Press 1998 on keyness).

Approaches to world Englishes

39

123-130; Rigotto and Rocci 2005: 127-129; and Scott and Tribble 2006: ch. 4). Here, we need not be concerned with the specifics of Stubbs’ findings; the theoretical importance of Stubbs’ research lies in the fact that he established a link between the concept of keyword and corpus linguistics methods,41 regardless of the fact that his methodological approach is somewhat opaque and his explanations very general,42 and keywords were not comparatively tested for frequency (i.e., statistically for keyness, as defined above). We will come back to the role of corpus linguistics in relation to the study of culture in section 1.4. Our short overview of cultural keywords research shows that various strands of linguistics converge on this topic, and the investigation of cultural keywords is increasingly receiving attention.43

1.3.4. Social cognition research This recent approach seeks to link CL with congenial strands in cognitive sociology and social psychology. Roughly speaking, it investigates linguistic features as markers of social identity. That linguistic features fulfill this function is, in itself, not an original observation. It has been made by many authors and received attention from various theoretical perspectives; e.g., in terms of ‘social deixis’ by Fillmore (1975a), and, generally, in socialsemiotics research represented by Hodge and Kress (1988) and Halliday (1978), who speaks of ‘indices of social structure,’ to name only a few authors. However, as our review of a recent study by Kristiansen (2003) hopes to reflect, the CL perspective on the issue yields a number of crucial original insights. 41

42

43

“Keyword” in the sense used here is different from keyword understood as search word, terms sometimes used interchangeably in the corpus linguistic literature (cf. Barnbrook 1996: 67; Oakes 1998: 151). Stubbs’ (2001: 151) (methodological) explanations for heritage are symptomatic: “I checked the most frequent collocates of HERITAGE in a large corpus of contemporary British English. It sometimes occurs in ironic phrases [...] However, most collocates of HERITAGE show its positive connotations.” He then goes on to list some of these collocations. The reader is kept in the dark about the absolute numbers and the corpus these findings were derived from. Cf., e.g., the theme session on “corpus analysis of cultural keywords” of the “Conference and Workshop on Corpora and Translation Studies,” 30 March – 2 April 2007, Shanghai Jiaotong University.

40

Approaches to world Englishes

Kristiansen (2003) addresses the specific field of allophonic variation and illustrates her approach with examples from historical, social, and regional varieties of English. Thus her study is also thematically highly relevant to our present concern. While descriptivists have worked out the full sets of features that are “linguistically” diagnostic of the various varieties of English (cf. sections 1.2.1.1. and 1.2.1.3.), Kristiansen shifts the perspective to the question which of these features are also and actually “socially” and/or “regionally” diagnostic, for that matter, i.e., are reference points used by the participants in interaction to identify each other’s social and/or regional background.44 Relevant questions include “where is this speaker from?”, “what is this speaker like?”, “how do I have to talk to him?”. That allophones fulfill this function as references points in social (re)cognition was first forcefully argued for and empirically proved by Labov (1972) with his seminal studies on the distribution of /r/ in New York department stores and, in particular, with his studies on vowel peculiarities on Martha’s Vineyard. Giving this type of analysis a CL interpretation, Kristiansen (2003) argues that in order to “do such things with allophones” (to take up the title of her paper), there must be a conceptual structure at which stereotypical knowledge of accents is stored. It is to that level that social meaning is attached; allophones in themselves do not have social meaning. One of the illustrations given by Kristiansen (2003: 9296) is the case of allophones of the phoneme /t/. Following Cognitive Phonology (Taylor 1990, 1995), she regards phonemes as categories with an internal prototype structure. In the center of this category, at least from an RP perspective, we would have the realization as a strong alveolar plosive.45 More towards the periphery of the category, allophones like the dental realization, the glottal stop, and the lenisized variant are located. System-oriented phonologists may object that this type of analysis is at odds with the fact that some of the variants do not even occur in specific 44

45

Addressing the question which properties a linguistic feature should have in order to operate as socially diagnostic, Kristiansen (2003: 92; leaning on Nunberg) argues that it should be “formally distinctive and perceptually salient, allowing for subcategorizations to take place within a more general linguistic category” and it should be “known to relate in exclusive ways to a given social categorization.” From the perspective of other accents, the internal structure of the category would of course be different. For Cockney, for instance, the glottal-stop realization would need to be placed in the center, in Nigerian English, arguably, the dental variant would occupy this position, to name but a few examples.

Approaches to world Englishes

41

accents. However, from the perspective of social categorization it is justified and even necessary to include these variants in the category: The crucial point is that although speakers of a specific accent may not actively use a certain allophone, they are still “aware” of its being part of the category, i.e., they have a “passive competence” of various accents (cf. Kristiansen 2003: 94, leaning on Taylor 1990).46 Specifically, they link it to the stereotype they have of speakers that have a particular social and/or regional background, provided, of course, that they are to some degree familiar with the accent in question.47 In other words, such allophones trigger the schematic stereotypical conceptualization of specific accents. Since these schemas are or may be associated with a specific “social meaning,” this meaning is evoked and attached to the speaker. For instance, the realization of intervocalic post-tonic /t/ as a glottal stop would be strongly linked to the stereotype of the Cockney accent and the corresponding meaning associated with this accent. This type of analysis has a number of crucial advantages and implications including the following ones: —

It sees allophonic variation (or other dimensions of variation) not only as driven by system-internal forces but partly regards it as born of the cognitive need for social categorization.

—

It views linguistic stereotyping positively, as cognitively “necessary.” This positive attitude towards stereotypes contrasts sharply with the generally negative account of stereotypes in other approaches (also see chapter 3).

—

It accounts for the fact that only some but not all of the linguistically diagnostic features of a variety are relevant to social categorization.

—

It accounts for the fact that the stereotypes associated with a specific accent (and its speakers) may differ among speakers of other varieties. What is socially diagnostic in a variety depends on the variety from which it is viewed. Likewise, the social meaning associated with a stereotype may differ among speakers of other varieties. Recall that

46

It is important to stress that the approach in terms of social categorization is not in opposition to a system-oriented account; rather, it is a matter of different perspectives. ‘Familiarity’ has been a key notion in prototype theory since its early Roschian days.

47

42

Approaches to world Englishes

under the above analysis; it is not a specific feature that carries social meaning but the stereotype to which it is linked. —

It accounts for the fact that the social meaning of accents changes over time, while the socially diagnostic features may still be the same. Thus, this approach may also elegantly account for the fact that certain diagnostic allophones spread across varieties, on the grounds that speakers from other groups adopt them in order to be associated with the specific social meaning the “donor” accent conveys.48

—

It recognizes the need for social categorization and identification as an important driving force of linguistic change. Sound change and sound shift, for instance, are not always triggered by system-internal pressures, but may well be born of the cognitive need of social identification.49

As hinted at several times, this approach may be readily extended to include dimensions of variation other than allophones, e.g., lexical and syntactic variation, or, to stay within the realm of phonology, prosodic features.50 The application of the social-cognition perspective on variation to the field of the New Englishes is still up to future research. We are unaware of 48

49

50

A well-known case in point is t-glottalling in varieties of English English. Attitudes towards this feature have changed along with the social meaning associated with the “home” accent of this feature, and t-glottalling spreads from “below” to higher social strata in English society. Altendorf (2004) is a recent study that documents this development among the young generation. Tglottalling is adopted by higher-strata school students, depending on the context, for instance, in order to present themselves as “modern” and “daring,” or to affiliate themselves with the “unprivileged.” In more stigmatized phonetic contexts it is used to convey the image of “selected naughtiness” (“bad-habit” image). However, it is generally avoided when it may give the impression of being “uneducated.” Data as those presented in Altendorf (2004) show how speakers make use of the social meaning associated with specific accents. Labov (1972) made the same point when he put his analysis of Martha’s Vineyard speech under the heading “the social motivation of a sound change.” This is of course not to deny the role of system-internal motivation for sound change. The latter dimension is of particular interest in the context of African varieties of English. Several regional L2 accents of English, e.g., Igbo English, have highly distinctive prosodic features, which is a legacy of the L1 tone languages of the speakers of these varieties.

Approaches to world Englishes

43

any study with this specific scope. This application would make a substantial contribution, first of all, to the study of language attitudes and of the prestige of these varieties in their respective settings. Furthermore, it promises to shed new light on the question of whether and how distinctly new varieties can be delineated. It is a commonplace that such a delineation cannot be made on “purely linguistic” grounds alone; rather, a highly important parameter is the question of whether speakers with a specific accent regard themselves as a group and are regarded and recognized this way by others. This point may be addressed and captured by shifting the perspective to socially diagnostic features and to the social meaning of accents.

1.3.5. Sociolinguistic metatheory research Unlike the previous sections, which grouped approaches in terms of shared theoretical notions, the present section subsumes and reviews studies that, using CL concepts, take a primarily metatheoretical perspective on the issue of WE. These studies analyze dominant conceptualizations of language, in our particular concern, of English vis-à-vis its varieties and vis-àvis other languages, that underlie and guide public discourse, language policies, and the very enterprise of (socio)linguistics itself. With this scope, this type of research is close to Critical Discourse Analysis. Although CL has produced significant contributions to the critical study of discourse (see Dirven, Polzenhagen, and Wolf 2007 for a survey), the specific field of language policy and language ideologies is only beginning to be analyzed from a CL perspective. Generally, these studies use a conceptual-metaphorbased approach, and some of them further embed this type of analysis in the more encompassing cultural-model perspective. Notions that lend themselves to application are ‘folk models of language’ and ‘scientific models of language.’ The relationship between ‘folk’ and ‘expert’ models would require a detailed discussion, which cannot be given here (see, e.g., Harris 1990; Giddens 1993; Gergen 1994a, 1994b, 2001 for various perspectives and criticisms). The distinction between the two is justified in our particular context, since the former may be seen to primarily capture public discourse while the latter may be said to be primarily directed towards scientific discourse. However, public discourse and scientific discourse are highly intertwined, and thus the two perspectives cannot be separated.

44

Approaches to world Englishes

We start our survey with studies focussing on scientific discourse. This research is close in spirit to a Kuhnian type of perspective, i.e., to an analysis of sciences in terms of ‘paradigms.’51 With Leech (1983; cit. in Figueroa 1994: 18), paradigms may be understood here as the set of background assumptions which one makes about the nature and limits of one’s subject matter, the method of studying it, and what counts as evidence, and which determines the form that theories take.

We will not be concerned with the literature that deals with paradigms in linguistics in general. Rather, we confine our review to studies which have a specific focus on language variation and/or specifically address the spread of English. Geeraerts (2003a) and Polzenhagen and Dirven (2008fc) may be mentioned here. Geeraerts’ (2003a) focus is on views of standard languages; however, in his discussion he also includes global languages and the general issue of linguistic diversity. His key observation is that the diverging and often conflicting views held in the (Western) discourse on standardization, linguistic diversity, and global languages are in fact situated in and derived from two dominant general cultural models in the Western philosophical tradition. On the one hand, there is the ‘rationalist model,’ with its roots in the Enlightenment; on the other hand, there is the ‘romantic model,’ which developed in direct opposition to the rationalist one. Geeraerts (2003a) carefully outlines the evolution of these models from their origins up to the present, making note of the remarkable shifts that took place within the models as well as their mutual interaction. His explication of the contemporary realizations of the two models provides a matrix along which the positions held in the current debate on the role of English and its varieties may be located. This point is explored in more detail in Polzenhagen (2007: ch. 4) and Polzenhagen and Dirven (2008fc).52 At the heart of the rationalist model of language is the conceptualization of language as a TOOL OF COMMUNICATION, and of global languages, correspondingly, as NEUTRAL MEANS OF WORLD-WIDE COMMUNICATION AND GLOBAL SOCIAL PARTICIPATION. Language variation and linguistic diversity are seen positively in terms of functional specialization, i.e., 51

52

On the applicability of the Kuhnian perspective to the social sciences see Figueroa (1994: 7-10). Figueroa (1994) itself is a comprehensive metatheoretical discussion of the field of sociolinguistics along these lines, covering the approaches of foremost scholars like Labov, Gumperz, and Hymes. Geeraerts illustrates his matrix with a discussion of standard and internal variation of contemporary Dutch.

Approaches to world Englishes

45

languages or varieties fulfill specific functions in particular domains and hence may coexist, in the same setting, without necessarily being in conflict with each other. The romantic model, in turn, views language primarily as a MEANS OF EXPRESSING IDENTITY or, in a stronger version, as a PART OF IDENTITY. This yields an emphasis on local languages and linguistic diversity, since this is the realm where identity is thought to be realized. Globalization tends to be seen as a threat to local identities, and global languages as MEANS OF SOCIAL EXCLUSION, since they are regarded as inextricably linked to (global) power structures and since access to these languages is not equal. This is, admittedly, a very rough characterization of the two models (see Geeraerts 2003a and Polzenhagen and Dirven 2008fc for more detailed accounts). However, it should suffice to illustrate the potential of this type of metalinguistic approach to sociolinguistics. Looking at the current debate on the global spread of English, one can hardly fail to notice that the positions held by the opposing camps fall squarely into the logic of either model. Here, Geeraerts’ matrix allows us to capture the direction in which individual authors tend to look and think. However, as a crucial advantage, the cultural-model approach also allows us to abstract from individual authors, who more often than not advocate mid-positions rather than being fully in line with either model. The matrix may thus be used to characterize the specific perspectives taken by the various approaches to WE outlined in the present chapter, and, equally important, to point to the aspects that are hidden and excluded when a certain perspective is taken. The point, however, is not to man the barricade on either side. Here, we may return to what was called above a “Kuhnian” type of approach in the social sciences: In the social sciences, to some degree unlike in the natural sciences, competing paradigms coexist and co-evolve rather than replace each other.53 As Figueroa (1994: 8) rightly puts it for sociolinguistics, it is not “an ever progressive accumulation of knowledge approaching some ideal,” but “a diverse, multiplex, loosely related and emergent entity.” 53

Kuhn’s (1962, 1993) model was developed for the context of the “hard” sciences, where one may indeed often find only one dominant paradigm at a particular time. For the social sciences, this constellation may hardly count as an ideal or mature state, nor does it reflect the actual history of the disciplines. See Figueroa (1994: 7-10) on this important caveat with respect to Kuhn’s approach, and her corresponding elaboration. Here, Figueroa draws from Hymes’ notions of ‘paradigmatic communities’ and ‘competing cynosures,’ which are a more appropriate characterization of social sciences.

46

Approaches to world Englishes

Ideally, metalinguistic criticism may contribute to the further evolution of the various approaches and may inspire the exploration of common ground between paradigms. The two studies reviewed above are immediate applications of the cultural-model approach. Furthermore, various authors, also from outside the more narrow CL community, have used the conceptual-metaphor approach to identify specific conceptualizations that guided the views of the English language over the centuries. Eggington (1997), for instance, groups them in three historical categories: ‘foundation metaphors’ (5th to 17th century), ‘expansion metaphors’ (17th to mid-20th century), and ‘contemporary metaphors’ (since mid-20th century).54 Foundation metaphors include conceptualizations of English as ASCENDING, as BEAUTY and as a language of MORALITY, and thus reflect the development of English as a national language. Expansion metaphors reflect the development of Standard English and of English as a colonial language. They include conceptualizations in terms of POWER, GRACE, CIVILIZATION, LIBERATION, SOCIAL ADVANCE, and ASSIMILATION. Contemporary metaphors reflect the debate on English as a world language. They include conceptualizations as a TOOL OF WIDER COMMUNICATION, as OPPRESSIVE, as EMPOWERING, as IMPERIALIST, as THREATENING. Yajun (2002), elaborating Eggington, provides a further discussion of these conceptualizations, especially of the MORALITY metaphor and its implications. Romaine (1997) focuses on conceptualizations based on the source domain FAMILY. She observes that the general colonial discourse, in which the colonizers were portrayed as omniscient fathers and the colonized as weak, immature children, is mirrored in a similar set of metaphors in the discourse on language.55 Likewise, the New Englishes have long been regarded as the illegitimate offspring of the metaphorical family of English (also see Mufwene 1997). In the debate on standards of World English, this is mirrored in endeavors to superimpose and uphold native-speaker standards, which are regarded as 54

55

Eggington himself refers to these conceptualizations collectively as metaphors; however, we wish to note that, strictly speaking, some of them are metonymic rather than metaphoric. In her discussion, Romaine includes historical examples like the characterization of languages, common in some strands of 19th and early 20th century linguistics, as “masculine” or “feminine,” respectively, expressed, e.g., in Otto Jespersens’s well-known statement that English is “positively and expressly masculine, it is the language of a grown up man and has very little childish or feminine about it” (cit. in Romaine 1997: xi).

Approaches to world Englishes

47

superior to the endonormative ones of the L2 varieties. Again, in the logic of the metaphorical model, the father knows best and has the right to set the norms. Furthermore, Romaine (1997: xiii) observes that the state of a language is frequently seen in correspondence with the state of a nation. Some relevant mappings include those between USING GOOD GRAMMAR and OBEYING LAWS, between CHANGE IN LANGUAGE and CHANGE IN SOCIETY, and between DECLINE OF LANGUAGE and DECLINE OF THE NATION. These mappings reveal why the evolution of world Englishes poses critical questions about nationhood in the core countries and raises fears of loss of control at home and abroad. The studies cited above are primarily concerned with the “scientific discourse” on language policy, language planning, and language varieties. However, the conceptualizations identified can also be traced in public discourse, which attests to our earlier remark that the perspectives on folk models and on expert models cannot be separated. We are unaware of any CL study that deals specifically with the folk-model dimension in the context of WE. The foremost issue here, namely speaker’s attitudes, is clearly a hallmark of the descriptive paradigm (see section 1.2.1.3.), and it is up to future research to interpret such findings from a CL perspective. Another field that invites input from CL-oriented work on folk models is the recent literature on what has been termed “language myths” (e.g., Wardhaugh 1999; Bauer and Trudgill 1998); although here, too, the perspectives on folk models and expert models meet.56

1.4.

Scope, methodology, and empirical basis of our study

The survey of dominant orientations within the world Englishes paradigm given in section 1.1. and the overview of Cognitive Linguistic work in the field allows us to situate our own approach in a pointed way. Within WE, our study is close to the general spirit of hybridizationism (sections 1.2.1.4.), with the caveats given in section 1.2.2.3. Since our analysis is strongly corpus-based, we are, methodologically, also indebted to the 56

The notion of ‘language myths,’ however, needs to be scrutinized and used with due caution. It suggests an assessment in terms of “true” and “false,” which should not be foregrounded in the context of folk beliefs. Also, the assumption of a per se superiority of “expert” models over “folk” models needs to be avoided.

Approaches to world Englishes

47

superior to the endonormative ones of the L2 varieties. Again, in the logic of the metaphorical model, the father knows best and has the right to set the norms. Furthermore, Romaine (1997: xiii) observes that the state of a language is frequently seen in correspondence with the state of a nation. Some relevant mappings include those between USING GOOD GRAMMAR and OBEYING LAWS, between CHANGE IN LANGUAGE and CHANGE IN SOCIETY, and between DECLINE OF LANGUAGE and DECLINE OF THE NATION. These mappings reveal why the evolution of world Englishes poses critical questions about nationhood in the core countries and raises fears of loss of control at home and abroad. The studies cited above are primarily concerned with the “scientific discourse” on language policy, language planning, and language varieties. However, the conceptualizations identified can also be traced in public discourse, which attests to our earlier remark that the perspectives on folk models and on expert models cannot be separated. We are unaware of any CL study that deals specifically with the folk-model dimension in the context of WE. The foremost issue here, namely speaker’s attitudes, is clearly a hallmark of the descriptive paradigm (see section 1.2.1.3.), and it is up to future research to interpret such findings from a CL perspective. Another field that invites input from CL-oriented work on folk models is the recent literature on what has been termed “language myths” (e.g., Wardhaugh 1999; Bauer and Trudgill 1998); although here, too, the perspectives on folk models and expert models meet.56

1.4.

Scope, methodology, and empirical basis of our study

The survey of dominant orientations within the world Englishes paradigm given in section 1.1. and the overview of Cognitive Linguistic work in the field allows us to situate our own approach in a pointed way. Within WE, our study is close to the general spirit of hybridizationism (sections 1.2.1.4.), with the caveats given in section 1.2.2.3. Since our analysis is strongly corpus-based, we are, methodologically, also indebted to the 56

The notion of ‘language myths,’ however, needs to be scrutinized and used with due caution. It suggests an assessment in terms of “true” and “false,” which should not be foregrounded in the context of folk beliefs. Also, the assumption of a per se superiority of “expert” models over “folk” models needs to be avoided.

48

Approaches to world Englishes

corpus-linguistic approach (section 1.2.1.2.), a point that will be dealt with in more detail below. Furthermore, as we will provide a brief lexicographic coverage of selected lexical items that seeks to incorporate the cognitivelinguistic perspective (appendix 1), we also aim to make a contribution to the lexicographic endeavor (cf. section 1.2.1.5.). There are thus many points of mutual compatibility between our specific approach and strands in the WE paradigm, and, in the course of our discussion, we stressed further general areas of common ground these approaches have with Cognitive Sociolinguistics. Within the range of the CL-oriented approaches outlined in section 1.3., our analysis is an explicit contribution to cultural-model research, and incorporates the cultural-keyword perspective (cf. section 1.3.3.). As repeatedly pointed out, the “usage-based commitment” of Cognitive Linguistics poses methodological challenges and requires an empirical basis that lives up to this tenet. Following Geeraerts (2005), we see a corpus-based approach as a highly suitable and beneficial way of meeting these challenges. Geeraerts (2005: 175-176) has rightly noted that socioempirical methods are intrinsic to contemporary sociolinguistic theory, and the general advantages of corpus-based approaches in the study of variation do not need an elaboration here. As we will argue below, however, we do not see corpus-based approaches as a substitute for other methodologies but as their useful and necessary supplement. In the remaining part of the present section, we will outline basic assumptions underlying the corpus-based comparison of the cultural dimension of language and corpus linguistics in general, and we will delineate the place the corpus-linguistic component has within our overall empirical basis. As we wish to argue, and as the following chapter will demonstrate, the conceptualizations and cross-domain mappings underlying certain discourses in African English are traceable in respective corpora (see below). In particular, clusters of synonyms – many of them keywords, as defined on p. 38 – and collocations from the domains of FAMILY/ COMMUNITY, FOOD, MONEY, and SPIRITUALITY can be found. These findings correspond with and support our analyses based on conceptual metaphor theory. Corpus linguistics is one of the fastest growing fields in linguistics. In using the term “corpus linguistics,” however, we follow Rissanen’s (2004: 58) understanding of it as a convenient shorthand term for research supported by corpora, i.e., as a methodology rather than a distinct “branch of linguistics.” Due to the present popularity of corpus linguistics, countless

Approaches to world Englishes

49

works that either deal theoretically with corpus linguistics or make use of computer corpora have been published, and it is impossible to review them here. The importance of corpus linguistics within CL is increasing as well. Recently, Dirven (2005) and Geeraerts (2005) have forcefully argued that CL as a usage-based linguistics invites, if not requires the use of computer corpora, and a survey of the (corpus linguistic) technical state of the art in a usage-based CL can be found in Tummers, Heylen and Geeraerts (2005). Following Tummers, Heylen and Geeraerts (2005: 244-245), the use of computer corpora for the purpose of this study could be classified as “sociovariational,” though in a wider sense which includes cultural variation. Our aim, as far as corpus linguistic methods are concerned, is to trace culture-specific key words and collocational patterns in specific corpora of second language varieties of English from a comparative perspective. By now, a number of corpus linguistic publications exist which have a cultural focus. For example, Charteris-Black (2004) and Deignan (2005) have linked corpus linguistics and (conceptual) metaphor analytically and methodologically, Schmid (2003) has analyzed differences in male and female culture as traceable in the British National Corpus (BNC), and Abe (2006) has compared patterns of advice giving in Japanese and US radio programs.57 Still, as to a cultural comparison of varieties of one language, little work has been done, despite Aston and Burnard’s (1998: 15-16) pointing to the usefulness of computer corpora for comparing, in their terms, “geographical varieties and languages.” The paradigmatic study in that respect is Leech and Fallon’s (1992) comparison of American English culture and British English culture in terms of frequency of certain concepts/lexemes, as revealed in the Brown Corpus and the LOB Corpus. Wolf (2001, 2003, 2006) has followed Leech and Fallon’s example by comparing the Corpus of English in Cameroon (CEC) with the Brown corpus, and with a combination of the FLOB Corpus and the FROWN Corpus (cf. below and 57

Unfortunately, the potential of corpus linguistics for the investigation of culture and sociocultural variation is not recognized by parts of the linguistic community. A special issue of the Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik intended “as a critical stock-taking and as an outlook into possible future developments and extensions of corpus methods” (Gast 2006: 113) includes a paper on corpora and dialectal variation (Hollmann and Siewierska 2006), but is mute on cultural issues.

50

Approaches to world Englishes

chapter 2). The same approach has been adopted in Bolton and Wolf’s (2005) exploration of the Hong Kong English component of the ICEproject, with the ICE-Great Britain as their reference corpus. Schmied (2004) has compared the two sub-corpora of the ICE-EA, i.e., the ICEKenya and ICE-Tanzania, regarding certain lexico-cultural domains and the occurrence of specific lexemes, and has also done comparative searches on East African lexemes on selected internet domains. Furthermore, both Haase’s (2004) and Skandera’s (2003) use of the ICE-EA share certain theoretical presuppositions and investigative aims with our own approach. Yet, Haase’s lexical-semantic investigation of verbal constructions in British and East African English from a CL perspective is comparative but only implicitly cultural, whereas Skandera’s analysis of idioms in Kenyan English is cultural but only implicitly comparative. The ICE-corpora have been specifically compiled for comparative purposes, and the design of each national corpus is more or less identical (see International Corpus of English 2002, and Schmied 2004, for exceptions regarding the ICE-EA). One of the two main corpora used for this book is the CEC (see p. 5).58 The other main corpus is the ICE-EA (see p. 5).59 Unfortunately, no corpus of Southern African English exists, which would have allowed for a full sub-Saharan-wide scope.60 Since a major portion of our statistical data goes back to earlier studies with a focus on WAE, and specifically Cameroon English (Wolf 2003, 2006), we admit to a certain regional imbalance as regards this data (though, as the examples in chapter 2 show, all of sub-Saharan Africa is represented, and the conceptualizations we describe are overarching). It was for the CEC that we have computed the cultural keywords in chapter 2. Our reference corpus is FLOBFROWN, a combination of the FLOB Corpus, based on British 58

59

60

Our thanks goes to Josef Schmied, who gave us a copy of this “unofficial” ICE corpus. For the specifics of the CEC, see Wolf (2003). Earlier publications (e.g., Wolf 2003) also used smaller country-specific corpora compiled at Humboldt-University Berlin, namely Corpus Calixthe (Cameroon English), Corpus Ghana (Ghanaian English), Corpus Liberia (Liberian English), and Corpus Nigeria (Nigerian English). These corpora were found to show collocational patterns and keyword results consistent with the analysis given in chapter 2. For our present study, however, we used these and a further small corpus of Liberian English (Corpus Liberia) only occasionally, in particular as sources of text examples. ICE-South Africa is in the making, but it is not clear to what extent it will differentiate between L1- and L2-speakers of English.

Approaches to world Englishes

51

English, and the FROWN Corpus, based on American English.61 There are several reasons why we have chosen FLOBFROWN as our reference corpus: First, when Wolf started his investigations of the CEC, the ICE-GB had not been released. Secondly, the ICE-GB is parsed and tagged for the corpus program ICECUP, and hence not readily useable for WordSmith, the software we employed for our computations.62 Thirdly, CEC and FLOBFROWN were compiled at roughly the same time, in the early nineties, and thus do not diverge diachronically (on top of the fact that the corpus design is also comparable, see Wolf 2003). Finally, and most importantly, a combination of American English and British English, the two major native varieties of English, makes for a more general representation of “Western culture” (the ICE-USA is still in the making). Given that the CEC was our starting point and that we understand this book still as a kind of pilot study as far as the application of cognitive-sociolinguistic methods to the cultural analysis of a continental variety of English is concerned, we took the findings derived from our earlier studies on the CEC and matched them against frequency patterns observable in the ICEEA, but did not do a separate keyword analysis for the latter corpus. Thus, the keywords found for the CEC result from our earlier computations of “keyness”, an indication of statistical significance (cf. section 1.3.3.). Though no such computations were performed for the respective items from the ICE-EA, the frequency patterns observed for this corpus by and large correspond to the keywords elicited for the CEC (see chapter 2). It is for this reason that in our frequency tabulations in chapter 2, no statistical figures for the “keyness’ of individual items are listed. Furthermore, we have retained regional differentiation by not combining the CEC and the ICE-EA into one large corpus of African English. Though in the future, when the ICE-South Africa, the ICE-Nigeria and the compilation of the various ICE-corpora based on native varieties of English will have been completed (ICE-USA, ICE-Canada, ICE-Australia have not 61

62

See p. 82 and Wolf (2003, 2006) for the exact size of the corpora and further specifics, and Scott and Tribble (2006: 64-65) for the choice of reference corpora in general. WordSmith has been our standard corpus software for the computation of lexical frequency, collocations, and keywords, (see Scott and Oxford University Press 1998; Scott 2001, Scott and Tribble 2006). Although WordSmith 4 is out, we have continued to use the more reliable WordSmith 3, given the numerous unfixed bugs still found in the new version.

52

Approaches to world Englishes

been released yet), researchers will have the chance “to play around” with regional and continental combinations of corpora. As regards size, the corpora we use all fall within the category of 1 million word compilations. The assumption that corpora of this size are, basically, representative of a variety is, certainly, an idealization and may be disputed.63 However, it has been common practice since the early days of computer corpus compilation to regard this size as a viable compromise: This was the basis of Francis and Kucera’s (1964) foundational BROWN corpus of American English and its British (English) English counterpart LOB (Johansson, Leech and Goodluck 1978), it was preserved for the more recent FLOB and FROWN corpora compiled at Freiburg in the 1990s, and it was also the guideline used in the ICE project. In principle, it is of course desirable to draw from larger corpora; however, larger corpora, irrespective of the mere fact that they are, at present, not available for African varieties of English,64 also involve a number of methodological problems. The perhaps most serious one for studies of the type represented by our book is posed by the enormous amount of tokens larger compilations would yield. Note that in the comparative frequency analyses performed for the present study based on our four 1 million word corpora, a total of about 35.000 tokens was computed. The undesirable and critical consequence is that, even here, the inspection of the context of each individual token was no more feasible; we had to make the compromise to limit close-text inspection to selected items. When even more tokens are available, the data cannot be handled anymore by single scholars or even a small group of collaborators. Then, comparative frequency analyses would almost inevitably be reduced to the mere presentation of raw frequency data, which goes counter to the usage-based, i.e., culture- and context-oriented commitment of our approach. This point has been highlighted by Sinclair (2001: xi), one of the fathers of corpus linguistics: 63

64

It goes without saying that corpora are only a partial representation of actual language use. This, however, does not invalidate the use of corpus findings. Rather, it calls for the inclusion of further sources of empirical data. On the present state of the art as regards corpora available for varieties of English, see the survey given by Lucko (2004). For a discussion of corpuslinguistic theory and methodology, we refer the reader to the rich body of literature from this branch of linguistics, e.g., Johansson (1982), Leitner (1992), Aarts and Meijs (1990), Meijs (1987), Sinclair (1994), to name only a few classics in the field. For an early discussion of the use of corpus linguistics in the study of non-native varieties of English, also see Schmied (1990).

Approaches to world Englishes

53

A small corpus is seen as a body of relevant and reliable evidence, and is either small enough to be analysed manually, or is processed by the computer in a preliminary fashion, ... thereafter the evidence is interpreted by the scholar directly. There is no need to collect the quantities of data needed in order to delay the direct participation of the human being.

We thus subscribe to Sinclair’s positive view (2001: xi) about “early human intervention” in the analyses of corpora, and our findings confirm his claim that corpus “comparison uncovers differences almost regardless of size” (Sinclair 2001: xii). It should have become apparent that we do not regard quantitative corpus-linguistic analysis as an end in itself. At the one end, one cannot approach corpora without prior assumptions, in our case about cultural patterns. At the other end, quantitative corpus findings need to be made part of the general interpretative process. This entails that quantitative corpus results are but one element in the overall argument and only one component of the empirical basis. Here, the second major component is authentic text examples that illustrate the conceptualizations we identify.65 The corpora, beyond being the input of quantitative analyses, also provided rich material in this respect. A considerable amount of our text examples come from the CEC and the ICE-EA. However, 1 million word general sample corpora alone cannot provide sufficient text examples for an in-depth analysis of specific domains. Most of the examples come from a thematic text compilation we labeled “Witchcraft, Corruption, Leadership” (WCL), drawn up for the specific needs of our analysis. WCL has a total of 240,000 words and comprises 147 individual texts thematically related to the domains under investigation.66 Further text examples come from literary productions by African creative writers, from our small country-specific 65

66

Throughout our book, we reproduce the authentic text examples we cite in their original form. Spelling mistakes and deviations from native English language use are only indicated when we deemed it necessary. The texts are exclusively obtained from African internet sources. WCL is not a structured corpus in any strict corpus-linguistic sense, in particular, being thematic, it is not a sample corpus as the CEC, the FROWN, and the FLOB are. Still, several text types are represented, e.g., journal and newspaper articles, press releases, political essays, political pamphlets, book reviews, published political speeches. Yet these text types are not represented proportionally. For convenience, we will still refer to text examples taken from WCL as “corpus” examples throughout the book, bearing in mind, however, that “text compilation” is the more appropriate label.

54

Approaches to world Englishes

corpora, from the African media, and from the scientific literature we draw from. A further main empirical pillar is the data collected in an ongoing joint research project (RPWAE) between colleagues from the Linguistic Department of the Institute of English and American Studies at Humboldt University, Berlin, the Anglistisches Seminar at Ruprecht-Karls-Universität, Heidelberg, and the School of English at The University of Hong Kong, in which the authors are involved. The major aim of this research project is the compilation of the first comprehensive dictionary of WAE. So far, more than 6000 specifically West African English lexical items have been collected in the data base of the project. The data is administered through a software called Trados MultiTerm, which allows users to set up hyperlinks between (near) synonymous terms. Through these hyperlinks, clusters of related lexical items emerge which point to culturally salient concepts (if a high number of related terms for any given concept is an indication of a cultural preoccupation, cf. p. 37) in WAE. Apart from certain food items and administrative and representational titles, these clusters include WITCHCRAFT and CORRUPTION (see Peter and Wolf 2008fc; and chapter 2). In addition to the empirical sources described above, we draw from the results of a small-scale questionnaire survey conducted among German students at Humboldt University Berlin and a group of Cameroonian students at the University of Yaounde in 2005.67 Unfortunately, we only obtained 19 questionnaires from the German group as compared to 39 from the Cameroonian. This discrepency notwithstanding, we still deem the results to be conclusive in combination with the other empirical sources mentioned earlier.68 The questionnaire was designed specifically to test some of the conceptual links we investigate (see appendix 2). The participants were confronted with sets of selected keywords, asked which ones they associate most with a particular given concept and also asked to indicate how strong they perceive the links to be. Furthermore, the questionnaire contained open questions designed to elicit conceptual links. 67

68

We wish to thank Samuel Atechi for conducting the questionnaire survey in Yaounde. The questionnaire was also distributed among students at The University of Hong Kong, and a comparison of some of the results of the German and the Hong Kong groups is included in Wolf and Polzenhagen (2006). Note that the survey was repeated with a group of 20 students at the University of Heidelberg in 2007, with results parallel to those of the Berlin group.

Approaches to world Englishes

55

From the answers given by the informants and, in particular, from the systematic differences between the two groups, we could draw further conclusions concerning the specific make-up of the underlying networks of cultural conceptualizations in the two groups.69 Striving for a “thick description” (Geertz 1973: ch. 1) of the culturespecific conceptualizations expressed in African English, we thus make use of all sorts of relevant data, a methodological principle proposed for cognitive anthropology by Quinn and Holland (1987: 16). As stated above, it is clear that we do not approach this data without any preconceptions or prior understanding of what we intend to describe. No linguistic investigation can be solely data-driven, and (not only) for corpus analyses a prior understanding of the subject matter is a bare necessity (cf. Schmied 1990: 264; Gast 2006: 114-115; and, for the debate in corpus linguistics on corpusbased vs. corpus-driven research, see McEnery, Xiao and Tono 2006: 8-11). In fact, in interpreting corpus and other data, the same hermeneutic processes we describe in chapter 3 for intercultural understanding are at work. In a hermeneutic circle, we interpret the data through our preconceptions, which in turn are refined and modified through the textual material, i.e., data. This interpretational process is hence bidirectional (see Wolf 2004: 139), or, if one wishes, dialectical. In this chapter, we placed our study in the wider context of two broad areas of linguistic research, namely Cognitive Linguistics and world Englishes. Besides giving an overview, we tried to identify points of contact, if not convergence, between these two fields of linguistic enquiry, which motivated our study of the cultural model of community in African English, to which we turn now in the following chapter...

69

One has to bear in mind, of course, that the status of English is that of a second language for the Cameroonian group whereas it is a foreign language for the Germans. Our comparison of the data is hence based on the assumption that cultural conceptualizations find expression in a speaker’s mother tongue, second language and foreign language use alike, albeit in a linguistically more entrenched way in the case of mother tongues and second languages. From a CL perspective, this is an altogether natural assumption, since it is the same conceptual system that underlies a speaker’s various language uses.

56

Approaches to world Englishes

2

The cultural model of community in African English: A comparative account

2.1.

Analytical tools: Conceptual metaphor, cultural models, conceptual networks 70

In this section, we will give a brief outline of the theoretical framework for the cognitive-linguistic component of our analysis. Here, we will concentrate on three interrelated concepts that are central to our approach, namely ‘conceptual metaphor and metonymy,’ ‘cultural model,’ and ‘conceptual network’. We will leave the discussion of further and related theoretical concepts to the subsequent individual sections. ‘Conceptual metaphor’ and ‘conceptual metonymy’ are well-established common grounds in CL, and we may thus rely on the rich literature on the issue rather than giving it an extensive discussion. Since Lakoff and Johnson’s (1980) seminal book,71 both concepts have been applied in numerous studies, and they have undergone a number of important theoretical refinements. A survey of current trends and major theoretical developments in conceptual-metaphor research is given by Dirven (2004, 2005a), in his general overview of major strands in CL. In the following 70

71

This section is based on the discussion given in Dirven, Wolf, and Polzenhagen (2007) and Polzenhagen and Wolf (2007). A more detailed overview of the theoretical framework we use can be found in Wolf (2001) and Polzenhagen (2007). While Lakoff and Johnson (1980) certainly have the merit of having given the first comprehensive and widely-known account of a cognitive view of metaphor and metonymy, the ideas underlying the notion ‘conceptual metaphor’ have, of course, a long tradition. The often neglected forefathers of conceptualmetaphor theory are traced, e.g., by Jäkel (1997, 1999) and Nerlich and Clarke (2002). For instance, decades prior to Lakoff and Johnson (1980), a cognate theory of metaphor was proposed by Weinrich (see the 1976 collection of his articles). His “image-field model” (Bildfeldmodell), however, received almost no attention among Anglo-American scholars of metaphor.

58

The cultural model of community in African English

discussion, we will pick up on only some of these developments, from a cultural, or more specifically, cross-cultural perspective. The most prominent elaboration of the initial approach proposed by Lakoff and Johnson (1980) is certainly Fauconnier’s (e.g., 1997) “blending theory,” and his multi-space-model, meanwhile, has become the standard view of metaphor among many cognitive linguists.72 It is also the view underlying our own analysis, since it accounts for our findings more elegantly than the initial two-domain approach. As we hope to show, the cultural conceptualizations we identify in the empirical part often involve the activation of a whole set of domains and are complex blends of various conceptual material. The second development relevant to our endeavor is the ongoing discussion of the distinction and relationship between metaphor and metonymy.73 The cognitive-linguistic view is that the former is a mapping between two domains that belong to different domain matrixes, while the latter is a mapping within one domain matrix (for a discussion, see, e.g., Croft 1993, 2002). The distinction between the two conceptual processes thus hinges on the need and possibility of a more or less clear determination of domain boundaries and domain matrixes. This is in itself a problematic issue, especially as it involves a strong element of inter-individual variation. In the early conceptual-metaphor framework, due to its clear emphasis on longterm conventional conceptualizations, domains, and, along with it, concepts in these domains, were treated as relatively stable, distinct, and decontextualized. There is, of course, nothing substantially wrong in positing, as a part of the model, rather distinct and stable conceptual domains. However, what is needed more generally is a dynamic model of concept formation that sheds light on the question of how these relatively stable domains come about, and, as a correlate, a usage-based model that accounts for contextual variation in meaning construction. This includes, crucially, the attention to the role and impact of the socio-cultural environment and 72

73

On the treatment of metaphor against the background of blending theory, see, e.g., Grady, Oakley and Coulson (1999). For the blending framework in general, see, e.g., Fauconnier (1997), Fauconnier and Turner (1998, 1999, 2002), Turner and Fauconnier (1995), and the special issue of Cognitive Linguistics 11(3-4). The major trends and recent findings in research on this issue are surveyed by Dirven (2004: 13-15). For recent studies see especially the collective volumes Panther and Radden (1999), Barcelona (2000), and Dirven and Pörings (2002).

The cultural model of community in African English

59

socialization, as one element of variation.74 The reality of variation has important implications for determining the conceptual basis of a specific expression. It is an often made and well-known observation that the same linguistic expression may be interpreted as metaphoric or, alternatively, metonymic, and that many metaphors may also be regarded as a metonymic chain (for a discussion, see, e.g., Bartsch 2002 and Goosens 1995, 2002). Whether the relationship between source and target domain is to be regarded as one of similarity/analogy or rather one of contiguity depends on the “perspectives” (in the sense of Bartsch 2002) that are involved in the particular context of use, and on what constitutes a certain domain of experience for a particular individual. In a cross-cultural analysis, this issue comes to the fore even more prominently. Concepts that would pertain to the same domain of experience for members of a specific socio-cultural group may rather belong to different matrixes for members of another group.75 The mapping between these concepts would thus be metaphoric for the latter and metonymic for the former, although the surface linguistic 74

75

One such context-sensitive and dynamic model is proposed by Bartsch (1998, 2002). She takes an approach that is strongly inspired by Vygotsky’s (1977 [1934]) seminal work on concept formation in childhood, and thus entails an attention to the impact of socialization. We cannot go into detail here (see Bartsch 2002 for an explication of her model), but we wish to note that we feel close to the view of metaphor and metonymy proposed by Bartsch (2002), in particular to her notion of ‘perspective.’ Also, Bartsch’s model has the potential to be a new bridge between the cognitive-linguistic and the contextualist theory of metaphor, and thus to strengthen the recognition of contextual variation in the former. A recent contextualist approach is proposed by Leezenberg (2001), and it draws heavily from Bartsch’s notion of “perspective.” The gist of Leezenberg’s theory is that lexical items are interpreted in terms of ‘thematic dimensions’ established by the context, and that metaphor is a case where, roughly speaking, the more or less stable internal ‘thematic dimension’ of a lexical item is blocked and overridden by the contextual one. The same point was made by Weinrich (1976: 320) when he speaks of an “expectation of determination” inherent in a word and defines metaphor as “a word in counterdetermining context” (our translation). Generally speaking, there are old affinities between the contextualist and the cognitive approach to metaphor. Weinrich (1976) is the most prominent example, but they can already be traced, for instance, in Richards (1936). A classic case is the study of Dyrbal and its classifier system; in his review of this case, Lakoff (1987: 93) captures the above point by speaking of the “domain-of-experience principle.”

60

The cultural model of community in African English

expression is identical. In our own analysis, we will meet this type of variation in kinship-based conceptualizations: Many of the spheres that should be best regarded as pertaining to one encompassing COMMUNITY domain against the background of the African cultural model appear to be more appropriately called separate against the Western cultural model. Mappings that involve the source concept kinship are thus based on a perceived contiguity in the former and on a perceived analogy in the latter. Occasionally it is, however, hard to decide if a particular expression in a non-Western variety of English has a metaphorical or non-metaphorical conceptual basis. Leaving the question open, we therefore prefer to sometimes use the neutral label “conceptualizations.” This indeterminacy is, however, not a theoretical weakness: Sometimes it is theoretically necessary to leave open the question if one does not want to fall into the trap of taking one’s own (in our case Western) understanding as the exclusive vantage point for making judgments on the metaphoricity of a particular conceptualization. The third highly relevant current strand in Cognitive Linguistics is the general move towards issues of social and cultural cognition (also see the discussion in section 1.3.). From its early beginning, the conceptualmetaphor paradigm had a strong programmatic commitment to the sociocultural dimension of language. As Lakoff and Johnson (2003: 57) state: Cultural assumptions, values, and attitudes are not a conceptual overlay which we may or may not place upon experience as we choose. It would be more correct to say that all experience is cultural through and through, that we experience our “world” in such a way that our culture is already present in the very experience itself.

This stance demonstrates the framework’s rootedness in the phenomenological tradition, in particular in Merleau-Ponty’s work,76 cf.: It is impossible to superimpose on man a lower layer of behaviour which one chooses to call ‘natural’, followed by a manufactured cultural or spiritual world. Everything is both manufactured and natural in man [...]. (Merleau-Ponty 2002 [1945]: 219-220)

In this vein, Lakoff and Johnson (1980: 22) have argued that “the most fundamental values in a culture will be coherent with the metaphorical 76

Merleau-Ponty is one of the few references in philosophy that is explicitly acknowledged by the Johnson and Lakoff approach, cf., e.g., Brockman’s (2001: 9) interview with Lakoff, and Lakoff and Johnson (1999: xi).

The cultural model of community in African English

61

structure of the most fundamental concepts in the culture.” And one may extend this statement to include conceptualizations other than metaphoric ones and say that the most fundamental values in a culture are coherent with the conceptual structure in the culture. During its early stage, conceptual-metaphor research certainly did not fully live up to this programmatic commitment. This is not so much due to the fact that only with the gradual spread of the paradigm more and more studies actually dealt with cross-cultural variation at the conceptual level. Rather, the crucial point is that there was an almost exclusive focus on the physical and, more narrowly, bodily basis of experience: The structures assumed by the Lakoff and Johnson model to be at the most fundamental level of cognition, namely image schematic structures, are precisely not “cultural through and through” but just bodily through and through,77 and there is no parallel recognition of basic cultural experience. While we do not make any argument at all against the validity of claiming a bodily basis of cognition, one cannot fail to see that this focus is not in keeping with programmatic statements like “every experience takes place within a vast background of cultural presuppositions” (Lakoff and Johnson 1980: 57; original emphasis). Also, it does not sit well with a strictly phenomenological approach: When the phenomenological stance is taken seriously, the very notion of the ‘body’ needs to be seen and treated as a constructed concept, too, and hence as inherently cultural (cf., e.g., Wolf 1994: 47-48; Violi 2003). A case in point is the specific use of the idea of ‘embodiment’ by the founding fathers of the framework, a use that has been repeatedly criticized by many authors since the early days of conceptual-metaphor theory (see Wolf 1994: 3.1.1. for an overview and a discussion). Dirven (2004: 12) aptly captures the gist of the criticism by saying that many have claimed that in his understanding of ‘embodiment,’ Lakoff is “dealing with floating bodies detached from their environments.” We would, however, not subscribe to this criticism, since it disregards the constant emphasis on ongoing organism-environment interaction in the Lakoff and Johnson framework.78 77

78

They are bodily through and through not only in the sense that they are formulated exclusively in terms of the bodily. Also, Lakoff and Johnson continuously stress (e.g., Johnson and Lakoff 2002: 250) that they view them explicitly as “neural structures,” i.e., as physical through and through in this respect, too. Many of the objections made against the notion of ‘embodiment’ advocated by Lakoff and Johnson may indeed be based on misinterpretations, as Johnson and Lakoff (2002) argue in their defense of their understanding of ‘embodied realism.’

62

The cultural model of community in African English

Rather, we argue that the bidirectionality, or better dialectic, of the organismenvironment interaction needs to be fully recognized. ‘Embodiment’ in the sense of Lakoff and Johnson is primarily meant to capture that humans conceptualize the world in terms of their bodily experience. The other direction of embodiment, i.e., the ‘incorporation’ of socio-cultural experience, is the dialectical counterpart of this, to our minds, undeniably true stance.79 What follows from this second direction of ‘embodiment’ is that the body does not provide meaning that is not already cultural and that different cultures may command different embodiments (cf. Wolf 1994: 47). Bodily experience can play the role it plays in conceptualizing the world precisely because it has incorporated and is charged with sociocultural meaning. It is this incorporation that connects the body to the socio-cultural world and keeps it from being alien in it. In other words, only through the synthesis of body and culture can meaning arise. While neither this stance nor the above remarks on a phenomenological view of the body are, at the philosophical level, in opposition to the Lakoff and Johnson framework,80 we feel that they are not correspondingly represented in the actual design of the theoretical model. A revision of the concept of ‘embodiment’ is one of the recent key issues in CL (see Ziemke, Zlatev and Frank 2007, and also Frank et al. 2008), with concepts like ‘situated embodiment’ (Zlatev 1999). The present debate on ‘embodiment’ is multifaceted, and it is not limited to the general points of criticism expressed above. It touches on the very basis of the theory in three respects: First, on the issue of whether the fundamental embodied structures should be regarded as “mental representations” or, as the Lakoff and Johnson approach has it, as downright “neural”; second, the question of whether these structures are accessible to the consciousness or are, as held by Lakoff and Johnson, part of the “unconscious”; and third, the problem of “conventionality” (see Zlatev 2007 for a discussion). We will not address the first two issues, since they are not immediately relevant to our concern. The problem of “conventionality,” however, is, since it is the key concept needed to account for the socio-cultural dimension of language. Zlatev (2007) argues that the Lakoff and Johnson view of ‘embodiment’ does not have a real place for ‘conventionality.’ Conventionality means, essentially, 79

80

We find this dialectic understanding of ‘embodiment’ expressed in Bourdieu (1990), especially in Belief and the Body (1990: ch. 4). Bourdieu is, for instance, Lakoff’s starting point in a 2001 interview on Philosophy in the Flesh (Brockman 2001).

The cultural model of community in African English

63

that knowledge, i.e., conceptualizations, are shared among individuals. A model that regards conceptual structures as “neural” structures is in fundamental conflict with this concept, or, at least, has a lot of explaining to do. “Neural” structures are a matter of individual brains and it makes little if any sense to speak of neural structures that are shared across individuals. As Zlatev (2007: 311) puts it for the case of metaphor, “there is nothing ‘conventional’ about neurally realized domain-to-domain mappings, at least in any conventional use of the term convention.” And one can only agree with Zlatev when he states that it takes more to account for shared knowledge than the evocation of basic conceptual commonalities due to basic bodily experience and shared biological make-up.81 This point may be also made with Merleau-Ponty (2002), who states, in his discussion of emotion concepts: It is not enough for two conscious subjects to have the same organs and nervous system for the same emotions to produce in both the same signs. What is important is how they use their bodies, the simultaneous patterning of body and world in emotion. The psychophysiological equipment leaves a great variety of possibilities open, and there is no more here than in the realm of instinct a human nature finally and immutably given. The use a man is to make of his body is transcendent in relation to that body as a mere biological entity. (Merleau-Ponty 2002: 219-220)

Here, it is one thing to acknowledge the great range of possible variation, as Lakoff and Johnson, for instance, have been repeatedly doing. The real question is, however, how to account for the fact that this potential for variation takes specific manifestations in specific socio-cultural contexts. These manifestations – or better, cultural systems of shared knowledge, beliefs, conventions, and norms – have the following characteristics that, to our minds, cannot be captured in terms of neural structures in individual brains: These systems “exist” not only rather irrespective of but also prior 81

One could take the ideas proposed by our anonymous reviewer as a possible way to console the “neural” perspective with “sociocultural cultural situatedness” (cf. Frank et al. 2008). The reviewer suggests that the exposure to similar physical events may stimulate shared neural development and conceptual structures across individuals not traceable yet by the current technological state of neuroscience. In the case of culturally structured physical events, such as initiations rites, one could say that culture structures embodied concepts within a system of conventions. We find these thoughts quite worthy of further theoretical and experimental efforts.

64

The cultural model of community in African English

to an individual’s mere biological existence. They transcend the individual ‘body’ as a fixed foundation of knowledge. They are transmitted and communicated. They are dynamic and open to change, again rather irrespective of individual group members. They are not distributed evenly among the members of a group (see below). They are conventional in the group, but not fully obligatory to individuals. Given these characteristics, it is not even appropriate to view these systems as a mere cross-section of the conceptual systems of the individual group members. This leads us to the discussion of another theoretical key concept of our approach, namely the concept of ‘cultural model.’ Since the 1970s, a number of theoretical ideas have been introduced in the cognitively oriented literature in order to capture conceptual structures at different levels of complexity and abstractness. Among the most influential ones developed from a linguistic vantage point are Fillmore’s (e.g., 1982) concept of ‘frame,’ Schank and Abelson’s (1977) concept of ‘script,’ and the concept of ‘idealized cognitive models’ proposed in Fillmore (1975) and further elaborated by Lakoff (1987). Parallel and congenial to these concepts are those developed against the background of cognitive anthropology, most prominently ‘folk model’ and ‘cultural model’ (e.g., D’Andrade 1987).82 Both strands, the linguistically and the anthropologically oriented ones, share common interests. For the anthropologist, linguistic data are among the best available clues for the reconstruction of patterns of cultural knowledge; for the linguist, in turn, cultural patterns promise to provide an explanatory basis of linguistic usage (cf. Quinn and Holland 1987: 24). This common interest is already attested in Holland and Quinn’s (1987) early collective volume Cultural Models in Language and Thought, which represents approaches in both strands. 82

The notion of ‘cultural model’ has, of course, predecessors. Amongst them, Weinrich’s (1976: 287) notion of an ‘image-field community’ (Bildfeldgemeinschaft) figures most prominently. Black (1993 [1977]: 28) has a related point in mind when he speaks of a ‘complex of associated commonplaces’ in the context of metaphor. Furthermore, there are congenial theoretical concepts in the neighboring social sciences. There are, for instance, striking parallels between ‘cultural model’ and Bourdieu’s (e.g., 1990) notion of habitus (see Polzenhagen 2007: 243-246 for a brief discussion), and the incorporation of Bourdieu’s approach may provide challenging perspectives for future culturalmodel research.

The cultural model of community in African English

65

The Holland and Quinn volume, however, also reflects a major theoretical controversy that arises when the linguistic and the anthropological perspectives meet, namely the issue of where the cultural conceptualizations underlying language are to be located. The linguistic perspective foregrounds the fact that language data are always produced by individual speakers and that they thus need to be explained as representing individual conceptual structures. This stance crystallizes in the cognitivist position that, after all, “individual minds are the primary locus of linguistic and cultural knowledge,” as Langacker (1994: 26) puts it, since “empty heads would not have any basis for talking or engaging in sociocultural interaction – the value of items cannot be renegotiated unless those engaged in that process ascribe some value to them in the first place” (Langacker 1994: 26). In this understanding, the concept ‘cognitive model’ has a pronounced psycho-physiological commitment. The anthropological perspective, in turn, is primarily concerned with sociocultural groups and thus sets out to anchor cultural conceptualizations in a group’s collective mind rather than in the minds of its individual members (see Keesing 1987: 370). This focus on the group level is reflected in D’Andrade’s understanding of ‘cultural models’ as “cognitive schemas that are intersubjectively shared by a social group” (D’Andrade 1987: 112). Locating cultural conceptualizations at group level, however, poses the question of how they are represented. It is counterfactual to assume a group of ideal homogeneous individuals who fully share the same conceptual structures. Rather, speaking of “cultural cognitive models” entails what Sharifian (2003) has termed “distributed representation,” i.e., the notion that cultural conceptualizations are partially shared by members of a group and unevenly distributed among them. As House (2003: 32) explains: A multitude of individual ‘mental representations’ exists within each group. A subset of these which can be overtly expressed in language and artefacts turn into ‘public representations’, which are communicated to others in the social group. This communication gives rise to similar mental representations in others which may again be communicated involving the creation of mental representations and so on. If a subset of these representations is communicated frequently enough within a social group, these representations will become firmly entrenched and turn into ‘cultural representations.’

Hence, cultural models truly emerge in discourse only, through collective interaction, and this concept thus transcends the cognitivist concept of

66

The cultural model of community in African English

‘idealized cognitive models (ICMs).’ Thus, cultural model could be the cover term, also comprising the individuals’ cognitive models (Gary Palmer, personal comment). This relationship between cultural models and ICMs may be illustrated with a standard example from the CL literature, namely the case of the concept MOTHER discussed by Lakoff (1987). This case is also of immediate interest to the concern of our book, since kinship relations are a key issue under analysis in the empirical part. For the concept MOTHER, Lakoff (1987: 74-76) identifies a set of several idealized cognitive models that are involved: — — — —

The genetic model: The biological mother.83 The nurture-and-care model: The woman who nurtures and raises the child. The marital model: The father’s wife. The genealogical mother: The closest female ancestor.

The specific model drawn upon by the speaker may be made explicit by compound expressions like foster mother, surrogate mother, stepmother, etc. However, the unspecified item mother may be used against the background of all these models, and it is then left to the context or co-text which of them is instantiated in a given utterance. For an individual, the above models are not necessarily linked to the same person; for instance, the father’s wife may be different from the biological mother. However, as Lakoff (1987: 75) rightly notes, only one person will be generally singled out as the “real mother,” and against the horizon of which model(s) this ascription is made depends on the circumstances of the given individual. From this perspective, there is no default case of “mother.” Furthermore, an individual’s concept of “mother” will be shaped significantly by the specific experience of that person. There is thus a strong element of variation at the level of individuals. Taking the cultural-model vantage point, however, one would transcend the level of the individual and would argue that there is, individual and contextual variation notwithstanding, a core model of MOTHER in a given sociocultural group. What constitutes this core model is a salience hierarchy of the different aspects of “motherhood” captured by the above ICMs; 83

As Lakoff rightly points out, the biological mother (donor of genetic material) does not necessarily coincide with the birth-giving (surrogate) mother. Thus further refinements can be made here.

The cultural model of community in African English

67

from the perspective of a given group, these aspects are not equally prominent, rather, they are arranged in a center-periphery fashion.84 It is important to note that the two foci, i.e., the cognitivist one on the individual and the anthropological one on the group, are not necessarily in conflict with each other. Rather, they are complementary and allow for different dimensions of analysis. As stated earlier, the former has a clear psycho-physiological commitment and is thus the one relevant to studies with such a scope. In turn, the crucial gain of the cultural-model approach is that it opens the way for a cross-cultural perspective. It is thus the one most suitable for our specific concern. Consider again the case of the MOTHER concept as an illustration: It was argued that, abstracting from individual variation, a core model of MOTHER may be identified. This model pertains to a certain sociocultural group; it reflects and captures this group’s specific sociocultural realities. Cross-culturally, the relative salience of the various aspects of motherhood that constitute the respective core model may differ. For instance, the nurture-and-care model certainly has more salience in a society with a community-based family concept – where the role of ‘mother’ may not be attached to one person alone – than in the “Western” context, where the cultural prototype is the nuclear family. Likewise, biological motherhood may have a greater prominence for one culture than for another, and the same applies to the other elements of the model. The analysis given in the empirical part of our book is driven by this observation. The case of the cultural model of MOTHER may also serve as an illustration of a further point which is crucial for our general concern here. There is a whole range of “non-literal” applications of kinship terms, including mother, which are linguistic manifestations of underlying metonymic or metaphoric mappings. As Lakoff (1987: 76) rightly observes for the case of mother, such instances of transfer hook up with specific aspects of motherhood. Against the conceptual background of the nurture-andcare model, for instance, a father, too, can be motherly. An expression like necessity is the mother of invention, in turn, draws upon the birth model. A more detailed account of the metaphoric transfer of kinship terms is given by Turner (1987). Turner’s book is concerned primarily with 84

Here, one needs to take into account, of course, that communities, linguistic and otherwise, have different degrees of cultural homogeneity. The idea of a “core model” may only apply to culturally relatively homogenous groups (cf. p. 77 for the cultural homogeneity of Sub-Saharan Africa).

68

The cultural model of community in African English

kinship metaphors in the Western cultural context. However, this type of analysis again invites a cross-cultural perspective. Interestingly, the examples discussed by Turner (1987) show a prevalence of metaphors made against the biological family model in the Western context, in particular those grounded on the notions of ‘birth,’ ‘creation,’ ‘causation,’ ‘lineage,’ and ‘inheritance.’ In our analysis of African English, however, we will observe a high frequency of mappings from the nurture-and-care model, which attests to the corresponding salience of this model in the African cultural context. The issue of metonymy and metaphor comes into play in yet another respect. Since the early days of cultural-model research there has been a strong debate on the actual role of conceptual metaphors and metonymies in the internal make-up of cultural models. The debate boils down to the question of whether conceptual metaphors are primary, or, to put it in words borrowed from the title of an article by Kövecses (1999), whether conceptual metaphors merely reflect or actually constitute cultural models. In fact, the early Holland and Quinn volume (1987) already mirrors this controversy. With Lakoff and Kövecses’ (1987) study on ANGER, it contains a paper that advocates the metaphor-as-constitutive position. Quinn’s paper (1987, also see 1991) on the American cultural model of marriage, in turn, represents the view that cultural models are constituted by what she calls “proposition-schemas,” and that the various metaphors present in the model derive from these taken-for-granted propositions. For the American cultural model of marriage, Quinn identified, based on 15 hours of taped interviews with married couples, eight such “proposition-schemas”: MARRIAGE is MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL, UNKNOWN AT THE OUTSET, JOINT, DIFFICULT, EFFORTFUL, RISKY, and ENDURING and MAY SUCCEED OR FAIL. MARRIAGE IS ENDURING, for example, is seen as the basis of metaphoric expressions like to be bound together or to be cemented together (Quinn 1987: 180; see Palmer 1996: 104-109 for a review). Quinn’s analysis has come under criticism by the proponents of the metaphor-as-constitutive position. Gibbs (1994: 197-207), for instance, argues that the marriage model may well be regarded as being structured by a set of frequently occurring metaphoric models alone, based on salient source domains like JOURNEY and PRODUCT. Specifically, Quinn’s findings that MARRIAGE is seen as UNKNOWN AT THE OUTSET, DIFFICULT, EFFORTFUL, JOINT, and that it MAY SUCCEED OR FAIL can then be interpreted as entailments of the underlying metaphor MARRIAGE IS A JOURNEY. Kövecses (1999) makes a similar point when he argues that many of Quinn’s data are expressions of

The cultural model of community in African English

69

the metaphor MARRIAGE IS THE PHYSICAL UNITY OF TWO COMPLEMENTARY PARTS, which is but a special instance of the NON-PHYSICAL UNITY IS PHYSICAL UNITY metaphor. It is against the background of the UNITY metaphor that marriage is expected to be “shared,” “beneficial,” “lasting,” etc. Kövecses thus concludes that the proposition schemas identified and analyzed by Quinn are in fact themselves derived from basic conceptual metaphors.85 The view favoring the primacy of conceptual metaphors has clearly dominated the research on cultural models within CL. There are, however, approaches to cultural models that tend towards the “cultural postulate” view, as Palmer (1996) aptly calls it, for instance the work of Wierzbicka (1996, 1997). The matter is still undecided and the exact relation between conceptual metaphors and cultural models remains controversial, as reflected in the articles in Gibbs and Steen (1999). Leaning towards a comprehensive view, we take cultural models to be more encompassing than metaphorical networks, in that they are complex conceptual patterns, including metaphoric, metonymic, as well as non-figurative conceptualizations among members of a socio-cultural group. For our present concern we see no immediate need to elaborate on the question of whether or not certain types of conceptualizations should be regarded as primary.86 Rather, we wish to put our focus on the interrelatedness of conceptualizations within a cultural model. Consider, as an illustration, a concept closely related to the model of marriage, namely the concept of LOVE as expressed in English. This concept has received a good deal of attention in the CL literature, and a whole set of salient source domains for this concept has been identified and exemplified (see Kövecses 2002: 45-46, 81-83 for an overview). One of the ways in which LOVE RELATIONSHIPS are conceptualized is in terms of a network of interrelated EATING metaphors. Specifically, the OBJECT OF LOVE is conceptualized as APPETIZING FOOD, which manifests itself, for instance, in the vast range of pet names given to a beloved person, like honey, sugar, sweetie-pie. Following the logic of the source domain, 85

86

In a later publication, however, Kövecses (2005: 205-208) tones down his criticism of Quinn. We regard the “literal,” the “metonymic,” and the “metaphoric” as expressions of three basic modes of human conceptualizing – symbolic, indexical, and iconic – without assuming primacy of any one of them. On the distinction of these three principles in CL, see Dirven and Verspoor (2004: ch. 1).

70

The cultural model of community in African English

a person’s desire for love is conceptualized in terms of HUNGER, as in hungry for love. This also applies to SEXUAL DESIRE, which yields expressions like sexual appetite, to be sex-starved, to crave for somebody, she has him drooling. In the same vein, MAKING LOVE (SEX) is conceptualized as EATING, which generates expressions like he wanted to devour her, I could eat you.87 We thus have a network of interrelated conceptualizations rather than a set of isolated ones. This aspect of systematicity is a central observation of CL, and the conceptual-metaphor literature in particular.88 The above example also illustrates a second and closely related aspect of systematicity. A parallel network of EATING metaphors is at work in several other domains. Consider the case of the conceptualization of KNOWLEDGE and IDEAS. One salient way in which IDEAS are conceptualized is as FOOD, e.g., in that class gave me food for thought, that’s a very meaty book, that’s a half-baked proposal, what he said left a bad taste in my mouth, or just give me the raw facts. Likewise, WANTING TO KNOW is conceptualized as HUNGER / THIRST, e.g., in an appetite for learning / thirst for knowledge and an insatiable curiosity. The network is extended by conceptualizations like AQUIRING KNOWLEDGE IS EATING / DIGESTING and GIVING INFORMATION IS FEEDING, as in she devoured the book, the lecture was hard to digest, his words were difficult to stomach, or the teacher spoon-fed them the information. In fact, the two networks sketched above may thus be regarded as instantiations of an underlying network of more general conceptualizations based on the source domain of EATING. This meets with Lakoff’s (1993a) observation that there is a general tendency to conceptualize all sorts of drives and desires as HUNGER, resources as FOOD, and achieving a purpose as EATING. Finally, HAVING ACHIEVED is conceptualized as BEING BIG as the result of EATING, which interacts with 87

88

See Kövecses (2002: 16, 73) for further discussion. Since the act of love making commonly involves practices that are associated with the EATING domain (e.g., biting, sucking), these metaphors may be said to have a metonymic origin and dimension. Most of the linguistic examples illustrating the conceptualizations of LOVE and IDEAS are taken from Kövecses (2002) and the Conceptual Metaphor Home Page (1994). However, it is once again Weinrich who has made this observation before key CL authors did, by arguing that “random isolated metaphors are always possible. But they are rarer than one would think them to be, and – even more importantly – they are usually not successful in a speech community. The speech community wants the metaphor that is integrated” (Weinrich 1976: 286; our translation).

The cultural model of community in African English

71

the metaphor IMPORTANT IS BIG.89 The overall more global network may be captured in the following graphic representation (figure 1):

RESOURCES ARE FOOD

STRONG DESIRES ARE HUNGER

ACHIEVING A PURPOSE IS EATING

IMPORTANT IS BIG

Figure 1.

Network of general conceptualizations based on the source domain EATING.

These conceptualizations have rather unspecified target domains and may be called “general” metaphors (a related concept to be found in the literature is ‘primary metaphor,’ in the sense of Grady 1999). They may be applied to more specific target domains, as LOVE and IDEAS above, and may be said to in fact motivate such more “specific” metaphors, as a kind of “Hierarchy Inheritance” (see Lakoff 1993b).90 Importantly, this application may be partial, in that only some of the general metaphors show up in entrenched specific ones. However, as the cases of LOVE and IDEAS 89

90

IMPORTANT IS BIG in itself is not an eating metaphor. Rather, its basis is physical size, which is correlated with the notions of strength and power. However, in the logic of the network, BEING BIG IS HAVING EATEN and BEING BIG IS HAVING FOOD, which links up to and integrates the metaphor IMPORTANT IS BIG. ‘General metaphor’ is to be distinguished from ‘generic-level metaphor,’ a concept developed in Lakoff and Turner (1989). EVENTS ARE ACTIONS is a metaphor of the latter type. Generic-level metaphors also allow for specifications, however, they are rather schematic in nature and do not have fixed target and source domains. For a discussion see Lakoff and Turner (1989: 80-83) and Grady (1999).

The cultural model of community in African English

72

illustrate, it may also be the entire network of general metaphors that is instantiated. We have discussed the case of general and specific EATING metaphors in some detail in order to prepare the ground for one of the main arguments we make in the empirical part of our book, namely that particular instantiations of such general networks may be specific and restricted to certain languages or language varieties, or better, to certain cultural contexts. While the network of eating metaphors in the conceptualization of LOVE and IDEAS is part of the ‘common core’ of English, i.e., common across the various cultural contexts in which English is spoken, we will provide evidence that African English displays this network in three domains (LEADERSHIP, WEALTH, and WITCHCRAFT) where no parallel degree of entrenchment and systematicity of eating metaphors can be found in Western varieties of English. The pervasiveness of eating metaphors in these domains is one of the linguistic manifestations of the African cultural model of community. From this admittedly brief outline of our theoretical framework, we will turn, in the following sections, to the discussion of the African cultural model of community. This model consists of a complex, interrelated network of conceptualizations. For organizational purposes, we have categorized our findings according to what may be called with Goodenough (2001: n.p.) “socially recognized relations” that are “recursively reproduced through time” (see section 2.2.1.); specifically, relations of group membership, relations of mutual obligations, relations of spirituality, and relations of tensions.

2.2.

Aspects of the African community model 91

2.2.1. The reference point of the kinship-based community model The study of kinship terms and kinship systems has been a hallmark of anthropological research from various theoretical perspectives since the 91

This section is a synthesis and, in parts, an extension of earlier publications by the present authors. The approach was first presented in Wolf (1999) and elaborated in Wolf (2001: ch. 5) and Polzenhagen (2007). Wolf and Simo Bobda (2001) discuss implications for language teaching in the ESL context, Wolf and Polzenhagen (2007) address the subject with the focus on fixed expressions, Polzenhagen and Wolf (2007) discuss conceptualizations and linguistic expressions of corruption in African English.

The cultural model of community in African English

72

illustrate, it may also be the entire network of general metaphors that is instantiated. We have discussed the case of general and specific EATING metaphors in some detail in order to prepare the ground for one of the main arguments we make in the empirical part of our book, namely that particular instantiations of such general networks may be specific and restricted to certain languages or language varieties, or better, to certain cultural contexts. While the network of eating metaphors in the conceptualization of LOVE and IDEAS is part of the ‘common core’ of English, i.e., common across the various cultural contexts in which English is spoken, we will provide evidence that African English displays this network in three domains (LEADERSHIP, WEALTH, and WITCHCRAFT) where no parallel degree of entrenchment and systematicity of eating metaphors can be found in Western varieties of English. The pervasiveness of eating metaphors in these domains is one of the linguistic manifestations of the African cultural model of community. From this admittedly brief outline of our theoretical framework, we will turn, in the following sections, to the discussion of the African cultural model of community. This model consists of a complex, interrelated network of conceptualizations. For organizational purposes, we have categorized our findings according to what may be called with Goodenough (2001: n.p.) “socially recognized relations” that are “recursively reproduced through time” (see section 2.2.1.); specifically, relations of group membership, relations of mutual obligations, relations of spirituality, and relations of tensions.

2.2.

Aspects of the African community model 91

2.2.1. The reference point of the kinship-based community model The study of kinship terms and kinship systems has been a hallmark of anthropological research from various theoretical perspectives since the 91

This section is a synthesis and, in parts, an extension of earlier publications by the present authors. The approach was first presented in Wolf (1999) and elaborated in Wolf (2001: ch. 5) and Polzenhagen (2007). Wolf and Simo Bobda (2001) discuss implications for language teaching in the ESL context, Wolf and Polzenhagen (2007) address the subject with the focus on fixed expressions, Polzenhagen and Wolf (2007) discuss conceptualizations and linguistic expressions of corruption in African English.

The cultural model of community in African English

73

early days of this field,92 and African societies have received a great deal of attention in literature. It goes far beyond the scope of our book to review the anthropological literature on the subject, especially since it is not our endeavor to describe the kinship order and kinship systems of specific groups. Rather, we are concerned with the role of KINSHIP and FAMILY as source domains for the conceptualization of various social relations that constitute communities in general. Our point is to show that kinship-related conceptualizations are the backbone of the African cultural model of community. We will then focus on the impact and implications of this model for the political sphere of contemporary Sub-Saharan Africa. Speaking of a “kinship-based” community model wishes to capture that this model is, in its essence, an extension of the FAMILY concept. The resulting network is described in the following statement by Mbiti (1990: 102): The kinship system is a vast network stretching laterally (horizontally) in every direction, to embrace everybody in a given local group. This means that each individual is a brother or sister, father or mother, grandmother or grandfather, or cousin or brother-in-law, sister-in-law, uncle or aunt or something else to somebody else. That means that everybody is related to everybody else.

Here, it is important to point out that the underlying African concept of FAMILY and KINSHIP is not altogether congruent with the Western one (cf., e.g., Alo 1989, Schatzberg 1986: 10). The prototype of the Western (folk) model is the nuclear family, constituted by biological relations, i.e., relations of blood, and in-law relations, i.e., relations established through marriage. Although lineage and in-law relationships are certainly important to the African concept of FAMILY, too, it is not restricted to such affiliations. As Weekes-Vagliani (1976: 15) has observed: In Africa, the notions of family and society are closely intertwined. The boundaries of family are defined by the social exchanges as much as by the biological ties between people, and the term covers far more than the strict nuclear unit of two parents and their children. In fact, the languages used in the area [Southern Cameroon] make no distinction between the terms for ‘family’ and for ‘kinship’ in general. 92

Classics in the field include Geertz and Geertz (1975), Goodenough (1968), Lévi-Strauss (1969 [1949]), Keesing (1976), Schneider (1984), to name only a few. Parkin and Stone (2003) is a recent reader with key texts on the issue, also see Parkin (1997).

74

The cultural model of community in African English

Similarly, Ellis (1999: 32, leaning on Horton 1985) characterizes “communities without strong political institutions” in Africa as remarkably flexible, since a highly elastic determination of who exactly is a relation by birth or by adoption, enables people to combine in larger or smaller units according to circumstance, by choosing to invoke or ignore broader kinship ties for specific purposes while retaining the capacity for individual enterprise or action.

Below we will give examples of the flexibility of the African kinship and community model. In the field of anthropology, this kind of divergence between cultural models of FAMILY and KINSHIP in different cultural settings is reflected in a long-standing and ongoing debate on the term “kinship” and on the methodology of kinship studies. A radical stance is taken by Schneider (e.g., 1984). He regards kinship as a mere “cultural construct” and holds that there is no per se cross-cultural common denominator of what constitutes kinship. He therefore rejects the possibility of a generally valid definition of this term, and, consequently, of a generally valid way of studying kinship cross-culturally. Schneider’s criticism thus challenges the entire tradition of kinship studies, on the grounds that they are based on the notion of ‘genealogy,’ which he deems to be an undue universalization of the Western kinship model.93 Not surprisingly, Schneider’s position met strong criticism in the field. Recent contributions to the debate can be found in the collective volume by Feinberg and Ottenheimer (2001). There, Goodenough (2001), for instance, summarizing his earlier objections, argues that Schneider’s criticism is based on a serious misconception of the term “genealogy” as it is used by most anthropologists. Goodenough (2001) points out that “genealogical” relations, in the anthropological sense, cannot be and are not reduced to bonds through blood and marriage. Rather, they comprise a whole set of “socially recognized relations,” and “one can construct a genealogy out of any relationship that is recursively reproduced through time.” Consequently, “as properly used by anthropologists, then, genealogies are not ethnocentric projections of Euro-American folk cultural ideas about kinship and kin relatedness” (Goodenough 2001: n.p.). 93

The deeper philosophical problem underlying the debate is the issue of relativism and its consequences for methodology, as can be seen in Feinberg and Ottenheimer’s (2001) volume. Since anthropology is not our home territory, we prefer to outline and exemplify our position on this issue for the field of pragmatics (see section 3.3.).

The cultural model of community in African English

75

Not being trained anthropologists, we do not wish to engage in terminological issues. There is, however, no doubt that the African understanding of kinship cannot be captured by a narrow conception of ‘genealogy.’ On par with bonds of blood and marriage, there is a set of other “socially recognized relations” that are central to the model. Key ingredients of the model that need to be considered here are aspects like age, the model’s spiritual and magical dimension, communal identity, and specific duties, in particular those of protection and nurture. Also, any analysis needs to pay tribute to the fact that the realm of these aspects is the community rather than the mere nuclear family. Historically speaking, the traditional reference point where these relations are established and instituted is the local village community. Certainly, in modern urbanized Sub-Saharan Africa the traditional village community is no longer the dominant mode of social life, and the actual contact urban dwellers have with their “village of origin” is more often than not scarce. However, the commitment of urban dwellers to “their” village is strong and, even for people born in the city, “home” still refers primarily to the place or at least the region of origin (Geschiere 1995; cf. also Bastian 1993: 135). The link to the village of origin, even when not substantiated by significant actual contact, continues to be of great emotional importance. For an urban dweller, it is, for instance, still a taken-for-granted and key aspect of self-realization to return to his “village” on retirement, to build a house there, and to be buried in the ground of the ancestors (Geschiere 1995; Bastian 1993: 136), rather irrespective of the question of whether or not this can actually be accomplished. Beyond these primarily “symbolic” issues, manifest relations of nurture and care continue to link urbanities with their village of origin. Successful urban dwellers are expected to share their wealth with their home village and in turn seek social security there. Ellis’ (1999: 36-37) reference to Liberia can stand for sub-Saharan Africa in general: It is particularly important for city-dwellers to stay in touch with their ancestral village as this is considered a central point of public morality. People would think it highly immoral if a country man or woman were to get a good job in Monrovia and then forget the relatives back in the village.

In many parts of Africa, these ties are virtually institutionalized. Geschiere (1995) and Bastian (1993: 135f.), for instance, give an account of the numerous associations of town people in Cameroon, which organize and provide support for their home villages and strive to keep cultural ties and

76

The cultural model of community in African English

contacts alive. These associations are primarily run by the urban elites. In the 1980s and 1990s some of them even transformed into veritable development associations and compensate for the often gross governmental neglect of the rural areas (Geschiere 1995). The relationship between the urban elite and their village is, however, far from being harmonious; cf.: It is important not to romanticise this ongoing relationship. The relations between urban elites and their kinsmen in the village are not only marked by commitment and solidarity but also by jealousy and fear of hidden aggression. The new inequalities often surpass the old boundaries and therefore call forth accusations that the elites are not sharing their new wealth;94 but the elites will often complain about the “impossible mentality” of the villagers who never stop asking. (Geschiere 1995: n.p.)

Furthermore, the commitment of the elites is often politically motivated. They do not only seek social security in their home village but political support, especially during election time. The relationship between town people and their village is thus a highly complex one (cf. Bastian 1993; Geschiere 1995; Chabal and Daloz 1999: 75).95 One may also and rightly argue that the village community itself is no longer an “intact” social space. “Things fall apart,” as Achebe puts it in the title of his 1958 novel. However, the local community serves as an ideal reference point and new social realities continue to be judged and modeled from its perspective. In van Binsbergen’s words (2000: n.p.): Rural populations in Africa struggled, through numerous forms of organisational, ideological and productive innovation combining local practices with outside borrowings, to reconstruct a new sense of community in an attempt to revitalise, complement or replace the collapsing village community [...]. [Rural Africans] have sought to re-formulate the notion of the viable, intact village community in new terms and with new outside inspiration and outside pressure. 94

95

Here, the occult dimension comes into play. Note that jealousy and the accusation of not sharing one’s wealth appropriately are major motivations of witchcraft. This aspect will be dealt with in more detail in section 2.2.5. This relationship is a central topic in modern African literature. Consider, for instance, Achebe’s Things Fall Apart (1958) and A Man of the People (1988) for Nigerian examples, Armah’s (1988) The Beautiful Ones Are Not Yet Born for a Ghanaian one, and John Luangala’s (1991) The Chosen Bud for the Zambian setting. Especially in the latter one, the entire complex of political motivation, new wealth, witchcraft, and ancestor beliefs is fully described.

The cultural model of community in African English

77

Van Binsbergen’s observation also holds true at a more general level. Up to the present, the kinship-based community system is a dominant cultural model of social life and social structures in Africa. This model is, to apply Bourdieu’s (1990) term, part of the cultural habitus, i.e., a conceptual representation generated by past conditions and collective past experience and used to structure the representations of present conditions. Elements and values of this model, which are directly meaningful in the immediate local context, are mapped on newly emerged and emerging social structures.96 In this mapping process, the elements are transformed, appropriated, and acquire new senses. As van Binsbergen (2000: n.p.; his italics) puts it, “modern life is the kinship order virtualised.” This process is, essentially, a metonymic and metaphoric transfer. The discussion so far implied that we treat Sub-Saharan Africa basically as culturally homogenous with respect to the dimensions covered by our analysis. Though this position may be open to dispute, we are in agreement with a large number of scholars, both African and non-African, who consider the culture of Sub-Saharan Africa as being united by certain cultural themes and practices (for a further discussion of this point, see Wolf 2001: 275, 2006: 43).

2.2.2. Relations of group membership: The identity dimension At the conceptual level, two interchangeable metonymies based on the kinship concept constitute the core of the African community model: COMMUNITY FOR KINSHIP and KINSHIP FOR COMMUNITY, respectively. Linguistically, they find marked expression in the well-known use of kinship terms in African English. Simo Bobda, for instance, makes the following observation for Cameroon English, which is valid for African English in general (see Wolf 2001: 212-214 for a detailed account): The terms father, mother, son, daughter, brother, and sister designate referents ranging from relatives in the Western sense to members of the same race, through close and distant relatives, people of the same village, tribe, country, continent, etc. (Simo Bobda 1997: 228-229) 96

This is aptly expressed, for instance, in Musopole’s (1994: 78) term “adoptive kinship”; in urban areas, where people have been uprooted from their traditional village settings, personal friends are adopted and become part of the family. On the persistence of the notion of the extended family in urban, and “modern” settings in Africa see, e.g., Weekes-Vagliani (1976).

The cultural model of community in African English

78

The kinship-based model is thus at work with respect to the full range of social units. Examples include: The inhabitants of a village or town, as in (1)

The village was proud of its sons and daughters. (Saho 1994: 58)

(2)

She had buried her son, the village had buried its child. (Makuchi 1999: 53).

(3)

The chief is like a father of the town. (Personal communication)

(4)

Santa people whose son was a prime minister. (Ntoi 1998: 8)

The population of a region, as in (5)

Worst of it, some daughters and sons of Southern Cameroons rolled the drums to celebrate. (WCL: 82)

(6)

Both from the same part of Liberia, Johnson affectionately referred to Bantu as ‘my little brother, Isaac.’ (Williams 2002: 289)

(7)

For the grasslanders and coastal brother. (The Guardian Post 2001: 8)

Communities defined regionally and linguistically, e.g., the anglophone population of Cameroon97 (8)

To express the solidarity of the SDF as well as of the Cameroonian People with our anglophone brothers. (WCL: 71)

(9)

You see, brother, it’s difficult to hide the truth. At the time when our radio sycophants were still shouting that the best thing to happen, is to continue eating shit in the uneasy marriage. Our son in Garoua, Nsuh Martin, cried out that frogs in the choir house were still referring to him as a slave from Southern Cameroons (“L’anglo la”). (WCL: 82)

Political parties, e.g., the Cameroonian CPDM (10)

the Santa CPDM is planning a mass decamping because none of their sons was appointed into the new government. (Ntoi 1998: 8)

Ethnic groups and nations, as in (11)

97

Sons, Daughters or any other legal resident of The Land of Liberia. (WCL: 93)

On the conceptualization of the Anglophones in Cameroon as a community, see Wolf (2001: 295-299).

The cultural model of community in African English (12)

Now, our Igbo brothers are saying the Yorubas have had four years, power should rotate to them before it goes back to the North in 2007. (WCL: 141)

(13)

The health development of brothers and sisters in Cameroon. (CEC)

(14)

In as much as the Igbo nation is trying to unite with itself and with its South-South brothers because the Igbo people know that they cannot do without neighbouring brothers, non-Igbo brothers and non-brothers believe they cannot do without us. There must be a kind of marriage or rethinking between these two brothers. (WCL: 72)

(15)

May this song be sung by the children of this land from the tree-tops to the summit of Mt. Cameroon. (CEC)

(16)

Children of Cameroon. (CEC).

79

Africa as a whole and its countries, as in (17)

Tambo is one of the illustrious sons of Africa. (ICE-EA)

(18)

Those same illustrious sons of Africa, Nigeria and their respective villages. (WCL: 124)

(19)

That the two countries were brotherly nations, with the same ancestors. (The Mail 2001: 3)

(20)

Soon, we will receive pictures taken with his brothers and sisters: Cameroonians, Nigerians, Ethiopians, Eritreans, Egyptians, Black South Africans, Kenyans, Senegalese. (Makuchi 1999: 92)

In the African model, KINSHIP is no doubt the central source domain for the conceptualization of COMMUNITY, in terms of entrenchment and frequency.98 It is the major means to anchor the individual in the various socio-cultural groups. What defines a group is, basically, a common denominator, most notably a common origin or identity, and this element of similarity is conceptualized and expressed in terms of KINSHIP. BEING SIMILAR IS BEING KIN is thus the more general conceptualization underlying KINSHIP FOR COMMUNITY. Kinship terms, as Bourdieu (1990: 170) puts it, 98

This is not to say that alternative ways of construing COMMUNITY are absent in the African setting. Another important metaphor is COMMUNITY IS AN ORGANISM, as in children are the buds of society (Mbiti 1990: 107), whence we stem like forests from the soil (CEC), and the child is considered a ‘plant’ growing up in a field – the kin group (CEC). This and other metaphors are, however, in the African context, clearly less salient and less frequent than kinship-based conceptualizations.

80

The cultural model of community in African English contain the magical power to institute frontiers and constitute groups, by performative declarations [...] that are invested with all the strength of the group that they help to make.

A key characteristic of the African community model is that it makes full and systematic use of this power. As Musopole (1994: 76) states: The social nature [...] is maintained and expressed through extended family systems and elaborate kinship networks, which produce a very strong sense of community.

Importantly, not only ties are established by the KINSHIP conceptualization, but, at the same time, cleavages, or “frontiers,” as Bourdieu puts it in the above statement. The resulting network constitutes a whole range of an individual’s possible identities, each of which determined by different criteria. As Chabal and Daloz (1999: 27) observe for the Nigerian context: The salience of any particular aspect of this identity changes according to the particulars of a given situation. For example, when religious violence breaks out, people identify with people of their own faith. Thus, conflicts between ‘Christians’ and ‘Muslims’ momentarily override any other attribute, whether ethnic, regional or social. A similar process occurs when ethnic identities come to the fore. The weight of each particular form of collective identification is, therefore, contingent on circumstances.

Chabal and Daloz’s evocation of “collective identification” and the “very strong sense of community” that Musopole emphasizes in the above quote point to a closely related crucial dimension of the KINSHIP FOR COMMUNITY conceptualization. In the African context, FAMILY and COMMUNITY are vital to an individual’s identity, or ‘concept of the self.’99 It is a common 99

On the notion of ‘concept of the self’ in cross-cultural studies see, e.g., Scollon and Scollon (2001: 144-147). The familiar distinction that is drawn is between cultures in which the major boundary that defines an individual’s self is his or her physical constitution, and cultures in which the intimate socio-cultural environment is perceived to be an integral part of an individual’s self, i.e., where the boundary is drawn to include this environment. This distinction is captured by terms like “independent” versus “interdependent” view of the individual (Markus and Kitayama 1991: 224). When this distinction is applied, African culture would fall into the latter category. We, however, fully agree with Scollon and Scollon’s (2001: 146) view that such categorizations are rather a characterization of the “ideal” that is upheld in a given society than of the society itself. Speaking in CL terms, it is a statement on dominant cultural models. On the Western folk model of the ‘self,’ see Wolf (1994).

The cultural model of community in African English

81

characterization of African societies that they are ‘collectivistic,’100 in the sense that communal collectivity takes precedence over individual identity (cf., e.g., Musopole 1994: 79). This precedence of the community has been continuously elaborated by anthropologists and philosophers dealing with Africa, and it is expressed, for instance, in the following quotes: True death in the African context is the exclusion of the individual from the community. (Masamba ma Mpolo 1994: 19) The dictum, ‘I am because we are, and since we are therefore I am,’ is the cardinal philosophical principle underlying African communitarianism. (Musopole 1994: 74; also see Gbadegesin 1991: 66) The individual does not and cannot exist alone except corporatively. He owes his existence to other people [...]. He is simply part of the whole. The community must therefore make, create or reproduce the individual; for the individual depends on the corporate group. (Mbiti 1990: 106)

Here are two examples that illustrate the underlying conceptualization of INDIVIDUAL IDENTITY in terms of COMMUNAL IDENTITY: (21)

Without other humans, a human offspring cannot attain social selfhood (personhood). (CEC)

(22)

The sense of self that we possess cannot therefore be attained without reference to the ‘community’ of other humans [...] Without [...] incorporation into ‘this’ or ‘that’ human community, individuals are considered mere ‘danglers’ to whom the designation ‘person’ does not appropriately and fully apply. (CEC)

INDIVIDUAL IDENTITY IS COMMUNAL IDENTITY is KINSHIP FOR COMMUNITY conceptualization. The

inherently implied in the patterns sketched in this section emerge clearly from our comparative frequency analyses of the corpora and from the data we obtained in our questionnaire survey. In line with the assumption that the centrality of certain concepts in a given culture should be traceable in representative text corpora through a high relative frequency of lexical material related to these concepts, we prepared a list of search words pertaining to the community domain and tested their occurrence in the CEC, the written component of the ICE-East

100

An influential matrix is the one proposed by Hofstede (1980), with its broad distinction between ‘collectivistic’ and ‘individualistic’ cultures. Again, to our mind, such characterizations should be interpreted as an identification of the dominant idealized cultural model in a given society.

82

The cultural model of community in African English

Africa (including the written-to-be-spoken part), and the FLOBFROWN (based on British and American English). In order to obtain the number of tokens, we lemmatized the items in question (following by and large the Concise Oxford English Dictionary 2002101). The various meanings or senses some items have (e.g., relative) were controlled as far as possible by looking at their occurrence in the texts, so that only the relevant tokens are included in the search results. Table 1 below presents the results of our comparative analysis. The data is partly taken from an earlier study (Wolf 2003) comparing the CEC and the FLOBFROWN; however, we now extended our analysis to include the ICE-EA in order to have a broader African perspective. The table lists the number of tokens per corpus for each of the items we considered in the search. However, the specific size of each corpus has to be taken into consideration: As computed by WordSmith, our version of FLOBFROWN has a total of 2,064,764 tokens, the ICE-EA of 1,255,488 tokens, and the CEC of 899,599 tokens (for more details on the corpora, see section 1.4. and the manuals accompanying the ICE-EA, the FLOB, and the FROWN corpora). In order to allow for a direct comparison, we thus provide, in brackets, weighted figures that indicate the number of tokens to which the actual frequency data would correspond in a 1 million word corpus. Some items in the ICE-EA (e.g., marry, maternal, maternity, offspring) do not follow the predicted pattern. This, however, may well be due to accidental specifics of a corpus, and it does not touch on the global results. It is precisely through the inclusion of a broad range of items from a domain that global patterns emerge, irrespective of deviations for individual items. Overall, the frequency data listed above clearly follow our expectations. If the CEC and the ICE-EA are taken together (combined they have about the same size as the FLOBFROWN), the items included in our analysis are almost 1.4 times more frequent in the African corpora than in the FLOBFROWN. We take this to be a linguistic reflection of the focal place that the notion ‘community’ occupies in African culture. 101

Married and blessed as adjectives and as the past tense forms are exceptions (see below). Also certain compounds like community care, money supply are separate lemmas in the COED, but unless these forms are hyphenated (e.g., father-in-law) they would be subsumed under the first unit of the compound in the wordlist produced by WordSmith. Note, more generally, that other strategies of lemmatization, as well as the use of specific settings in WordSmith may yield slightly different outputs of the computation from those presented in our tables. However, this should not bear significantly on the global results.

The cultural model of community in African English

Table 1.

83

Keywords pertaining to the role of the community/family.

item CEC EA FLOBFROWN community 413 (459) 506 (403) 599 (290) (41) (19) (13) communal 37 24 27 (606) (474) (489) family 545 595 1010 (57) (69) (34) relative 51 87 70 (73) (18) (16) kin / kinship / kinsman / kinspeople 66 22 33 (16) (3) (4) brotherhood 14 4 8 marriage 189 (210) 265 (211) 281 (136) marry 153 (170) 183 (146) 371 (180) (26) (18) (10) marital 23 21 20 husband 172 (191) 298 (237) 301 (146) wife 234 (260) 313 (249) 468 (227) parent / parental / parenting 362 (402) 301 (240) 497 (241) (46) (14) (23) maternity / maternal 41 18 47 (67) birth 104 (116) 126 (100) 138 child / childhood / childless 1100 (1223) 1339 (1067) 1590 (770) (42) (4) (12) offspring 38 5 24 total 3542

(3937)

4107

(3271)

5484

(2656)

Table 1 does not include primary kinship terms. The data for these items are given in the following table (table 2): Table 2.

Kinship terms. Frequency.

item father mother sister brother son daughter

CEC (406) 365 (270) 243 (182) 164 (202) 182 (171) 154 (84) 76 total

1184

(1316)

EA 245 402 129 119 143 153

(195)

1191

(949)

(320) (103) (95) (114) (122)

FLOBFROWN (385) 795 (444) 917 (127) 263 (162) 335 (193) 399 (136) 281 2990

(1448)

These results require some further discussion, since they run counter to the expected pattern, especially for the ICE-EA. As a whole, these terms are more frequent in FLOBFROWN than in the two African corpora combined (almost 1.3 times). However, two points need to be taken into consideration

84

The cultural model of community in African English

here. First of all, these items are frequently used in African English as terms of address. Hence, they are to be expected, primarily, in the spoken medium, which is not represented by the corpora we used.102 Second, the results need to be seen in the light of data given earlier in table 1. Son and daughter, for instance, are hyponyms of the item child listed there, and relatives is the hyperonym of all the kinship terms in table 2. When the results for relatives and child are added to those for the items in table 2, the African corpora taken together have about the same total of tokens of the resulting set as the FLOBFROWN (relative to 1 million words). Further and overwhelming evidence comes from the results of our questionnaire survey among 39 Cameroonian and 19 German university students (see appendix 2 for its design). In part 3.1. of the questionnaire, we presented the participants with 17 keywords and asked them to indicate seven of these items that they associate most with FAMILY. A selection of the results is given below in figure 2. Cam Ger

in %

s

m th w ar

n

va lu e

ce

di tio tr a

di en

ob e

sp

iri

ts /

gh

os ts

nt ry co u

ie ty so c

or s

s nd

es t an c

fr ie

re la t

iv es

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Figure 2. 102

QD 3.1. Concepts associated with family (selection).

It would be interesting to comparatively analyze these items in the spoken components of the variety-specific corpora now available through the ICE project. This is a task left for future research. Recall that we did not include the spoken component of ICE-EA in the present analysis, in order to assure comparability with the CEC and FLOBFROWN, which are exclusively based on written language.

The cultural model of community in African English

85

While the results for the keyword relatives are identical, the items from the broader community domain (i.e., friends, ancestors, society, country) received considerably higher scores in the Cameroonian group compared to the German group. In turn, among the Germans, keywords like warmth and values played a greater role. Since the question tested the significance of links relative to others, we conclude that concepts from the broader community domain have a greater salience in the overall conceptual network associated with FAMILY in the Cameroonian group. This supports our general analysis of the African community model. The differences between the two groups show up even more clearly in the data from part 3.2. of the questionnaire. Here, the informants were asked to judge the degree of strength they perceive for the link between FAMILY and the 17 keywords, i.e., this part set out to test the strength of associations individually rather than relative to others. The figures below (3-5) compare the results for three of the relevant links, namely between family and friends, family and society, and family and country. As these figures show, the link between FAMILY and friends, society, and country, respectively, is perceived to be stronger in the Cameroonian group as compared to the German informants. This result is again in line with the expected pattern and shows that the internal structure of the conceptual networks tested differ between the two groups.

in % 70

Cam Ger

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 none

weak

medium

strong

degree of strength

Figure 3.

QD 3.2. Perceived link between family and friends.

86

The cultural model of community in African English

in % 45

Cam

40

Ger

35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 none

weak

medium

strong

degree of strength

Figure 4.

QD 3.2. Perceived link between family and country.

in % 60

Cam Ger

50 40 30 20 10 0 none

weak

medium

strong

degree of strength

Figure 5.

103

QD 3.2. Perceived link between family and society.103

Society is, admittedly, a problematic keyword, given its multiple senses. However, the different senses the participants may have taken as the basis of their answer are all within the range of the community model. So we find it justified to include this item in our analysis.

The cultural model of community in African English

87

In question 1.2 we confronted the informants with four lines of the type ______ is a family and asked them to fill in the blank space so that the statement makes sense to them. Of the 19 German informants, only 12 attempted to fill in all or at least some of blanks. We obtained 43 statements of the type X is a family. Since the German informants were generally very responsive on the open questions and answered them at length, we may conclude that they had difficulties making sense of this task at all. Most of the 43 statements refer to emotional and social concepts associated with ‘family,’ like warmth, happiness, and support; 11 refer to the nuclear or extended biological family.104 Only 4 statements are clearly “figurative,” namely group is a family (1 time), my friends is a family (1 time), sports team is a family (1 time), and friendship is a family (1 time). The results are entirely different for our Cameroonian informants. Although generally far less responsive on the open questions, only 2 of the participants left this task out. We obtained a total of 148 statements of the type X is a family.105 82 of them refer to members of the nuclear and extended biological family, often including in-laws. However, the 148 statements include 71 references not related to the biological and marital model,106 e.g., community is family (2 times), church is family (5 times), village is family (9). The following table (table 3) lists the results in detail. The various extensions beyond the blood-and-marriage model (table 3b) are loosely grouped according to their target domain: Table 3a.

QD 1.2. CAM. ______ is a family. references to the blood-and-marriage model

blood-and-marriage model nuclear and extended family (often including in-laws)

81

descendant

1 total

104

105

106

82

Interestingly enough, regarding the concept of a nuclear family, one answer is “me and my dog is a family.” This makes for 3.8 out of 4 possible answers per person, as compared to 2.3 answers for the Germans. In 5 statements, references in terms of the blood-and-marriage model were combined with items beyond this model. Since we counted the references, their total (153) exceeds the total of the statements (148).

88

The cultural model of community in African English

Table 3b.

QD 1.2. CAM. ______ is a family. references other than to the blood-and-marriage model

extensions friends neighbors community clan tribe ethnic group traditional group church trinity ministry school

15 2 2 2 12 1 1 5 1 1 3

village Fondom107 province country Cameroon continent Africa political party members of an association caring people total

9 1 1 7 2 2 1 1 1 1 71

The same picture emerged from the result of part 1.3, in which the participants were asked to indicate to whom they refer with the kinship terms father, mother, sister, son, aunt, uncle, and cousin. We will confine our analysis to a discussion of the former four terms, and will start with the results from the Cameroonian group. Statements solely in terms of the respective biological relation and/or in terms of the respective relation established by marriage bonds were given by only 4 informants for father, by 2 for mother, by 3 for brother, and by 5 for sister. The rest of the statements indicate further applications of these terms. The gist of the answers given by the Cameroonians is expressed in the following statement on father by one of the participants: (23)

an elderly male person who takes certain responsibilities not necessarily associated to biological reasons.

The following table (table 4) lists the distribution of applications for the terms father and mother respectively.

107

Fon is the title of a local traditional ruler in the North-West province of Cameroon.

The cultural model of community in African English

Table 4.

89

QD 1.3. CAM. Use of father/mother beyond nuclear family.

father uncle other male relatives god father family friend (especially father’s friend) friend’s father elder male person anybody who behaves like a father caretaker respectable / responsible male person teacher / supervisor / mentor priest boss

20 4 5 11 3 19 4 8 4 7 4 1

mother aunts other female relatives god mother family friend, (especially mother’s friend) friend’s mother elder female person anybody who behaves like a mother caretaker respectable / responsible female person teacher / supervisor / mentor neighbors

18 8 4 13 2 18 3 10 2 5 2

Fully parallel results were obtained for brother and sister. Here, rather than giving the full spectrum of applications indicated by the Cameroonians, we only list some of the most frequent ones (table 5). It is, however, worth noting that among the lesser mentioned applications there are 2 that state the use of sister for ‘female person with the same mother tongue.’ Table 5.

QD 1.3. CAM. Use of sister/brother beyond nuclear family. Selection.

sister friends church members person from the same region / tribe / village

16 11 5

brother friends church members person from the same region / tribe / village

13 12 8

All of the German informants except for one responded to this task, though 2 of them characterized the importance and role of ‘father,’ ‘mother,’ etc. rather than answering the question as to whom they would address with these terms. The vast majority of answers pertained to the biological and/or

90

The cultural model of community in African English

nurturance and legal domain, some even explicitly so. Since the exceptions are small in number, we list them in the original wordings (table 6): Table 6.

QD 1.3. GER. Use of kinship terms beyond the nuclear family.

Father Grandfather, priest Priest God God A father figure brother Maybe a close friend Member of church congregation (perhaps on occasion)

mother Holy person (Mother Teresa) sister A very close female friend A friend of my brother’s A girlfriend My best friend A very good friend Best friend and 2 other girls (in absence of biological sister) Member of church congregation (perhaps on occasion)

Some answers are hedged, e.g., maybe a close friend, member of church congregation (perhaps on occasion) for the keyword brother, i.e., the informants doubted whether they would really use the terms in reference to a person not biologically or legally related. Still, there are remnants of the RELIGIOUS GROUP IS A COMMUNITY model. Furthermore, it seems that in the absence of “real” sisters, some female respondents take close friends to be surrogate sisters. Also, among the data for the items aunt and uncle not included in table 6, there are examples of the German custom to use these kinship terms for close female or male friends of the parents.108 There are four relevant results for aunt: Close friend of family An old acquaintance of family My Godmother, my Moms very close friends Very good friend of family

and one for uncle: Very good friend of family. 108

This custom, however, is getting less and less common for today’s children and adolescents.

The cultural model of community in African English

91

Yet most of the target groups for kinship terms encountered in the Cameroonian data are completely absent in the German responses. In sum, the results from the questionnaire readily exemplify and overwhelmingly confirm the general analysis of the various extensions of family-related concepts within the broader African model of community given at the beginning of the present section.

2.2.3. Relations of mutual obligations: The nurture dimension In the African community model, kinship-based conceptualizations do more than merely mark group membership and identity. BEING SIMILAR IS BEING KIN is but one aspect of KINSHIP FOR COMMUNITY. Furthermore, referring to some person with a particular kinship term indicates specific forms of expected behavior within a social group, or, as Mark Turner puts it in a general consideration of kinship labels:109 A given term, though applicable to perhaps many people, carries connotations of personal affection, of expected behavior, of rules of behavior, and of rites and duties, or, as an anthropologist might say, of affect, practice, etiquette, and obligation. (Turner 1987: 55)

It is crucial to the understanding of the African community model that it makes full and systematic use of this second power of kinship terms, too. The type of expectations and obligations that are central here are those resulting from relations of nurture, care, and protection. In the African setting, these relations are among those that constitute kinship; they truly are, to apply Goodenough’s criteria (cf. section 2.2.1.), “socially recognized relations” and “recursively reproduced through time.” Again, the realm of these relations is the community, as expressed in the following Yoruba proverb: (24)

It takes a whole village to raise a child. (Singer 1995)

and in a Gambian novel: (25)

It is the people, the community as a whole that takes part in bringing up and maintaining this child. (Saho 1994: 42)

Since kinship relations in the African setting are inherently nurture-andcare relations, the evocation of the model (e.g., by the use of kinship terms) 109

Similar observations are made by Lévi-Strauss (1968: ch. 2).

92

The cultural model of community in African English

correspondingly implies the related obligations and expectations. Specifically, as noted earlier, it is a cultural imperative to share one’s wealth with one’s conceptual kin, i.e., with one’s community,110 an obligation that is not only expected to be met but whose fulfillment is reinforced.111 At the conceptual level, the nurture-and-care relations are systematically captured in terms of an eating-and-feeding pattern, i.e., in terms of foodrelated conceptualizations. Or, to take the inverse perspective, the African discourse on wealth and the distribution of resources makes pervasive use of eating metaphors. It is in fact a full-fledged instantiation of the network of general eating metaphors sketched in section 2.1., i.e., a specification of general conceptualizations like STRONG DESIRES ARE HUNGER, RESOURCES ARE FOOD, ACHIEVING A PURPOSE IS EATING, and HAVING ACHIEVED IS BEING BIG to the domain of material wealth. In the following, we will illustrate the resulting network with text examples from our African English sources. One linguistic manifestation of the network is the item to eat money, which is a fixed expression in African English and highly frequent. It may be used either in the sense ‘to accumulate wealth’ (ENRICHMENT IS EATING) or in the sense ‘to spend (excessively)’ (USING RESOURCES IS EATING). Examples of these conceptualizations, beyond their manifestation in the specific expression to eat money, include:

110

111

To provide an example from personal experience which involves another type of expectation: One of the authors, Hans-Georg, supported the application for a DAAD-scholarship for a West African PhD-student to go to Germany to further his studies and agreed to act as his supervisor. It happened that in the meantime, Hans-Georg left Germany for a post at the University of Hong Kong. The West African PhD-student keeps writing emails frequently, signing with “your boy” or “your son.” With these terms, he does more than situate himself within his German “academic community.” It established ties of expectation and obligation, in this case, the expectation of support by academic “fathers.” Also note that in the Ghanaian language Ewe, for instance, the conceptual identity of ‘father’ (tó) and ‘owner’ (also tó) is lexicalized, and the expectation of a rich person providing is implicit in the compound ga-tó, which means both ‘money-owner’ and ‘money-father’ (this translation of the Ewe words is taken from Romaine 2000: 98). As will be exemplified in section 2.2.5., the application of magic/occult forces is a major means of reinforcing such expectations.

The cultural model of community in African English (26)

Cameroon immigration use Nigerians to grow fat. (The Mail 2001: 1)

(27)

You eat money the way locusts eat tons of green. (CEC)

(28)

Eating on the profits of the investor. (ICE-EA)

(29)

Money-minded sycophantic upstarts. (The Mail 2001: 1)

(30)

No, my brother, I won’t spoil anybody’s good fortune. When Eddy’s father married me I was not half her age. As soon as her mother recovers let her come and eat Nanga’s wealth. (Achebe 1988: 88)

(31)

Certain ministers have eaten all the funds. (In Fisher 2000: 59)

(32)

Not to emulate the examples of Lake Nyos crisis commission, where members fed fat on gifts destined for disaster victims. (The Post 2001: 6)

93

In West African English, to eat money has a PE-induced equivalent, to chop money, which, too, is a fixed expression.112 It is especially frequent in political discourse to express undue enrichment of office holders at the expense of public resources, e.g.: (33)

Most government officials go there to chop money. (WCL: 69)

(34)

I was not a popular governor in Anambra; I didn’t open treasury for people to chop money. (WCL: 89)

The use of the original PE item is illustrated by the following passage in Nigerian Pidgin English (NigPE): (35)

Fine big woman wey dress like dis. She never chop money bele full. (Adimora-Ezeigbo 1999: 29)

The item big woman in this passage and the well-known parallel expression big man illustrate the conceptualization BEING RICH IS BEING BIG. Generally, it is a recurrent pattern across the various languages that the word for ‘big’ also has the meaning ‘significant’, with the general metaphor IMPORTANT IS BIG being responsible for this polysemy (for examples from 112

Importantly, largely similar observations can be made for francophone West Africa. The corresponding French items, manger (equivalent to eat) and bouffer (equivalent to chop) display the same pattern as observed for the English items. This adds strength to our argument that cultural conceptualizations are systematically expressed in L2 varieties, and that, at the more general level, the expression of culture is thus not bound to a speaker’s mother tongue alone.

94

The cultural model of community in African English

various languages see, e.g., Grady 1999: 80).113 In the African setting, ‘big man/woman’ is a veritable socio-cultural and political concept of ‘power,’ with a range of application much wider than in the domain of material wealth, cf.114 (36)

Their customers range from bureaucrats to Presidents, the Small Man to the Big Man. (WCL: 29)

The specific link of this African concept to material wealth and the ability to draw from resources is strong, as illustrated by the following passage: (37)

[NigPE] Few people dey fat with big money, and the rest dey hungry. (WCL: 124)

A further conceptualization also part of the network is GREED IS HUNGER. It finds expression, for instance, in items like long throat in West African English, as in: (38)

How can anyone be so daft enough to think that just by putting down $20,000,000, you can double it in just 1 week. Get real guys! and please shorten your long throats. (WCL: 88)

Here, the metaphor GREED IS HUNGER/THIRST is in fact metonymically extended to body parts involved in taking in food (GREED IS A BODY PART INVOLVED IN TAKING IN FOOD), a conceptualization that also underlies the following NigPE example which was cited earlier: (39)

She never chop money belle full. (Adimora-Ezeigbo 1999: 29)

The omnipresence and systematicity of EATING metaphors in the domain of MATERIAL WEALTH may also be illustrated by the more specific case of the conceptualization of CORRUPTION in African English. A detailed analysis of this point is given in Polzenhagen and Wolf (2007) and Polzenhagen (2007: 3.4.). The most prominent example is certainly the lexical item kola (meaning ‘bribe,’ literally ‘cola nut’) and the corresponding fixed expression to give kola, which are straightforward lexicalizations of the 113

114

In the African context, this finds further expression in specific terms of address and respect, e.g., bwana mkubwa (< Swahili ‘big man’) to address an extremely important person (Dalgish 1982) and Makhulu (< Swahili -kuu ‘big’), a term of respect in South Africa (Dalgish 1982). Nigerian and Cameroon English have the related item thick madam (meaning ‘wealthy woman’) used in addition to big woman (RPWAE).

The cultural model of community in African English

95

metaphors BRIBE IS FOOD (a special instance of RESOURCES/MONEY IS and BRIBING IS FEEDING, respectively. Here is a representative example: FOOD)

(40)

An unqualified contractor is allowed to bid on a project – in exchange for a little kola and a little dash.115 (WCL: 128)

The underlying mapping from the domain of food (‘cola nut’) to that of corruption (‘bribe’) can only be understood and accounted for against the background of a common and wide-spread African cultural practice: Kola (‘cola nut’) is a traditional food gift presented, for instance, to welcome guests, especially persons of authority (for details of the mapping process, see Polzenhagen and Wolf 2007). Here is a description of this practice, from a literary source: (41)

Presently she returned with kola nut and wine cups [...] By the time Edoro came to the obi, the men had gone through the ritual of breaking the kola nut and eating it. (Adimora-Ezeigbo 1999: 12)

Kola and to give kola are items shared across the varieties of at least WAE. In addition to kola, individual regions and countries have further specific expressions that are lexicalizations of BRIBE IS FOOD and BRIBING IS FEEDING. Consider, e.g., the following lexical items, which can be used to mean ‘bribe’ in Cameroon English or, in the case of beer money, Nigerian English:116 soya (he has eaten soya) beer money

mimbo (take this as mimbo) makalapati

fried beef skewers (considered a delicacy) in Nigeria, metonymically also for the ’20 Naira banknote,’ which is the standard bribe paid to the police beer-like drink obtained from the raffia palm tree; also used to mean ‘drink’ in general a sort of doughnut

The following examples further illustrate the BRIBE IS FOOD metaphor:

115 116

Dash means ‘bribe’ in WAE. We owe the examples mimbo and soya to Samuel Atechi (personal communication, but also see appendix 1 for soya). Note that, again, the same pattern can be observed in African French. Consider the following lexical items, which are used to mean ‘bribe’ in Cameroonian French: gombo (‘okra’, ‘okra sauce’, Camfranglais ‘feast’); l’eau (‘water’); bière (‘beer’).

96

The cultural model of community in African English (42)

Corrupt citizens dish out heavy bribes and the government prosecution team mellows in its responsibility. (WCL: 41)

(43)

Were they not, sort of, justified in supposing that the loans were some gifts to be taken as chop money?” (WCL: 95)

It is crucial to note that the issue of corruption and, more globally, the entire issue of distribution of resources can only be accounted for against the background of the community model.117 What is at stake is the reciprocal eating-and feeding pattern, which is an integral part of the model’s logic. With respect to the corruption issue, this is expressed in the following statement by the Nigerian president Obasanjo: It has been suggested that society has a way of corrupting the public office holder because of the excessive demands and expectations that are placed on the resources of the individual and because of the African concept of the big chief, the public office holder is expected to have an infinite resource or access to a sufficiently large resource base from which he is expected to dish out freely to all and sundry if only to assist his kith and kin to escape throes of poverty. (Obasanjo, cit. in Waliggo n.d.: 9)

In other words, corrupt practices claim legitimacy against the background of the community model.118 In turn, those who target corrupt practices do 117

118

This is not to say that we regard corruption as a “part of African culture.” Rather, we explicitly reject this type of claims (cf. Polzenhagen and Wolf 2007; Polzenhagen 2007: 3.4.). What we are concerned with is the way corruption is conceptualized, and here, cultural schemas and scenarios serve as the conceptual background. Corruption is difficult to pin down, both in terms of the law and as regards public perception. The borders between what counts as legal and illegal, and legitimate and illegitimate, respectively, are fuzzy. While this is true for any individual society already, the issue is further complicated when a crosscultural perspective is taken. Legal regulations differ from country to country, and, more importantly, there is no universal or neutral third model of what is regarded as legitimate and what is not. Cultures may differ in their acceptance of specific practices. For instance, certain practices that may be perceived, from the African perspective, as a fulfillment of obligations towards one’s community and thus as legitimate, may be seen as acts of corruption from a Western point of view. For detailed analyses of the corruption issue and its cultural implications, see, e.g., Olivier de Sardan (1999), Szeftel (1998, 2000a, 2000b), Bayart, Ellis and Hibou (1999), Chabal and Daloz (1999), and some of the papers in the collective volume Steinmann and Scherer (1998). For a cognitivesociolinguistic perspective on the subject, see Polzenhagen and Wolf (2007).

The cultural model of community in African English

97

so by arguing that corruption is in fact a violation of the kinship model, especially of the principle of reciprocity, a point that is implicit in the following text example: (44)

They took bribes from their less fortunate brothers. (CEC)

Thus, in both cases, the community model is the relevant reference point. Our comparative frequency analyses and the data from the questionnaire survey strongly support the above discussion of the nurture aspect. The comparative frequency data we obtained from our analysis of the three corpora clearly reflect that the distribution of resources is a central issue in contemporary African societies. We extracted the number of tokens of items that belong to the broader domain of money and resources, including the item food; the results are given in the following table 7. Table 7.

Keywords pertaining to the broader domain of MONEY. item

CEC

food / foodstuff / food crop wealth money fund cash payment pay119 greed / greedy exploit / exploitation fraud / fraudulent embezzle / embezzlement corrupt / corruption bribe total

119

EA

FLOBFROWN

545

(606)

579

(461)

463

(224)

96 375 386 132 97 510 39 233 49

(107)

(37)

(65)

100 699 500 105 191 512 31 107 27

(48)

(54)

47 703 332 168 146 548 17 95 81

14

(16)

31

(25)

2

(1)

106 29

(118)

(80) 10

79 20

(38)

(32)

100 13

2611

(2902)

2860

(2278)

2836

(1374)

(417) (429) (147) (108) (567) (43) (259)

(560) (264) (134) (116) (436) (14) (76)

(339) (242) (51) (93) (248) (15) (52) (13)

(10)

The tokens of pay were not checked for fixed expressions like pay attention or pay respect.

98

The cultural model of community in African English

In the two African corpora, these items taken together are about 1.9 times more frequent than in FLOBFROWN. Again, individual items that deviate from the global result (e.g., wealth in the ICE-EA) do not touch upon the overall pattern. The corpus data are further confirmed by results from our questionnaire survey. One of the keywords presented to the participants in the open part of the questionnaire (question 1.1.) was money, and we asked to give a brief characterization of what they associate with this item. The answers given by the two groups are difficult to compare, as the Cameroonians generally listed a number of keywords that they associate with money, while most of the Germans used a more “narrative” style and described their attitude towards money. Yet a comparison of the most frequent keywords used by the participants is still revealing. From the 39 Cameroonians, we obtained roughly 320 words of text on this question; from the Germans, due to the more “narrative” style, we obtained roughly 460 words, although the group of German participants was, as noted earlier, considerably smaller (19). The most frequent keyword in the Cameroonian answers is corruption (23 occurrences). Adding also the highly frequent occurrences of embezzlement (8x) and the tokens for bribery (2x), we have the result that more than 10% of the words used in the answers by the Cameroonians are a direct reference to the domain of CORRUPTION. This attests to the significance of the corruption issue as a pressing socio-cultural concern in the region, and, at the conceptual level, to the salience of the concept CORRUPTION in the broader domain of MONEY.120 Representative examples of the Cameroonian data are the following two: (45)

Happiness, comfort, killing, corruption, prostitution

(46)

Good living, easy life, evil, wickedness, destruction, development, bloodshed, corruption, embezzlement

The German answers contain no reference to corruption. The most frequent content words include life (7x), important (5x), materialistic/material (5x), 120

Related frequent keywords included problem(s) (14x), conflict (4x), power (8x), and prostitution (8x). Other frequent keywords were happiness (18x) and comfort (9x). Another group of highly frequent items includes evil (16x), killing (5x), jealousy (4x), wickedness (4x), death/dead (4x), bloodshed (3x), which attests to the strong link between MONEY and WITCHCRAFT. We will return to this point in detail in the corresponding section 2.2.5.

The cultural model of community in African English

99

necessary (5x), work (4x), need (3x), and dreams (3x). Here are two fairly representative examples from the German data: (47)

Necessary evil, determines our life, you strive your whole life for it so that you’re able to afford certain things ĺ a house, travelling, a car etc. part of our tradition, different currencies

(48)

Being independent, able to fulfill dreams and to help people in bad situations, lot of work to do to get the money

In the same part of the questionnaire, we also asked the participants to comment on the keyword family support. The abovementioned different style of answering used by the two groups also applies here. But again it is revealing to have a closer look at the keywords that occurred frequently in the statements. From the Cameroonians we obtained roughly 200 words. The two by far most frequent ones are money (23x) and food (20x).121 Further relatively frequent items directly related to money include income (3x), cash (2x), and financial (2x). Money and food occur in communion in 17 of the total 39 answers, mostly as the two items mentioned first. Although due caution needs to be taken with the interpretation of a smallscale questionnaire, one cannot fail to relate these results to the omnipresent triad FAMILY-FOOD-MONEY/RESOURCES described earlier in this section’s nurture aspect of the community model. In the German data, although consisting of 400 words, food is altogether absent and money occurs only once. Even if one adds the tokens of related terms like monetary (2x) and financial (1x) and takes into consideration that only 19 Germans participated as compared to the 39 Cameroonians, one does not reach the significance the notion of ‘financial support by the family’ has for the Cameroonians. This is not to say, however, that this notion plays no role for the German group (or more generally, in German culture); it is also made explicit in some of the German data, e.g., in (49)

source of power, I can rely on them, mental support, honest critique, sometimes also financial support

(50)

unconditional love, emotional and monetary support

Yet in the cultural model expressed by the German group – and cultural models are what we are concerned with – it is clearly placed in the background. Specifically, there is no strong conceptual triad FAMILY-FOOD121

Money and food are followed, in terms of frequency, by clothes (9x), education (8x), shelter (7x), and advice (5x).

100

The cultural model of community in African English

MONEY/RESOURCES as in the African model and as clearly presented in the Cameroonian data. Further support for this interpretation comes from the data in another section of the questionnaire. In part 3.2., where the participants were asked to indicate the degree of strength they perceived for the link between “family” and the 17 individual keywords we listed, we also tested the keyword money. As figure 6 shows, the link between ‘family’ and ‘money’ was perceived to be considerably stronger in the Cameroonian group as compared to the German group.

in % 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0

Cam Ger

none

weak

medium

strong

degree of strength

Figure 6. 122

QD 3.2. Perceived link between family and money.122

Not in line with our expectations were, however, the results for the keyword money from part 3.1. of the questionnaire. There, the participants were asked to choose, from the 17 keywords, the 7 ones most strongly linked to family. This question thus set out to test the strength of links relative to others in the overall network. Here, only 8% of the Cameroonians placed money among the 7 most important keywords. While this is still above the results among the Germans (5% for this keyword), it is far from being supportive of our case. We state this as a simple matter of fact and refrain from speculating why the results among the Cameroonians were as they were on this specific question. Note, however, that almost 20% of the Cameroonians actually found the link to be strong and a further 30% to be of medium strength (part 3.2. of the questionnaire; see figure 6). Also mind that on the list money was “in competition” with many other key ingredients of the community model. Also, the complex notions of ‘nurtureand-care’ and ‘eating-and-feeding’ can only partly be covered by a single keyword like money.

The cultural model of community in African English

101

In sum, our empirical data from the comparative corpus analyses and from the questionnaire survey attest both to the status of concepts like RESOURCES and CORRUPTION as “cultural keywords” in the sense of Wierzbicka (1997) and to the embeddedness of these concepts in the broader community model in the African setting.

2.2.4. Spiritual relations: The cosmological dimension It is a central characteristic of the traditional African world-view that it sees human existence as inseparably imbedded in an overarching cosmology.123 And neither the full range of the community model nor the relations that establish the model may be captured without taking this cosmology into consideration. Comprehensive accounts of the African cosmology and African spirituality are given in a vast body of philosophically and anthropologically oriented literature (see, for an African perspective, e.g., Mbiti 1990; Gbadegesin 1991; Opoku 1993; Musopole 1994; Masamba ma Mpolo 1994; Salami 2006, and for a European perspective Wladarsch 2004), and in our discussion we will confine ourselves to evoking and profiling some basic concepts that are immediately relevant to our concern. The basic constellation of the African cosmos is captured in the following statement by Alembong (1993): African thought-systems emphasize the three worlds of African cosmology, namely that of man, heavenly bodies [...] and deities and spirits. (Alembong 1993: 136)

Here are four examples taken from our sources that illustrate this cosmology:

123

(51)

A West African universe consists not only of ‘this’ world, the world in which we live, but also of the ‘next’ world, a [...] spiritual world. (CEC)

(52)

Daughters and Sons of Africa, Comrades in the struggle for Humanity, I greet you in the names of the Most High God, the Lesser Gods and The Ancestors. (WCL: 55)

The decision to treat the spiritual dimension in a separate section rather than including it in the previous discussion is primarily motivated by the need to structure our discussion in a way that allows us to handle a subject matter as complex and multi-dimensional as the African community model. Certainly, this decision may also be taken to reflect our own, i.e., Western, model.

102

The cultural model of community in African English

(53)

God, The ultimate ancestor. (ICE-EA)

(54)

The deceased travelled to the land of the royal ancestors. (The Grasslanda 2001: 2)

The central metaphor is that of a UNITY of the “three worlds” referred to by Alembong (1993) – THE COSMOS IS THE UNITY OF MAN’S WORLD, THE WORLD OF THE ANCESTORS, AND THE WORLD OF THE DEITIES/SPIRITS –, cf.: (55)

The union of heaven and earth [...] the relationship, so to speax [sic] between supernatural forces and human beings with the cosmic continuum. (CEC)

The UNITY metaphor is not only central to the conceptualization of the cosmos as a whole, but also of MAN’S WORLD, as one of its components. Here, the UNITY metaphor embraces man and the total of man’s physical environment (MAN’S WORLD IS THE UNITY OF MAN AND THEIR PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT), e.g.: (56)

In the universe everything is ONE united. Man, animals, plants, fishes, water, air etc. are one from the same source. (CEC)

(57)

Land belongs to living, the unborn as well as to the dead. (CEC)

Importantly, the UNITY metaphor should not be interpreted in terms of a WHOLE that consists of SEPARABLE PARTS. In the traditional African worldview, there is no perceived clear-cut boundary or separation between the three realms; rather, they are believed to overlap and interact. Here are some passages that illustrate this holistic view: (58)

Each human is of its own divinity and bears high power to protect such divinity, for there exists no separation between gods and humans; one blends softly casual into the other. (WCL: 93)

(59)

Our relationship with the gods who hover permanently over and above us. (Eyoh 1993: 103)

Closely related to the UNITY metaphor is the second central conceptualization of the relations between the elements of the cosmos. The cosmos is not only perceived as a UNITY, but more specifically as a COMMUNITY. In the African belief systems, the notion of ‘community’ transcends the world of the “living” and encompasses the world of the “dead,” i.e., of the ancestors and spirits, and, finally, extends to the realm of the gods (or God, in a monotheistic setting), e.g.:

The cultural model of community in African English

103

(60)

The point where all members of a given community meet: the departed, the living and those yet to be born. (Musopole 1994: 86)

(61)

Man’s perpetual communion with his Gods. (Alembong 1993: 138)

(62)

Sacrifices and libations become a communication link that keeps the living, the dead, and the unborn in communion. (CEC)

(63)

The ancestors, the living and the unborn are part of a cyclic trinity. (CEC)

In other words, MAN IS IN A KINSHIP RELATION WITH THE OTHER ELEMENTS OF THE COSMOS, e.g., (64)

Human kinship with the universe. (CEC)

Key notions captured by the kinship-based conceptualization are, for instance, ‘descent’ vis-à-vis the ancestors, and ‘procreation’ vis-à-vis the god(s) (see Wolf 2001: ch. 5 for a more detailed discussion). However, as noted and exemplified in earlier sections, kinship relations in the African community model cannot be reduced to genealogies in a narrow sense. They are relations of reciprocal duties and expectations, and this also applies to the bonds man has with his conceptual kin in another realm of the cosmos. A good case in point to show the conceptual system underlying African spirituality is the ANCESTOR concept. In line with what has been said above, the world of ancestors is not separated from man’s world (cf. Chabal and Daloz 1999: 66-67).124 Rather, they are living-dead, and inhabit both realms. The conceptualization ANCESTORS ARE PART OF MAN’S PRESENT 125 WORLD is expressed in the following corpus examples:

124

125

(65)

I saw his ghost walking along the road. (CEC)

(66)

What it means when those who have left us come to be seen again among us here in the world. (Luangala 1991: 59)

The ancestor concept and related ceremonies and rituals have been highlighted by Palmer and Neal Arin (1999: 36) as “central domains of experience” for noun classifiers in Shona, a language of Zimbabwe. Again, this and the related conceptualizations discussed here also manifest themselves in African varieties of French, e.g., in the following example from the French spoken in Cameroon: “Le pouvoir est une émanation de l'esprit des ancêtres” (Ndam Njoya 1976: 35). This is additional evidence for our view that cultural models are independent of the language in which they are expressed.

104

The cultural model of community in African English

(67)

The ancestors are thought to have gone from the land of the living, but not very far. (CEC)

(68)

In all the families, there are elders. Some of them are left behind in this world to tend the living children while the others go ahead to go and live in the other world. But even they do not forget us. Indeed they still come back to live among us. (Luangala 1991: 100)

(69)

Nocturnal spirits are believed to use marketplaces as habitats. (CEC)126

(70)

She is believed to have communicated with the spirits. (CEC)

The inclusion of the ancestors in the COMMUNITY concept (ANCESTORS ARE COMMUNITY MEMBERS/KIN) is illustrated by examples like: (71)

Ancestors intercede on behalf of their living kin. (CEC)

(72)

To all our ancestor spirits […] and all other dear departed souls, both big and small: We give you thanks and praises for the sacrifices you made for our well-being. We are here today, because you were here. We ask that you all continue to guard and guide us. We ask that you help us and direct us as we follow that divine path to our individual destinies. (WCL: 124)

These examples also show that, within this cultural model, the role of the ancestors is active and most direct: ANCESTORS ARE PERSONS OF AUTHORITY/RESPECT and ANCESTORS ARE LEADERS AND GUARDIANS. The numerous examples of these conceptualizations in our sources include:

126

(73)

My return to the land of the living have been due to the disapproval of the Greater Caouncil of the spirits, which had decided that I was too young to do any useful work on the plantation. (CEC)

(74)

Ancestors and gods keep a watchful eye on the living. (CEC)

(75)

A prayer to the ancestors to protect the family from misfortune and illnesses in particular. (ICE-EA)

(76)

I wish that everyone return home safely with our ancestors guiding you on the way. (Ngongwikuo 1980, cit. in Mbangwana 1992: 95)

(77)

Ancestors, grant me strength and wisdom, grant me patience and love. (Ambanasom 1993: 122)

(78)

So ordered the ancestral spirit. (Luangala 1991: 97)

On market spirits, see Masquelier (1993).

The cultural model of community in African English

105

(79)

If the ancestors had felt offended by the family, they should have said so in a different way. (Luangala 1991: 65)

(80)

Calling on the deities or ancestors to pour blessings on the living. (CEC)

(81)

May our ancestors devour him, may he be punished by the spirits. (Saho 1994: 21)

(82)

We should go and consult our ancestral spirits to ask them to explain to us what it is particularly that has angered them. (Luangala 1991: 61)

(83)

To all our ancestor spirits [...] and all other dear departed souls, both big and small: We give you thanks and praises for the sacrifices you made for our well-being. We are here today, because you were here. We ask that you all continue to guard and guide us. We ask that you help us and direct us as we follow that divine path to our individual destinies. (WCL: 124)

(84)

When the ancestral spirits were thoroughly convinced that he had paid well enough for his offence. (Luangala 1991: 50-51)

(85)

It is the duty and the right of every ancestor to torment or punish the living. (CEC)

As these examples illustrate, the ancestors are included in the system of relations based on reciprocal duties and expectation. As conceptual COMMUNITY MEMBERS, they are addressed to provide material and non-material support. A specific obligation associated with the ancestors is the protection of the foundations of the kinship order, cf.: (86)

Ancestral wrath is caused by the neglect of the offspring. (Gbadegesin 1991: 105)

(87)

Cruelty to children is [...] punishable by ancestral spirits. (CEC)

(88)

Departure from the traditional usage which might offend the ancestors. (Setiloane 1993: 151-152)

(89)

She whispered to him the good news; he was now a father, not of the child only but of the whole family because it was through her that the family would find its continuity. She was the bud which the ancestors had secured to ensure the continual growth of the family tree. (Luangala 1991: 30)

(90)

Spirits [...] are also very sensitive to any acts of disrespect. (CEC)

106

The cultural model of community in African English

In keeping with the principle of reciprocity, there are, in turn, duties vis-àvis the ancestors. They crystallize in numerous rites and other cultural practices that are part of the general ancestor cult, cf.: (91)

The Shufai (sub-chief) then invited all the sons and daughters of Nzeendzev to return home and perform certain rites and sacrifices to appease their ancestors so as to receive their blessings in return. (The Herald 1998: 5)

Many of these practices involve gift-giving, often in the form of food offerings, which is a further manifestation of the eating-and-feeding pattern discussed in section 2.2.3., e.g.: (92)

Here is drink for you gods, for you ancestors. (Ambanasom 1993: 122)127

The general obligation underlying such practices is again the duty to share one’s wealth with the community, a duty which extends to the ancestors qua ANCESTORS ARE COMMUNITY MEMBERS/KIN. This is illustrated by the following example: (93)

He did not share with his ancestors. (Makuchi 1999: 22)

As stated above, the special position the ancestors occupy in the African cultural model of community is due to their special position in the overall cosmology. As Masamba ma Mpolo (1994) puts it: By virtue of their moral integrity which made them to become ancestors, they live in close proximity to God [the gods] and are believed to possess special powers. (Masamba ma Mpolo 1994: 24)

Since the ancestors inhabit both man’s world and the spiritual world, they may mediate between these realms (ANCESTORS ARE MEDIATORS BETWEEN MAN’S WORLD AND THE SPIRITUAL WORLD), as in:

127

(94)

Protected by ancestors, who pleaded [...] to appease the village Gods. (Makuchi 1999: 1)

(95)

The ultimate source of all evils is the machinations of spiritual forces, mediated by means of known agents such as ancestors. (CEC)

In parts of West Africa, for example in Igbo culture, before one takes a drink, part of it is poured on the ground for the ancestors. Similar practices are common throughout Sub-Saharan Africa.

The cultural model of community in African English

107

The special position of the ancestors is mirrored by the special position of the community elders in African culture. In the course of his or her life, a person is not only thought of as gathering “worldly” experience but also, by moving closer to worldly death and thus closer to the realm of the ancestors, as increasingly acquiring spiritual power (cf. Geschiere 1997: 50; Bastian 1993: 138). Age is hence crucial in this context (cf. Kalu 1993: 115). The closeness between the elders and the ancestors is expressed in the following passages: (96)

In all the families, there are elders. Some of them are left behind in this world to tend the living children while the others go ahead to go and live in the other world. (Luangala 1991: 100)

(97)

We, Elders of The Land of Liberia, assembled at Zouzon by the Grace of the Almighty and under the commanding authority of the Ancestors, present these sentiments. (WCL: 93)

The general attribution of wisdom to the older generation is thus reinforced by a pronounced spiritual dimension, and older people are often believed to possess special powers (see Geschiere 1997: 95, 151). Like the ancestors, elders, and traditional healers and rulers in particular, may be MEDIATORS BETWEEN MAN’S WORLD AND THE SPIRITUAL WORLD (cf. Ndam Njoya 1976: 34-36; Geschiere 1997: 151, 160). Alobwede (1982: 9) has described this conceptualization for the Bakossi of Cameroon: Among Bakossi people, status and precedence are determined by age and by the ability to manifest supernatural powers. Thus elders and traditional medicine-men are believed to be endowed with political, judiciary and spiritual powers. They lead their communities in ritual processes of ancestor worship.

It can also be found in the following sources: (98)

Kings incarnate their cultural heritage and are intermediaries between the living and the ancestral spirits and deities. (CEC)

(99)

The ancestors and gods keep a watchful eye on the living through the mediation of the king. (CEC)

(100) In the family, the Diokpala ‘head of the lineage’ as well as the paterfamilias ‘head of the nuclear household’ become quasi-priests, who [...] pour libation to the ‘living-dead’ ancestors. (Kalu 1993: 115) (101) She is the ceremonial head who links the living community with the deceased ancestral community. (Setiloane 1993: 150)

108

The cultural model of community in African English

This link to the spiritual realm gives power and leadership a marked magical dimension in African culture; this important point may be captured by notions like ‘sacred power’ and ‘magical leadership’128 (cf. Bernault n.d.). Generally, these special powers would be regarded as positive, i.e., as serving the good of the community (cf. Geschiere 1997: 50), and as a legitimization of leadership.129 However, they may also be perceived as “negative,” as serving individual interests at the expense of others. This ambiguity is a general trait of “special powers” in the Sub-Saharan context, and it will show up continuously in the subsequent sections. ‘Special powers’ cannot be separated from ‘witchcraft,’ and ‘magical leadership’ often has a distinct occult dimension in the African setting, and is directly linked to witchcraft-related practices and conceptualizations (see section 2.2.5.). As we will see in section 2.4., this dimension of power plays, for instance, a significant role in contemporary African politics. Historically speaking, “neither colonization, christianization [sic] or the slave enterprise has [...] eradicated the traditional African spirituality” (Masamba ma Mpolo 1994: 16), and it persists in the contemporary setting, despite Western hegemony and the impact of Islam. Christianity and Islam are thriving in Sub-Saharan Africa, yet rather than being replaced by these world religions, traditional African spirituality often forms complex blends with them, a phenomenon that could be described as “cultural creolization” (Ellis 1999: 292). A case in point are Christian churches: One source states that in Africa, 1200 new Christian congregations come into existence each month (Willmann 2002). West Africa, specifically, is estimated to have the fastest growing congregations within the Catholic Church, and the number of protestant groups, too, is rapidly increasing. The success of these groups, including their material success, depends heavily on their ability to fuse Christian belief with the traditional belief system (cf. Chabal and Daloz 1999: 70-73) Here, the basic creeds of Christianity lend themselves to becoming part of traditional African belief and vice versa. The idea of God, 128

129

It is important not to reduce ‘magical leadership’ in the African context to ‘charismatic leadership.’ The latter arises from specific traits of an individual’s character, while the former emanates qua association with the realms beyond man’s world. Accordingly, challenges to the elders and leaders are readily perceived in terms of “negative” witchcraft (cf. Geschiere 1997: 95). However, witchcraft as a means of challenging authority is not to be seen, per se, as a negative force. Instead, it may be used as a balancing counter-force directed against an undue exercise of power. See the sections 2.2.5. and 2.4. for a discussion.

The cultural model of community in African English

109

for instance, is readily integrated into the traditional African cosmology, as illustrated by the following examples (they were cited earlier in the section and are reproduced here for convenience): (102) Daughters and Sons of Africa, Comrades in the struggle for Humanity, I greet you in the names of the Most High God, the Lesser Gods and The Ancestors. (WCL: 55) (103) We, Elders of The Land of Liberia, assembled at Zouzon by the Grace of the Almighty and under the commanding authority of the Ancestors, present these sentiments. (WCL: 93)

Likewise, the Christian idea of the ‘Devil’ is fused with the traditional concept of negative witchcraft (for a discussion of witchcraft, see section 2.2.5.).130 This point has been analyzed, for example, in the cases of thriving Pentecostalism in Ghana by Meyer (1999) and in Malawi by van Dijk (2001). Pentecostalism is a theology that emphasizes the struggle between God and the Devil, and it explicitly recognizes witchcraft as the work of the Devil (cf. Moore and Sanders 2001: 12). As Moore and Sanders (2001a: 16) conclude in their review of the literature: In this context, modern Christianity has not displaced ideas about witchcraft and the occult, but provided a new context in which they make perfect sense.

Parallel examples abound. The Aladura (‘praying people’) in Nigeria are fundamentalist Christians who “believe that the witches and witch doctors who practice traditional medicine are real and have real spiritual powers” (Lettinga 2000). And a Cameroonian paper (The Herald Observer 1998: 6) reports the story of a “diabolic owl exorcised from Presbyterian Church,” in which the pastor refers to the owl as the “omen of death and destruction.” Such examples show that the traditional occult is made part of Christian religious practice. The points discussed here are reflected in the results of our questionnaire survey and partly in the corpora. With regard to the latter empirical evidence, some important caveats should first be made. A comparative corpus analysis in terms of frequency faces a number of problems when a 130

Conversely, Geschiere (e.g., 1997: 187-195) recounts the ways in which Western notions of witchcraft may have fused with African beliefs in the course of colonization. The incorporation of European languages into African spiritual beliefs is discussed on the basis of the Nigerian Bori cult by Krings (1999); Alobwede (1982: 14-16) even notes the incorporation of magical Hindu elements through colonial trade into the belief system of the Bakossi in Cameroon.

110

The cultural model of community in African English

domain like SPIRITUALITY is to be covered. As discussed in the various sections here, there are numerous notions in the African cultural context that involve a strong spiritual dimension, including ‘age,’ ‘leadership,’ ‘material wealth,’ and ‘health/healing.’ Arguably, these notions do not imply spirituality in the Western context. The domain of spirituality would need to include items from all of these domains in the case of the African corpora, yet would need to exclude them in the case of FLOBFROWN. Given the specific scope of our analysis, such items do not lend themselves to a direct comparison in terms of frequency. Hence, we did not include them and restricted our search to core items. A further problem comes from the fact, that in this domain, a whole range of loan words from indigenous languages in the specific varieties of African English exists. Prominent examples are titles of traditional leaders/rulers and diviners.131 Since such items do not belong to the common core of English, we did not include them in our search list. Furthermore, in the African community model, “modern” and “traditional” religious beliefs and practices are not compartmentalized, but rather blended and interwoven. A specific case is the realm of witchcraft in African culture (see section 2.2.5. for a detailed discussion), which cannot be separated from the broader spiritual dimension. The results from our comparative frequency analyses need to be read against the background of these predicaments. Our approach is the following: In order to ensure comparability across the corpora, we only included a small list of core items, bearing in mind that this is only a partial representation of the spiritual dimension for the case of African English. Thereby the results presented here are not fully expressive and conclusive. In the light of this caveat, another component of our corpus-linguistic analysis gains more significance, namely the discussion of collocational patterns traceable in the corpora. We start with earlier findings culled from a keyword analysis of the CEC with the FLOBFROWN as reference corpus (see the sections 1.4. and 1.3.3. on the concepts underlying our corpus analysis). Table 8, which is adapted from Wolf and Polzenhagen (2007) and Wolf (2006), who discussed the prevalence of religious beliefs in West African English at more length, presents keywords relevant in particular to traditional spirituality:

131

In the case of Cameroon English and thus the CEC, examples include items like kwifon (‘associate of a traditional leader possessing occult power,’ 13x CEC).

The cultural model of community in African English Table 8.

111

Keywords pertaining to the broader domain of spirituality. CEC and FLOBFROWN compared.

item ancestor ancestral spirit ghost taboo sacred rite ritual worship ceremony ceremonial cult sacrifice bless mediums

CEC 65 58 396 60 18 37 22 58 47 131 19 23 73 83 6

FLOBFROWN

(72) (64) (440) (67) (20) (41) (24) (64) (52) (146) (21) (26) (81) (92) (7)

28 10 175 64 14 50 23 65 46 66 16 23 47 72 2

(14) (5) (85) (31) (7) (24) (11) (31) (22) (32) (8) (11) (23) (35) (1)

keyness

P-value

61.5 88.8 367.3 17.6 9.2 5.8 6.7 15.3 16.5 109.1 8.6 7.7 47.5 36.0 6.8

0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000027 0.002402 0.016266 0.009409 0.000093 0.000049 0.000000 0.003283 0.005400 0.000000 0.000000 0.009286

This table clearly reflects the cultural centrality of traditional religious concepts in Cameroon English, and West African discourse respectively (see Wolf 2006 for similar findings from other WAE varieties). In the CEC, there are also prominent collocations indicative of the idiom discussed in this section: In a search horizon of 5 items left and right of the target item, spirit collocates with ancestral 25 times (and ancestral spirit can be said to be a fixed expression in WAE); it also collocates 10 times with deities, 6 times with evil, 4 times with dead, and 2 times with ghost* (see Wolf and Polzenhagen 2007 for more examples and a further discussion). While religious core terms and terms relating to the ancestors are far more frequent in the CEC than in FLOBFROWN, discourse on religion and traditional belief is not as prominently represented in the ICE-EA. This fact is already in evidence from the frequency data for the items religion/ religious/religiosity themselves: These items, when lemmatized, have 564 (i.e., 273 relative to 1 million words) tokens in the FLOBFROWN, which is very close to the results for the CEC (238 tokens, i.e., 265 relative to 1 million words). In the ICE-EA, there are only 143 tokens (i.e., 114 relative

112

The cultural model of community in African English

to 1 million words). Table 9 shows the results for some further core items (compared on the basis of 1 million words), most of them taken from table 8, again with an emphasis on traditional beliefs: Table 9.

Items pertaining to the domain of spirituality. item

CEC

pray prayer spiritual sacred bless worship gods ghost taboo rite ritual cult living-dead ancestral ancestor elder total

EA

184 173 143 37 83 47 50 60 18 22 58 23 3 58 65 59

(205)

1083

FLOBFROWN (40)

(66)

50 35 35 6 42 11 11 22 12 27 38 11 1 3 9 49

(1204)

362

(192) (159) (41) (92) (52) (56) (67) (20) (24) (64) (26) (3) (64) (72)

(24)

(39)

50 119 106 50 72 46 33 64 14 23 65 23 0 10 28 68

(288)

771

(373)

(28) (28) (5) (33) (9) (9) (18) (10) (21) (30) (9) (1) (2) (7)

(58) (51) (24) (35) (22) (16) (31) (7) (11) (31) (11) (0) (5) (14) (33)

These items are an overwhelming 3.2 times more frequent in the CEC than in FLOBFROWN (see Wolf 2006 for a more comprehensive survey). By contrast, in the ICE-EA, most of the relevant items even occur less frequently than in FLOBFROWN, and the results would not be significantly different if the spoken component of the ICE-EA were included. The ICEEA data thus run counter to the expected pattern. Recall, however, the general caveats made above as regards the problem of tracing the spiritual dimension through comparative frequency analyses. The items included in table 9 are but a very partial representation of this dimension. More revealing are the relevant collocational patterns. In the ICE-EA, we find patterns similar to those in the CEC: Spirit* collocates 3 times with dead, as in spirit of the dead; twice with evil, and once with ancestral, again in a

The cultural model of community in African English

113

search horizon of 5 items left and right of the target item. At the end of the section 2.2.5., further evidence of this kind of parallelism between the two African corpora will be given. There, we will also demonstrate that the spiritual dimension is more prominently represented in the ICE-EA in the specific context of witchcraft. The differences between CEC and ICE-EA are even more pronounced when it comes to the frequency of lexical items that are linked to specific religions. Table 10 lists the results for items associated with the Christian faith (there is, of course, some overlap with Islam for several of the terms). Table 10.

Items linked to the Christian faith. item

CEC

God Jesus Lord Christ Almighty Saviour heaven Satan Devil prophet apostle disciple Bible commandment gospel saint holy sin total

EA

876 258 667 179 30 16 52 18 27 27 41 458 143 10 70 37 206 300

(974)

3415

FLOBFROWN

(333)

165 23 19 13 5 2 21 4 12 7 1 3 13 0 7 6 15 31

(131)

(3796)

347

(287) (741) (199) (33) (18) (58) (20) (30) (30) (46) (509) (159) (11) (78) (41) (229)

(257)

(25)

531 125 319 114 7 10 71 4 26 30 14 15 93 3 69 39 67 94

(276)

1631

(790)

(18) (15) (10) (4) (2) (17) (3) (10) (6) (1) (2) (10) (0) (6) (5) (12)

(61) (154) (55) (3) (5) (34) (2) (13) (15) (7) (7) (45) (1) (33) (19) (32) (46)

The CEC data may be interpreted in the light of the fact that the Christian belief has a strong footing in the Cameroonian context. According to The World Factbook (CIA 2006), 40% of the Cameroonian population are Christians, 40% hold indigenous religious beliefs, and only 20% are

114

The cultural model of community in African English

Muslims. Specifically, the anglophone Cameroonian population is almost exclusively Christian or holds indigenous beliefs, whereas the Muslims are almost exclusively Francophones from the North (cf. Wolf 2001: 156-160). The fact that the items in table 10 are 4.8 times more frequent in the CEC than in FLOBFROWN clearly reflects the central position of the Christian faith among the anglophone community, and the important role of religion in the Cameroonian context in general. According to The World Factbook (CIA 2006), the distribution of religions for the East African countries represented by ICE-EA, i.e., Tanzania and Kenya, is the following: Tanzania has 35% Muslims, 35% followers of indigenous religions, and 30% Christians (the data do not include Sansibar, where 99% of the population are Muslim), and Kenya has 78% Christians, 10% Muslims, and 10% followers of indigenous religions. Surprisingly in light of the considerable presence of Islam at least in Tanzania, however, terms specifically linked to this faith are almost absent from the ICE-EA. There is, for instance, only a single token of Koran/Qoran in the corpus, Allah occurs only twice, and the 7 tokens of prophet(s) are in the plural form and bear no reference to the prophet Mohammed. This adds to our earlier observation that, generally speaking, there is a notable overall scarcity of religious vocabulary in this corpus.132 A full confirmation of our general analysis given earlier in this section comes from the results of our questionnaire survey, specifically from the data we obtained on the keyword ancestor. In the open part (question 1.1.), we asked the participants to comment on this keyword. The discrepancy between the number of informants (39 Cameroonians and only 19 Germans) who returned the questionnaire is partly compensated by the fact that the amount of text we obtained from both groups on this question is more 132

This scarcity may simply be due to the selection of texts. One may, however, argue that this casts some doubt on the representativeness and conclusiveness of corpus findings, partly at least, and that the results from the CEC would also have to be put into perspective then. Yet recall again the caveats regarding the problem of tracing the spiritual dimension via frequency analyses. Also note that the ICE-EA, although not expressive in this specific case, reflects the cultural patterns identified for other domains, e.g., that of MONEY/RESOURCES. Note, furthermore, that frequency is not the only parameter of our corpus investigation; the ICE-EA does support, for instance, our findings at the level of collocations, and it provides text examples that are confirmatory of our analysis. Finally, corpus findings are but one element in our overall argument; we make use of a whole range of further sources (see section 1.4.).

The cultural model of community in African English

115

balanced (roughly 300 words from the Germans and 250 words from the Cameroonians).133 It is, first of all, revealing to have a closer look at the most frequent words used by the participants in the two groups. As for the Cameroonian data, the clusters formed by the most frequent words used in the answers readily support our findings on the African community model. The first cluster comprises the highly frequent items tradition/traditional (19x), culture(s) (10x), and nostalgia (5x), and attests to the central general role of the ancestor concept in the (West) African socio-cultural setting. The following statements made by informants are representative of this point: (104) a. b. c.

Culture, protection, nostalgia, tradition Great grand parents, culture, tradition, life Positive, nostalgia, protection, culture

Items like tradition/traditional and nostalgia place the ancestor concept into the realm of traditional African belief systems, i.e., of indigenous (folk) culture, a point highlighted by the following statement: (105) Culture, tradition, folk tales, folk dancing, folk art

Only three answers, however, put this realm into opposition to ‘modernity’ by explicitly associating the ancestor concept with ‘backwardness’ via items like primitive, barbarism, bush-men, illiteracy, cf.: (106) a. b. c.

Early men, bush-men, primitive man, forefather Witchcraft, nostalgia, early man, farming, nakedness, illiteracy, tradition, traditional beliefs Tradition, primitivity, barbarism

Closely related, two further answers associate the keyword ancestors with paganism and superstition, respectively. One statement contains an explicit negative value judgement (false), two other statements, by contrast, associated the keyword with positive. The vast majority of statements, however, is neutral. The rootedness of the ANCESTOR concept in the global community model and its cosmology is reflected by the second cluster with items like god(s) (3x), community (2x), parents (8x), and family (3x). Here are three representative statements from the Cameroonian data: 133

Also recall that the questionnaire survey was repeated with a second group of 20 German students in Heidelberg in 2007, with results parallel to those obtained from the Berlin group.

116

The cultural model of community in African English

(107) a. b. c. d.

Long gone parents; dead people of community; wise parents; men of wisdom in the community that had dead Superhuman, docile, immutable Family lineage, tradition, customs, god Death, great grand parents, appeasing of the gods, liabation, tradition, curses, prosperity, family line

Here, expressions like dead people of community and references to “liabation” (libation 3x) attest to the persistence of the ANCESTORS ARE COMMUNITY MEMBERS/KIN conceptualization, and the expression appeasing of the gods in the latter statement specifically illustrates the ANCESTORS ARE MEDIATORS BETWEEN MAN’S WORLD AND THE SPIRITUAL WORLD conceptualization described earlier in this section. The role ascribed to the ancestors within the community model is reflected by a third and very prominent cluster in the Cameroonian data, with the highly frequent items protection/protect/protectors (19x), shelter (9x), wisdom/wise (5x), and a whole range of further less frequent items including guidance/guides (2x), assistance (1x), caring (1x), counselor (1x), comforters (1x). The following statements illustrate this cluster: (108) a. b.

c. d. e.

Protect members of family, curse, dreams Shelter, counselor, tradition, rite, culture, customs, guides, help, knowledge, wisdom, eternity, omnipresent, grandfathers, keepers of the cultures, respect, obedience, pride Comforters, curse, alive, protection Guidance, protection, security Caring, living, demanding, justice

These statements express conceptualizations like ANCESTORS ARE PERSONS and ANCESTORS ARE LEADERS/GUARDIANS, which were described in our general account of the African community model. The forth cluster highlights the link to the realm of the occult and the special powers ascribed to ancestors in the cultural model. Relevant items include witchcraft (8x), curse(s) (10x), blessing(s) (5x), spirits (3x), and items evoking practices linked to the traditional ancestor cult like rite/ rituals (3x) and worship (2x). Examples include:

OF AUTHORITY/RESPECT

(109) a. b. c. 134

Shelter, protection, tradition, witchcraft, curse, worship of dead, Juju Kalaka134 Protection, death, witchcraft, liabation, rituals, evil, paganism Blessing, curse, revenge, protection

We cannot specify the meaning of Kalaka.

The cultural model of community in African English d.

117

Culture, tradition, witchcraft, shelter, protection, curse, worship of dead skulls, power

The examples from the Cameroonian data given so far, and the latter set of examples in particular, illustrate a further important point, namely the ambivalence of magic powers as to good and evil (see section 2.2.5. for further analysis). It is, for instance, worth noting that in 11 statements we find pairs like curse-protection, curse-blessing, and evil-protection, respectively. In sum, the questionnaire data amply illustrate that even the today’s student generation of Cameroonians represented by our small-scale survey displays the full range of conceptualizations characteristic of the African community model. The picture that emerges from the German data is clearly different. Like in the Cameroonian data, there is a first cluster involving the item tradition(s) (4x); however, the item culture(s), which was highly frequent in the Cameroonian group (10 times), is entirely absent in the German cluster. Here, its place is occupied by the items history (6x) and past (3x), which, in turn, appear only once in the Cameroonian data. Also, it is important to note that for the Germans the item traditional does not evoke ‘indigenous’ and is thus not used in the same sense as seen above for the Cameroonian data. The make-up of the German cluster (history-tradition-past) and the absence of culture from this cluster reflect the general gist of the answers given by the German informants: For them, the ANCESTOR concept pertains to the past, and by the majority of them it is not perceived as a significant element of what they see as their immediate “culture.” This is made explicit in the following statements we obtained: (110) a. b.

c. d.

e.

Connected to the past People you descent of; their life time is so far away from you that it has become already history; they are already dead and cannot tell you of the “The Old Times” Persons that lived long before me, hardly anything known, graveyard I cannot really write something about my ancestors because on the one hand side I do not know much about my ancestors and on the other hand side they do not really have any influence on my life except for the fact that our DNA matches in a way Not important to me

This contrasts sharply to the cluster protection-shelter-guidance with which the Cameroonian group characterized the impact of the ancestors; in fact,

118

The cultural model of community in African English

the items from this Cameroonian cluster are altogether absent in the German data. It also contrasts to the perception of ancestors as a part of the present reality expressed explicitly by 4 Cameroonian informants via items like omnipresent, alive, presence, and living, and expressed implicitly through the general description of the impact of ancestors in terms of the protection-shelter-guidance cluster in the Cameroonian group. Even those among the German participants who stated ancestors to be ‘important’ did so in terms of ‘heritage’ and ‘roots,’ e.g.: (111) a.

b.

Our forebears belong to the past, while also having an impact on a family’s values, traditions and social status. They may be either a source of pride or shame. In any case, they play a considerable role in regards to our identity An important part of your own life. They show you where your roots are and who belongs to your ‘blood’. Without them you wouldn’t exist

Fully absent from the German data is the cluster witchcraft-curse-blessing that was found above to be dominant in the Cameroonian answers. The German answers contain no reference to the spiritual or occult dimension. Only the item ghost appears once in the German data; however, it is in the specific context of tales and stories, cf.: (112) Could be connected with ghost-stories

The most frequent item in the German answers is family (7x), which forms a cluster with further items like grandparents (3x), parents (2x), and relatives (2x). Via this cluster, many of the Germans linked ancestors to the history of their family. If this association was made more explicit, it was done in terms of ‘origin’ and biological/genealogical descent, which corresponds to the dominant family model in much of the Western world, e.g.: (113) a. b. c. d.

Get to know more about your family and were you really come from Parents, grandparents, roots, relatives, history, genes, tradition Part of my family history, heredity, generations, values, respect, tradition My ancestors: my grandparents and their relatives

However, as the results from another part of the questionnaire show, the link between family and ancestors is far less prominent among the Germans as compared to the Cameroonians. In part 3.2 we tested the perceived strength of this specific individual link, and figure 7 shows the results:

The cultural model of community in African English

in % 90

119

Cam Ger

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 none

weak

medium

strong

degree of strength

Figure 7.

QD 3.2. Perceived link between family and ancestors.

The overwhelming majority of the Cameroonians (84%) thus found the link to be strong, as compared to only 26% of the Germans. This strongly attests to the embeddedness and centrality of the ANCESTOR concept in the African community model. In the same part of the questionnaire, we also tested the perceived strength of the individual link between the keywords age and ancestor. Again, this association was clearly more salient among the Cameroonians, as the following figure 8 shows: in % 60

Cam Ger

50 40 30 20 10 0 none

weak

medium

strong

degree of strength

Figure 8.

QD 3.2. Perceived link between family and age.

120

The cultural model of community in African English

These results reflect that ANCESTOR is an abstract concept for the Germans and lacks the immediateness of presence that ancestors have in the African model. Specifically, the results for the Cameroonian group confirm the salience of the link between the ancestors and the elder community members, and the special relationship that holds between them. Interestingly, several of the German answers linked ancestors to more global “histories” beyond that of their family; e.g.: (114) a. b. c.

On one hand my heritage on the other the history of the world Are dead. But can tell you a lot of your family’s / country’s history Ancestors: people from the past through whose doings or wrongdoings teach mankind in the present

Yet one cannot say that these statements express an extension of the FAMILY concept to more global social units as it is characteristic of the African model. As the wording on one hand ... on the other in example (114a) suggests, the various social spheres are rather kept apart. Also, one of the German informants explicitly rejected the link to his/her own family, while emphasizing the association of ancestor with global units: (115) This is nothing I connect with my family, but with the world as a family, like the ancestors of a certain people or nation or in general the ancestors of mankind

In sum, our general discussion of the spiritual dimension of the African community model is fully confirmed by the results from our questionnaire survey. Our comparative frequency analyses yielded equally supportive results in the case of the CEC and with respect to relevant collocational pattern in the African corpora, but failed to produce confirmatory frequency data in the case of the ICE-EA.

2.2.5. Relations of tensions: The occult dimension In our discussion, we apply the term “witchcraft” in a broad sense, as a cover term for forces and practices that are ascribed to involve the application of supernatural powers.135 Alternative terms that are proposed in the 135

In the anthropological literature, proposals for a further classification have been made, most prominently Evans-Pritchard’s (1937) well-known distinction between ‘witchcraft’ and ‘sorcery’; see Geschiere (1997: 12-15) for a discussion.

The cultural model of community in African English

121

anthropological literature are, for instance, “magic” and “occult.” We use these three terms almost interchangeably. This use of terminology is perhaps diffuse, but it reflects that ‘witchcraft’ is in itself a multi-dimensional concept. The deeper problem underlying the terminological issues is again a divergence if not collision of cultural models. Consider the English word witchcraft. From a Western perspective, it is charged with clearly negative connotations, as ‘evil,’ ‘irrational,’ ‘backward,’ ‘superstitious,’ if not as a ‘psychological disturbance.’ Yet applying oppositions like ‘good’ versus ‘evil,’ ‘enlightened’ versus ‘superstitious,’ ‘rational’ versus ‘irrational,’ ‘modern’ versus ‘backward’ to the African cultural concept of witchcraft is, to borrow Geschiere’s (1997: 13) words, “highly unfortunate” and “misleading.” This type of discourse entails a value matrix that may make sense in the Western Enlightenment-based model but may be at best called “moralizing” when applied to the African context. More importantly, such oppositions fail to capture the actual place, role, and perception of witchcraft in African culture. Unfortunately and far beyond the specific issue of the occult, they still dominate the public view of African culture in the Western world, and they have a considerable impact on decision making vis-à-vis Sub-Saharan Africa in Western institutions and political bodies. In contemporary anthropology, the inadequacy of these and similar oppositions is of course well-documented. Throughout the present section, we will make reference to some of the relevant recent studies136 and will link their observations to our findings on African English. The following four points made in these studies are crucial: (1) Witchcraft and witchcraft beliefs are an every-day experience in Sub-Saharan Africa, both historically and in the contemporary context. They pervade the whole range of social spheres, e.g., family, politics, the discourse on material wealth, the medical discourse, sports. (2) African witchcraft notions are essentially neutral, or better “ambiguous” as to ‘evil’ and ‘good.’ Whether witchcraft is perceived as negative or as positive depends on the purpose and context of application. (3) African witchcraft notions are highly dynamic, they are open to change and transformation, they adapt to and are employed to make sense 136

These studies include Geschiere (1997), with a special focus on Cameroon, Meyer (1999) for the Ghanaian context, Niehaus (2001a, 2001b) for the South African setting, van Binsbergen (2000), and, covering various regions, the articles in the collective volumes Comaroff and Comaroff (1993), Moore and Sanders (2001), Behrend and Luig (1999), and Deutsch, Probst and Schmidt (2002). An overview is given in Moore and Sanders (2001a).

122

The cultural model of community in African English

of new social realities. They are thus not anti-modern; rather they are an inherent part of African modernity, as the title of Geschiere’s (1997) book The modernity of witchcraft suggests. (4) Witchcraft is inherently linked to kinship and thus part of the larger African cosmology. While we refer, in our discussion, primarily to the more recent anthropological literature, the view presented here is also strongly inspired by approaches to witchcraft in earlier anthropology.137 We wish to at least evoke some traditions to which we feel close. First of all, we see numerous points of contact between our view and the common-sense approach to witchcraft represented, most prominently, by Geertz (e.g., 1975). Geertz regards witchcraft beliefs, roughly speaking, as a “defense of common-sense,” i.e., as a means to account for phenomena that go counter to common-sense knowledge and experience. This view is already expressed in Evans-Pritchard’s (1937) seminal work on the Zande, and Geertz (1975, 1987: 267-268) illustrates the common-sense perspective with reference to Evans-Pritchard: Take a Zande boy, he [Evans-Pritchard] says, who has stubbed his foot on a tree stump and developed an infection. The boy says it’s witchcraft. Nonsense, says Evans-Pritchard, out of his own common-sense tradition: you were merely bloody careless; you should have looked where you were going. I did look where I was going; you have to with so many stumps about, says the boy – and if I hadn’t been witched I would have seen it. Furthermore, “all cuts do not take days to heal, but, on the contrary, close quickly, for that is the nature of cuts.” But this one festered, thus witchcraft must be involved. (Geertz 1975: n.p.)

As the quote illustrates, this approach argues explicitly against the view that interpretations in terms of witchcraft result from a disregard of “empirical” evidence. Rather, from such a perspective, a magic interpretation of such instances appears to be more “rational” and “coherent” than doubting well-founded experience. The common-sense approach thus stresses the coherent and logical element in magic beliefs and practices (see Kippenberg 1995: 34-38 for a discussion). In fact, many, though not all of the instances ascribed to witchcraft that we will discuss in the present section may be readily seen in terms of a defense of common sense. Parallel to the above example of the Zande boy, it goes counter to the 137

Key texts representing the different traditions in anthropological approaches to witchcraft from the 1960s and 1970s are reproduced in Kippenberg and Luchesi’s (1995) reader.

The cultural model of community in African English

123

every-day experience that young or healthy people suddenly get ill or die, that people suddenly get rich and that successful people suddenly fail. Closely related to, and in fact implied by the common-sense approach, is a further perspective on witchcraft. Magic interpretations are not only a defense of every-day experience, but they are themselves an integral part of the socio-cultural reality in the regions in question, i.e., they are themselves an accepted and transmitted every-day experience. Again, an example given by Evans-Pritchard may be taken to illustrate this view. What he states in a passage comparing his own “scientific” interpretation of natural phenomena, in this case rain fall, to the magic interpretation among the “savages,”138 is worth quoting at length: The fact that we attribute rain to meteorological causes alone while savages believe that Gods or ghosts or magic can influence the rainfall is no evidence that our brains function differently from their brains. It does not show that we ‘think more logically’ than savages, at least not if this expression suggests some kind of hereditary psychic superiority. It is no sign of superior intelligence on my part that I attribute rain to physical causes. I did not come to this conclusion myself by observation and inference and have, in fact, little knowledge of the meteorological processes that lead to rain. I merely accept what everybody else in my society accepts, namely that rain is due to natural causes. This particular idea formed part of my culture long before I was born into it and little more was required of me than sufficient linguistic ability to learn it. Likewise a savage who believes that under suitable natural and ritual conditions the rainfall can be influenced by use of appropriate magic is not on account of this belief to be considered of inferior intelligence. He did not build up this belief from his own observation and inferences but adopted it in the same way as he adopted the rest of his cultural heritage, namely, by being born into it. He and I are both thinking in patterns of thought provided for us by the societies in which we live. (Evans-Pritchard 1934: 21; our emphasis)

Evans-Pritchard’s approach emphasizes that what counts as accepted experience is to a high degree culturally constructed (also see Kippenberg 1995 for a discussion). Furthermore, and crucially, it locates this experience at group level. As expressed in the above quote and in the following passage, the individual relies on the accepted and transmitted experience of the group: 138

While Evans-Pritchard’s use of the terms “savages” and “savage,” on the one hand, and “civilised people” (see the following page) on the other reflects a now obsolete colonial dichotomy, his anthropological theorizing is still quite pertinent to the topic in question.

124

The cultural model of community in African English

What we are asked to accept is that a man who is born into a community of savages acquires as a consequence notions about reality which differ remarkably from the notions he would have acquired had he been born into a community of civilised people [...]. (Evans-Pritchard 1934: 21)

This view also accounts for the persistence of magic interpretations. Magic interpretations are, to apply Bourdieu’s (1990) term, an element of the sociocultural habitus of the group transmitted and reproduced through socialization. There are thus obvious meeting points between Evans-Pritchard’s approach and the theoretical framework we use in our own analysis. What Evans-Pritchard describes in the above-quoted passage are his own and the other’s cultural models, and he describes them as coherent systems of thought with their own internal logic.139 There is a third important anthropological perspective on witchcraft with a long tradition which meets with our own account. This perspective highlights and investigates the role of analogy and contiguity in magic practices. Prominent examples are healing practices, where the choice of a particular medicine is based on perceived similarities or contiguities 139

The consonance between cultural-model research and Evans-Pritchard’s approach should, of course, not be stretched too far. Evans-Pritchard is firmly rooted in positivism; he clings to the belief in “objective truth,” reiterates the corresponding opposition between “scientific” and “primitive” thought, and shows little awareness of the ideological nature of his own cultural model. In other words, there is a clear and omnipresent ethnocentric bias in his approach. Seemingly in contradiction to this bias, his ethnographic accounts are often remarkable descriptions of cultural systems ‘in their own rights.’ As Kippenberg (1995: 34-35) rightly observes, this is possible through a notable methodological move: Evans-Pritchard separates the question of whether or not a specific interpretation matches with the “objective truth” from the question on the logic underlying a certain interpretation and the general belief system in which it is embedded. The latter perspective yields descriptions as in the passages quoted above. The former perspective then dictates the further course of EvansPritchard’s argument, since he continues as follows: “It would be absurd to say that the savage is thinking mystically and that we are thinking scientifically about rainfall. In either case like mental processes are involved and, moreover, the content of thought is similarly derived. But we can say that the social content of our thought about rainfall is scientific, in accord with objective facts, whereas the social content of savage thought is unscientific since it is not in accord with reality and may be mystical where it assumes the existence of supra-sensible forces” (Evans-Pritchard 1934: 21; our emphasis).

The cultural model of community in African English

125

between the disease and the substance used to bring remedy. Such and similar instances are described and analyzed throughout the anthropological literature on witchcraft, and a more theoretical account can be found in Tambiah (1973). Evidently, the anthropological approach to witchcraft in terms of analogy and contiguity has strong parallels to the cognitivelinguistic analysis in terms of conceptual metaphors and metonymies, respectively, and it has a related strong emphasis on folk models underlying perceived analogies and contiguities. Tambiah’s (1973) approach is notable in yet another respect. It takes an explicitly linguistic-pragmatic perspective on witchcraft, in that it analyzes the speech-act dimension of magic practices against the background of Austin’s then newly emerged theory.140 While the three more traditional strands in the anthropological literature evoked above are part of the background of our analysis, our subsequent account is more narrowly along the lines of a recent approach to witchcraft proposed by Geschiere (1997). Generally speaking, Geschiere’s focus is on the role of magic practices within and for a given community, which makes his theory an excellent reference point for our own concern. More specifically, his approach highlights the aspects of magic practices that we deem to be crucial to the understanding of witchcraft in contemporary SubSaharan Africa, namely their ambiguity as to “good” and “evil,” their rooting in the kinship model, their pervasiveness across the various spheres of life, and their highly dynamic nature. As noted earlier on, from a Western perspective, witchcraft is charged with predominantly negative connotations. This, however, does not generally apply to the African view, where magical forces are markedly ambiguous as to “good” and “evil.” The following corpus examples are an illustration of this point: (116) It is common to hear the West African interpreting anything bad or good in witchcraft or juju or marabou terms, or suspecting such no matter the person’s education level. (WCL: 76) (117) Among some central Africans, like in the Cameroonian ethnic groups the force of witchcraft evu is found in each person – it can be activated for evil or for good. (WCL: 77)

140

A similar approach is taken by Alobwede (1982), who, on the basis of his definition as language as a “sacred human tool for causing and curing diseases with given settings” (Alobwede 1982: vi) has analyzed speech acts in settings of traditional medicine in Bakossi.

126

The cultural model of community in African English

Ellis’ (1999: 231; also see p. 235) characterization of the ambiguous understanding of magical power in Poro rituals, a secret society found in Sierra Leone and Liberia, hints at the link between witchcraft and eating, discussed later in this section: Poro rituals articulate a view of power as morally ambiguous, a source of both life and death, just as eating itself is a fundamentally ambiguous activity, being essential for life, but also implying the death of another being.

Evu (Ewondo) referred to in example (117), a witchcraft notion among the Beti in Cameroon, is among the examples discussed in detail by Geschiere (1997: 62-65; also see Boyer 1992). Parallel potentially ambiguous witchcraft notions in the Cameroonian setting analyzed by Geschiere also include (d)jambe among the Maka and lembo (Geschiere 1997: 64). He puts much emphasis on the fact that such practices, in themselves, are not to be understood primarily in moral terms. Rather, these forces may have a positive or negative application and perception, depending on their context and purpose of application. The central argument is that this ambiguity of witchcraft can only be understood against the background of the values of the kinship model. In simple terms, magical forces employed against these values are perceived as negative, while those that are in accordance with these values are seen as positive.141 This ambiguity of magic practices is most notably embodied by the traditional doctors (or herbalists, witch-doctors, traditional healers for some alternative names), cf.: (118) Traditional doctors are known to have the ability to cast evil spells, which can be attributed to death or illness, for example, or undo evil spells in the form of healing and rescue. (Williams 2002: 53)

141

Geschiere’s (1997) analysis focuses on the Southern Cameroonian setting. Onyejekwe (2003) makes similar observations for the ethnic group of the Tivs in Nigeria, whose witchcraft notion tsav may have a productive and protective function for the community or may be destructive. Numerous studies from other Sub-Saharan settings confirm that the ambiguity of witchcraft is a general trait in this region (cf. Moore and Sanders 2001a: 4-5). The same ambiguity is equally present in traditional occult practices such as, most prominently, cannibalism: The consumption of an enemy in order to incorporate his strength, energy, and power is not morally reprehensible, whereas the eating of one’s kin is heavily sanctioned.

The cultural model of community in African English

127

Their province is the management of occult powers (cf. Moore and Sanders 2001a: 5). Positively, they protect and re-establish the social balance disturbed by witchcraft attacks, by applying magical means, i.e., by beating the threat with its own weapons. This is an instance of what Geschiere (1997: 10) refers to as the ‘leveling’ function of witchcraft. The following examples provide an illustration thereof: (119) In some African states like Nigeria, Uganda, Tanzania and Kenya laws have been passed long ago not only to tame witchcraft frenzy but to control witchcraft activities though sometimes the regulation affected people like witch-doctors who seek to protect society against witchcraft. In Nigerian laws “any person who represents himself to be witch or have the power of witchcraft” is liable to six months in jail. (WCL: 44; our emphasis) (120) Witchdoctors are asked to exorcise spirits and ghosts. (CEC) (121) Diviners are consulted to find whether a harmful spell looms over a person. (CEC)

It is thus a key aspect of the African witchcraft discourse that it is a discourse on tensions among members of a group, or, to take the inverse stance, tensions among group members are captured in terms of witchcraft. Hence, witchcraft is not only linked to the kinship model but is an inherent element of it.142 As with the kinship model in general, the original reference point of witchcraft is the immediate circle of kin. Witchcraft begins and emanates from “inside the house” (cf. Geschiere 1997: 11). It is, in its negative application, everything “that falls outside the kinship order, is not regulated by that order, [and] challenges, rejects, destroys that order” (van Binsbergen 2000: 3.7.).143 This is expressed in the following example: (122) The pity of witchcraft is the destruction of parental or kin relationship, the strength of rural African societies that is also the area of witchcraft operation. (WCL: 77) 142

143

This is also apparent in the fact that anti-social behavior is generally associated with negative witchcraft. For instance, people who eat alone and do not share their food and people who do not rejoice with others at their good fortune or are happy at other’s misfortune are considered potential witches (cf. Onyejekwe 2003 for the Nigerian context). Note the association with the domain of eating and the corresponding link to greed, to be discussed in more detail below. Note, however, the general ambiguity of magical forces observed above. They may also be applied in order to stabilize and protect the kinship order.

128

The cultural model of community in African English

Some important aspects of witchcraft beliefs follow from this intrinsic rooting in the kinship model. Since the kin group is the locus of witchcraft practices, the source of witchcraft is first of all and readily suspected and looked for in the immediate environment; cf. the following examples: (123) Zana is sick and the diviner has diagnosed conflicts in the extended family as the source of illness. (Msamba ma Mpolo 1994: 21) (124) There are already very strong feelings that witchcraft emanating not very far from his parents could be at the basis of the boy’s death. (Cameroon Tribune 1995: 1)

Here, one major driving force for the application of occult means is seen in negative emotions towards one’s kin, most prominently jealousy in its various forms. Geschiere (1997: 11) captures this point by describing witchcraft as the “dark side of kinship.” The association of witchcraft with jealousy is well-documented in the anthropological literature. Meyer (1999: 91), for instance, reports the following for the Ewe in Ghana: However, adzetowo [the Ewe word for ‘witch’], who could be either male or female, normally directed their destructive powers against members of their own family whom they envied. In particular, the paternal aunt, tasi, was considered a potential witch. If her brother’s children fared better than her own or, worse still, if she herself did not even have offsprings, she was suspected of harming them out of jealousy.

and Onyejekwe (2003: n.p.) for the Nigerian Urhobo: The Urhobo people believed that children do not die natural deaths but are eaten by witches who are envious of their mothers.

Jealousy as the main source of witchcraft is an eminent and well-known theme in traditional witchcraft stories, often in the immediate family context; see, e.g., the following extract from a West African story (The Jealous Witch-Wife): (125) A man [...] had several wives, of whom the chief, commonly called the “queen” or head wife, had no children. This was a grief to her and a disappointment to the husband. But one of his younger women, who had now become his favorite, had a baby, and the head wife was jealous of her. The husband still retained the older one as the bearer of the keys and in direction of the other women, though he was beginning to doubt her, as he suspected her of witchcraft.

The cultural model of community in African English

129

Here is a further example that illustrates the conceptualization WITCHCRAFT IS THE RESULT OF JEALOUSY: (126) Aina is [...] sickly an dull in school [...] The mother begins to worry and therefore goes to a herbalist who prescribes some medicine, to no avail. In the end, [...] the mother attributes his son’s predicament to the second wife’s jealousy. She must be a witch. Another herbalist is consulted who confirms that Aina’s problem is the handiwork of an evil force. (Gbadegesin 1991: 111)

The two points discussed so far, namely that is the immediate family context where witchcraft practices are first suspected to emanate from and that negative feelings towards one’s kin are seen as the main driving force of applying negative witchcraft, are expressed in communion in the following corpus example: (127) And I just wanted to know from you whether wallocks [warlocks] and witches already exit [exist] in this holy family of ours? When a kinsman falls and another celebrate, accusing fingers could be pointed at the celebrant unfairly. (CEC)

Events that are readily attributed to witchcraft, pervasively both in the traditional and the contemporary context, are illness and death, especially when they come unexpectedly and affect young and healthy persons.144 Examples of the general conceptualization UNEXPECTED ILLNESS / DEATH IS CAUSED BY WITCHCRAFT abound; see, e.g.: (128) In two months, not less than five young men in their early thirties and holding key positions in government services [...] had been brought home in coffins [...] and their deaths are all connected with witchcraft. (CEC) (129) His second wife Zama had also died. But she had died while still very strong and healthy. She had been bewitched by her grandmother. (Luangala 1991: 45). (130) Maseko said traditional healers were lately noticing an increase in the number of patients who had been bewitched and fallen desperately ill. “Our population of one million people includes 30000 wizards who cause misfortune for others,” he explained. (WCL: 87)

144

Case studies and discussion of this belief abound, see, e.g., Apter (1993) for the Yoruba, Bastian (1993: 134) for the Igbo, Meyer (1999) for the Ewe, and Geschiere (1997: 38-43) for the Maka.

130

The cultural model of community in African English

(131) At this stage of his illness, family members and friends feared that the musician had been bewitched. (CEC) (132) A controversy erupted in Kokobuma village, Konye, following the death of a female student of Bafaw extraction. The student, Sarah Bakane, died last August 1 while receiving treatment at a traditional clinic for an ulcer that Manyemen Hospital authorities had diagnosed as cancer. Speculations were, however, rife that she was bewitched by her father‘s sister in retaliation for what was said to have been the forceful adoption of the deceased by her mother, after her father had reportedly paid a huge amount of money as damages after impregnating her mother. (The Herald 1996: 5)

Note that instances like the death of young and healthy persons do not only run counter to common sense (cf. the Geertzian perspective on witchcraft sketched at the beginning of this section), but are often conceived as a direct threat to the continuation of the kinship order.145 Two ills that are thus particularly prone to be ascribed to witchcraft are the death of children and the blocking of reproductive power.146 The former case is illustrated by example (133), whereas both aspects are present in example (134): (133) All the people expressed deep shock at the sudden death of a young mother, at her most promising age, and her only child. It was witchcraft, they said. Such blatant witchcraft deserved the very severest type of punishment. (Luangala 1991: 230) 145

146

A highly topical case in point is the conceptualization of AIDS. Given its dramatic spread in Sub-Saharan Africa, this disease literally threatens the vitality of many communities. Not surprisingly, witchcraft beliefs are thus omnipresent in the African discourse on AIDS. For instance, according to a 2003 survey of the Zambian Ministry of Health, more than 25% of the rural population and about 13% of the urban population in this country believe that AIDS can be transmitted through witchcraft (Republic of Zambia. Central Statistical Office 2004: 12). For a discussion of the link between witchcraft and diseases like AIDS see, e.g., Ellis (1999: 272), Ashforth (2005) for the South African setting, and, with a notable linguistic perspective, Schwab Zimmer (n.d., 2001). The latter author lists lexical items like slow poison for AIDS in Cameroon English, which bears a direct reference to witchcraft. A direct link between AIDS and other illnesses and witchcraft is also observed by A. Wolf (1996: 217-220) in such discourse in Malawi; the basis for this link, according to her, is that EATING specifies both ILLNESS and WITCHCRAFT. In turn, however, there is a long-standing practice of using occult means to enhance potency.

The cultural model of community in African English

131

(134) There is still consternation and disbeleive [sic!] surrounding the mysterious death on a six-years-old boy that occurred last tuesday from alleged rat bite [...] The body of the boy, who had gone to bed normally in the evening [...] was discovered [...] with some parts of his body including his genitals eaten up by the ‘vampire rat.’ Although rats in Douala are usually extraordinary in size, it is still very difficult, to beleive [sic!] that this six years-old boy could be found dead under his bed and the death attributed to a rat of extralarge size![...] There are already very strong feelings that witchcraft emanating not very far from his parents could be at the basis of the boy’s death. (Cameroon Tribune 1995: 1)

Examples from our sources that illustrate the latter case, the blocking of reproductive power, include: (135) [A Ghanaian student] told me, with his big red eyes rolling here and there how his mother initially could not have children because witches had blocked her womb. (WCL: 8) (136) Ms. Tibu’s accusers, mostly men, exploiting traditional African law, found her guilty of casting a spell on a local herbalist and supernaturally causing him to be poor and impotent. (WCL: 78) 147

The importance of fertility and of having many children in African culture is well-known. They are not only a symbol of a person’s wealth and wellbeing, but, at the spiritual level, also signs of being in harmony with the forces of the cosmos, cf.: (137) Pregnancy and birth are [...] positive indicators of the process of divine gifting. (CEC)

Against the background of the kinship model, the lack or loss of reproductive power are thus a most serious peril, cf.: (138) Infertility is regarded not as a physiological deficiency, but a cosmocultural deficit. (CEC)

Fears of witchcraft directed against reproductive power are a good case in point to get an impression of the pervasiveness of witchcraft beliefs in contemporary Sub-Saharan Africa (cf. Abunaw 2004: 44; A. Wolf 1996: 217). Particularly striking examples are alleged instances of “penis snatching” in West Africa, as those described in the following news reports: 147

Note, in this example, the link between witchcraft and material wealth; see below for further discussion.

132

The cultural model of community in African English

(139) For more than a week now, residents of Fako have been stunned by a wave of allegations, that a group of people are causing male genitals to disappear by a simple touch or handshake. Cases have been reported in Limbe, Tiko, Muea, and Batoke. (The Cameroon Post 1996a: 1) (140) The ECOMOG Commander has warned that his forces will deal severely with any person who attacked or accused Nigerian soldiers of making their genitals disappear. Several ECOMOG soldiers have been severely beaten in Monrovia and have come close to being lynched over the past two weeks following rumours that strange men from Nigeria were capable of such witchcraft. (WCL: 75)148

Evidence that attests to the wide spread and resonance of the underlying belief comes from the following passage from a Cameroonian newspaper article: (141) Whether allegations of the mysterious disappearances of manhood are true or false, a general atmosphere of fear is reigning in Fako division. The psychology of the crowd is taking its toll. People are scared to greet even their relatives and the male folk constantly keep their hands in their pockets. Moreover, the way male folk instinctively and sporadically grab their crotches, is an indication that special scabbards may have to be designed for the Fako male residents to safely store their manhoods when in public. (The Cameroon Post 1996b: Cover story)

Such cases did not only receive broad attention among the public and in the media, but were also brought to court:149 (142) A Nigerian male adult, Remijus Njoku, was arraigned before the Limbe Magistrate’s Court II, and charged with witchcraft which is said to have caused the shrinking of the penis of Sabum Christopher Fodje. The charge reads in full: “That you [...] on or about the 15/08/96 at Batoke Limbe, in the Fako division, did commit an act of witchcraft liable to disturb the public order by causing the shrinking of the penis of Sabum Christopher Fodje and thereby committed an offence contrary to section 251 of the Penal code.” (The Cameroon Post 1996b: Cover story) 148

149

Ellis (1999: 272) notes the general Liberian “supposition that Nigeria is a centre of enormous and generally malevolent spiritual power.” Witchcraft-related legal regulations are common in Sub-Saharan countries. For the case of Cameroon, see, e.g., Geschiere (1997: ch. 6).

The cultural model of community in African English

133

The fact that this topic also occurs in a fiction story by the Nigerian writer Adimora-Ezeigbo (1999) further attests to its popularity. In the passage cited below, the female protagonist is accused by a man in the streets of having stolen his genitals. The text is partly in PE:150 (143) “I touch my body, na him I come see say my prick don disappear [...]” A man in a dirty overall, who probably was a motor mechanic, said: “[...] Fine big woman wey dress like dis. She never chop money bele full. Na poor man prick she go take make money [...]” They were all convinced she was guilty of the offence. Stories had been recently circulating in the city and reports had appeared in newspapers about people who lost their vital organs to total strangers. (Adimora-Ezeigbo 1999: 29; our emphasis)

Examples like these show that witchcraft beliefs are not just a matter of the past but an ubiquitous part of the present realities in Sub-Saharan Africa, including “modern” and urban settings. The passage that is emphasized in the text, na poor man prick she go take make money, indicates in which kind of broader discourse this type of belief is embedded, namely the discourse on “new wealth.” In the following, we will look at this link between witchcraft and material wealth in more detail. The analysis of this phenomenon is a hallmark of recent anthropological research (see Moore and Sanders 2001a: 14-17 for a review of the literature on this issue). This is due, on the one hand, to the central place the discourse on new wealth occupies in present-day African societies, and, on the other hand, to the “new” outlook of the witchcraft beliefs that are an inherent part of this discourse. Together with the discourse on political power (see section 2.4.), it is seen by these anthropologists as the case in point to show the “modernity of witchcraft” in Sub-Saharan Africa, to borrow from the title of Geschiere’s (1997) book. The link between witchcraft and material wealth in itself is not a new phenomenon. For the Cameroonian setting he investigated, Geschiere (1997: 69), for examples, notes that this aspect is already inherent in traditional forms of witchcraft, e.g., (d)jambe, and this observation can be made for many witchcraft notions in the region (see, e.g., Ashforth 2005: 213 for muthi in South Africa, and, for various other settings, the articles in Moore and Sanders 2001 and Comaroff and Comaroff 1993). The basic general pattern is that success and, in turn, failure are attributed to the 150

Also note the close interaction with eating metaphors in this context. We will discuss this point in detail later in the present section.

134

The cultural model of community in African English

impact of magic forces. Here, it is important to recall that against the background of the cosmology underlying the kinship model, success in life, including material wealth, is generally interpreted as an indication of a person’s strong support by the spiritual realm, i.e., as positive; cf.: (144) Wealth is a potential sign of being at one with the forces of the cosmos. (WCL: 51)

As noted earlier, however, the logic of the kinship model concurrently requires that the material wealth acquired by an individual is shared with the community members. The occult has its place in both aspects of wealth. On the one hand, occult means may be employed to obtain riches, and, on the other hand, to reinforce the obligation to “share.” Geschiere (1997: 10) aptly speaks of the “accumulative” and the “leveling” tendencies in witchcraft. It needs to be stressed that this is not a matrix in moral terms. Specifically, the application of occult means for “accumulation” is not viewed as negative per se; cf.: (145) Among the Akans of Ghana, where the possessor of witchcraft uses it for positive is the so-called “Nzima-bayi” a peculiar type of charm for the acquiring of riches. (WCL: 44)

While the link between wealth and witchcraft is already strongly present in the traditional context, Geschiere observes that in the wake of modernity new specific forms of witchcraft have emerged to which economic success is attributed, associated primarily with the nouveaux riches and the white (cf. Geschiere 1997: ch. 5). Two such Cameroonian witchcraft concepts are famla and nyongo.151 As loan words, these items have entered the corresponding L2 variety of English. This is attested by the following text examples: (146) In Cameroon, witchcraft in many villages is like saying ‘good morning’. Just before you blink your eyes, you are being taking away from this world, in to the under world, so called Nyongo. Nyongo is some how a satanic owned business, where people are being sold in to, to work for others who are on earth. This is very common in the villages and among some big, responsible men around town, with big and wonderful cars and houses. (WCL: 94)

151

Dako (2001: 39) lists a parallel item, sikaduro, for Ghanaian English. Van Binsbergen (2000) reports similar notions for Zambia, Austen (2001) for the Cameroonian tribe Duala.

The cultural model of community in African English

135

(147) Belonging to a nyongo secret society that used human sacrifice to build its wealth. (Makuchi 1999: 125) (148) Fame Ndogo lashed out at people who say they can develop alone without the community. ‘When other people are developing, we say there is famla, there is nothing like that. There is only hard work. It is for this reason that I saluted the creation of the Federation of Rural Organisations of the Mvila and community development in the division.’ (WCL: 83)

A further example comes from Uganda. Since this news report conveys the matter-of-factness with which witchcraft occurrences are dealt with, it is quoted at length: (149) Primary school in Kiboga district was closed in May after parents reported that their children were being attacked by demons. [...] The parents accused Isma Sserunkuuma, a man, who lives near the school, of bringing the demons locally known as mayembe. They said Sserunkuma wanted the demons from a witchdoctor to help him acquire wealth. Acting on the parents’ report, the Kiboga resident district commissioner (rdc), Margaret Kasaija, ordered for the arrest of Sserunkuuma and the closure of the school until the demons would be driven out of the school. [...] ‘I wonder why people really acquire demons and resort to bewitching others,’ Kasaija lamented before she cautioned the public against acquiring demons. At the time of arrest, Sserunkuuma said he could not afford the demons’ enormous demands. He said the demons demanded for 300 virgin girls and cows to provide them with blood for sustenance. Sserunkuuma added that when he failed to provide the virgins and cows, he set them (demons) free. They then attacked the pupils. He pleaded that he had no intention of harming the school, but only failed to control the demons. [...] The national chairman for traditional healers, Ben Ggulu, performed traditional rituals before the school was re-opened in May. He also healed 15 pupils, whose mental abilities had been affected by the demons. Ggulu would hold herbs atop the pupils’ heads to invoke the demons out of them. Using traditional charms, Ggulu spoke strange languages causing bark cloth-wound cow’s horn to move around the place, a ritual he said he did to search for the demons. ‘Sorcery has become a common practice in this district [...]” Ggulu [...] said. He noted that many people acquired demons without knowing their nature, adding that, “harmless demons do not ask for blood and human sacrifices.” Ggulu said some people use harmful demons to kill others in the struggle to gain wealth. (Nsubuga and Kiwawuloa 2004)

136

The cultural model of community in African English

The new dimension of these witchcraft notions is not only that they are associated with modern forms of economy, they also do not normally involve the immediate kin, whereas traditional witchcraft rather is, as noted earlier, close to the “house.” More importantly, however, while traditional forms of witchcraft are, as seen above, primarily associated with death and diseases, the new forms of witchcraft are explicitly based on the notion of exploitation. The “old” witches consume the life force of their victims, the “new” witches exploit their labor force (cf. Geschiere 1997: 139). The underlying conceptualizations are thus WITCHCRAFT IS EXPLOITATION and its inversion EXPLOITATION IS WITCHCRAFT. One popular belief is that the “new” witches, i.e., the nouveaux riches, put their victims to work on “invisible plantations” (Geschiere 1997: 139) or in other kinds of “otherworld businesses.” This belief is already expressed in one of the text examples from Cameroon cited above and is further illustrated by the following quote: (150) When some one sells the other party in Nyongo, the person that is being sold goes to work in the spiritual world for the person that sold him/her. (WCL: 94)

This belief is not restricted to Cameroon; it is also reported for South Africa in Niehaus (2001a: 27) and attested for East Africa by the following news report from Tanzania: (151) D A R E S S A L A A M, Tanzania, Feb. 9 – Police in southern Tanzania have arrested a 90-year-old woman on suspicion she abducted an 11-year-old boy to turn him into a zombie-like slave through witchcraft, the regional police chief said today. [...] Many people in the rich agricultural region believe that such zombies can be made to perform menial farming chores late at night. (WCL: 84)

The victims of such modern forms of witchcraft are labeled zombies (cf. Geschiere 1997: 139); cf. the example above and the following one: (152) And so the mind is lured to a witch growing rich from the work of zombies as the “living dead.” (WCL: 44)

One may capture the gist of these new forms of witchcraft, in almost Marxist terms, as the “accumulation of human capital.” However, this enterprise is transferred into the realm of the supernatural. Austen (2001, 1993) relates this belief to the African experience of slave trade, a link also drawn by Bernault (n.d.) and van Binsbergen (2000: n.p.). As the latter author puts it:

The cultural model of community in African English

137

The reference to earlier forms of globalisation (slave trade) is now used in order to express and contest, in a witchcraft idiom, newer forms of globalisation, such as the differential access to consumer goods and post-colonial state power.

These new forms of witchcraft thus attest to the dynamic nature of witchcraft beliefs. Rather than being “anti-modern,” they are adapted to the modern setting and applied to make sense of the present realities. On a wider plane, specific forms of new witchcraft like famla and nyongo are part of a rampant discourse on “money rituals” and “money magic” in Sub-Saharan countries (for a discussion of the Nigerian context, see, e.g., Matory 1993: 81; Bastian 1995, 2001; for examples from Tanzania, see Sanders 2001).152 Here are some representative examples from West Africa: (153) LAGOS: A teenage girl in Nigeria has confessed to taking part in the ritual killing of 48 people in the last seven years. [...] Ritual killing is common in some parts of Nigeria, where some people believe witchcraft involving the use of human parts can make them rich. (WCL: 79) (154) There are also the young greedy ones who resort to fetish practices as a way of making quick and sudden wealth. (WCL: 11) (155) Onohiolo, a contributor to the independent triweekly LA NOUVELLE EXPRESSION, was charged with libel and sentenced in absentia to four months in prison for a February 17 article about a ceremony during which an exorcist allegedly accused Adamou Bako, the affluent director of a local bus company, of enriching himself by means of witchcraft. (WCL: 80) (156) But from what a Nigerian friend of mine made to understand that people in cults to make money are using most of these parts. How do they do this, is what he could not tell me. All is that, others to make money are using human parts. Wooooow! ! How scary it is to be used by other to make money. (WCL: 94)

“Money rituals” are not restricted to West Africa. Rather, they are spread across Sub-Saharan Africa, cf. the following example from East Africa: (157) After all of Nyerere’s Ujamma revolution witchcraft is as rampant as never before in Tanzania, where innocent people’s are kidnapped, killed, their skin peeled off for juju/marabou rituals for apparent money making. (WCL: 46) 152

For the parallel discourse on politically motivated ritual murder see section 2.4.

138

The cultural model of community in African English

Again, the context of these forms of witchcraft is distinctly “modern.” Furthermore, and parallel to the belief in occult plantations discussed above, there is a strong association of “money rituals” with the wealthy elite, the Big Men and Big Women (cf. Matory 1993: 81). This point is illustrated by the following examples from Nigeria and Liberia: (158) Police hunt big wigs behind ritual killing [...] Most of these missing persons are believed to be victims of ritualists who operate in various hideouts across the state. A young girl, who recently escaped from one of such hideouts, told the police that she saw big men and women with flashy cars at the hideout where she was taken after being kidnapped. (WCL: 144) (159) There are several observations in relation to the new outbreak of ritual murder in Nigeria today. The belief is that this act is being perpetrated by the most powerful in society who used human parts to make sacrifices for wealth. (WCL: 11) (160) The increasing practice of this negative cultural value in Liberia, as in other African states, is because Liberians increasingly think that most of their “Big Men” got to where they are because of dabbling in these African occult rituals. Liberians don’t think the “Big Men” became “Big Men” because of planning, organization, discipline, struggle, hard work, suffering, respect, regard, steadfastness and tenacity, patience, and humility. (WCL: 39)

We shall not be concerned with the question of whether the cases that are reported necessarily have a factual basis (often, however, they do). The mere fact that these beliefs are widespread and that material wealth is readily interpreted as the result of the application of occult forces attests to the salience of the underlying conceptualizations WITCHCRAFT IS A MEANS TO OBTAIN MATERIAL WEALTH and, inversely, MATERIAL WEALTH IS THE RESULT OF WITCHCRAFT. As noted earlier, new forms of witchcraft differ from traditional ones in that they are not necessarily located in the immediate circle of kin (cf. Geschiere 1997: 139). The examples of “money rituals” given so far are “new” forms of witchcraft in this sense. However, the new and old contexts may blend, as in the following examples, which stay within the “house”: (161) The reason is that the juju/marabou art is negative, demands negative rituals such as sacrificing one’s child or relative to oil one’s business or blame innocent people for one’s business failure, and since it is negative the result of the business becomes a failure. (WCL: 28)

The cultural model of community in African English

139

(162) In this manner, and in a particular case, many regarded as gory and sordid, in Lagos popular tabloid came alive and screamed: Cobbler Uses Wife to Make Money. The story sent shock waves across a nation where senseless killing is the order of the day. Screaming further, the tabloid revealed that Mr. Abiodun Olaleye, the cobbler, became a millionaire in less than four months after using his wife, Fatima, for the money ritual. (WCL: 11)

On a more general scale, beyond the domain of material wealth, forms of success in various realms of life are readily seen as the result of the application of occult forces (SUCCESS IS THE RESULT OF WITCHCRAFT). This observation is confirmed by the following example: (163) One of the cultural values here is ritual killings as the best root to advancement in politics, job, and other social situations (WCL: 39)

A highly prominent realm of this belief is that of contemporary African politics, and we will deal with this issue in a separate section (2.4.).153 Complementary to the conceptualization of success in terms of the application of witchcraft we find the association of failure with the impact of occult forces (FAILURE IS THE RESULT OF WITCHCRAFT). In line with this conceptualization, economic and social decline are readily attributed to witchcraft attacks; cf.: (164) If Kweku Boadu visits a juju/marabou man and is told that his sister or grandmother, who the juju/marabou said are witches, are responsible for his failures, such as his business not doing well. (WCL: 18) (165) Some African ethnic groups are so mired in witchcraft and juju/ marabou that they fear progressing, believing that if people see their material progress they will be attacked by witches and other supernatural powers. (WCL: 21)

153

Other spheres of social life of which witchcraft beliefs are an integral part include the work space and sports. We will not extend our analysis to these domains, since the pattern is entirely analogical to the one observed above for the domain of material wealth. On witchcraft beliefs in the domain of sports, football in particular, see, e.g., the discussions in Geschiere (1997: 3-4), Schatzberg (2001: 121-129), Grill (2002), and, for some recent examples, Lovgren (2006) and Laity (2006). Also note the following example from the ICE-EA: In Tanzanian soccer, lucrative sums of money find their way into the coffers of presumed witch-experts who use divination, ritual acts and powerful medicines to hex rival teams in order to win.

140

The cultural model of community in African English

The major driving force assumed to underlie such witchcraft attacks is the envy towards a person’s social position or social advance. Here, the traditional attribution of witchcraft to jealousy in the immediate family context (see the discussion earlier in this section) is transferred to further social domains. This is illustrated by the following example from South Africa: (166) BEWITCHED HEADMASTER Mudubakangwana Geoffrey Madonsela (43), the headmaster at Ncakini Secondary School near Nelspruit, where he was in charge of more than 800 pupils, attended school for three days in 1999 and only 18 days in 2000, according to official records. His excuse? That he had been bewitched by his “enemies” with a curse that made him feel sick whenever he arrived at school. [...] Pupils like Nomalanga Nkosi say they do not understand why he was fired. “We know he is sick. His sickness starts immediately when he arrives at the school in the morning. There is proff [proof] that some teachers have bewithced [bewitched] him on order to get his position”, said Nkosi. (WCL: 81)

Generally speaking, this discourse on success and failure reflects an aspect of witchcraft aptly described by van Binsbergen (2000: n.p.) as “the celebration of individual desires and powers at the expense of one’s kin.” While in the traditional context, the targets were within the immediate kin circle, i.e., in the local community, this pattern is transferred along the lines of the general community model to the various other social circles. Underlying this discourse on success and failure is a sort of “zero-sum belief,” to use Austen’s (2001) explication, i.e., that the advance of one person necessarily goes along with the decline of another one. This belief is already at the heart of traditional witchcraft, e.g., with respect to health and recovery from illness; cf.: (167) Whenever a young child died when there was an ailing elder in the family, it was thought that he had sacrificed the young child so that he could remain alive. (Luangala 1991: 230)

This is also the pattern underlying much of the modern African discourse on wealth and success. As Austen (2001: n.p.) explains:154 154

Note that the zero-sum belief evoked in this quote is also at work in the political context. There, the little value ascribed to political opposition is linked to the fact that it is deprived of resources and thus unable to act in terms of immediate eating-and-feeding structures.

The cultural model of community in African English

141

The immediate idiom of this discourse remains alien or even reprehensible to most Western audience. It concerns ideas of witchcraft, in which individuals become rich by consuming the life forces of others. The underlying belief system here assumes a zero-sum universe in which the amount of wealth is ultimately limited. Anyone who gains riches is therefore suspected of having drawn them from the property and – most frightening – the vital energies of someone else.

In the discussion given so far we foregrounded the aspect of witchcraft that was described by Geschiere (1997: 10) as its “accumulative tendency.” However, one may also observe the “leveling function” of witchcraft with regard to material wealth. It was noted above that the accumulation of material wealth is not perceived as negative per se. However, against the background of the kinship model it is expected that this wealth is adequately shared with the community members, or, to adopt the food metaphor of this discourse, that the feeding obligations towards one’s kin are met. The occult is employed here as a means of enforcing that expectation. Meyer (1999: 91), for instance, observes that among the Ghanaian Ewe one category of people considered to be prone to practicing witchcraft are poor people who envy rich family members who failed to share their wealth with them. And Geschiere (1995) reports the fear of better-off Cameroonian town people “to be eaten” by the members of the rural community they stem from, if they do not convincingly fulfill their feeding obligations (also cf. Austen 1993: 90). The eating metaphor here has to be seen as a clear reference to witchcraft. In fact, the domain of EATING is the key source domain in the conceptualization of witchcraft. In the following part of this section we will deal with this aspect in detail. The association between witchcraft and eating is already at the heart of traditional witchcraft beliefs. Traditional witches “eat” their victims (cf. Geschiere 1997: 139), not only metaphorically but also literally. It is well-known that many traditional witchcraft practices involve the actual consumption of body parts and/or body liquids.155 The roots of the conceptualization of WITCHCRAFT in terms of EATING are thus partly metonymic.156 155

156

This element is also present in modern witchcraft practices as in money rituals and politically motivated occultism. The WITCHCRAFT IS EATING conceptualization has first been described from the perspective of ethno-medicine by A. Wolf (1996: 216-218), who uses Lakoff and Johnson’s theory for her explanation of this conceptualization in Malawi.

142

The cultural model of community in African English

Examples of the WITCHCRAFT IS EATING conceptualization abound. The first two illustrations come from the West African context: (168) Yorubas believing that witches are associated with birds like nightjars which flies about at dusk, suck the blood of their victims till they die. (WCL: 44) (169) the Yorubas witches sucking peoples blood and taking away their souls – usually their own relatives. (WCL: 44)

The following examples stem from a Zambian novel: (170) [...] who insisted that they had better call in a witch-finder to come and point out the beasts which were chewing the young ones. (Luangala 1991: 233) (171) My mother was eaten. (Luangala 1991: 231) (172) Father says that there are witches at home and that they eat children in the dark. (Luangala 1991: 68) (173) “Do you know wizards, you?” challenged one man. “I know. They are people who kill and eat others.” (Luangala 1991: 12)

In the ICE-EA we even found a reinterpretation of Christianity – being referred to as a cult – and its practice of the Holy Communion according to this witchcraft conceptualization: (174) We drink your blood and eat your body. (ICE-EA)

Further examples come from specific traditional witchcraft notions. For instance, among the Ewe in Ghana, a person who performs destructive ‘black magic’ (dzo) on somebody else is called dzoquameto, which literally means ‘somebody eating a person with dzo’ (Meyer 1999: 90). Ewe witches (adzetowo) are suspected of feeding on the blood of the young (Meyer 1999: 91). Furthermore, there is also a vast range of traditional eating imagery related to witchcraft. It is, for instance, a central and recurrent pattern across traditional Sub-Saharan witchcraft beliefs that the witchcraft force is described and depicted as a small hungry ferocious beast living in one’s belly. For the Cameroonian setting he investigates, Geschiere 1997: 39, 62) reports this belief, for instance, for (d)jambe among the Maka and evu among the Beti. He recounts the following narrative:

The cultural model of community in African English

143

One day, a hunter found the djambe between the roots of a giant tree, deep in the forest. The djambe said to him, “Give me a little meat.” The hunter gave him some. On this day, he killed many animals. And this continued. Every day, the hunter gave a little meat to the djambe, and he returned with a well-endowed game bag. His wife suspected something. One day she followed him in secret. She saw him speak to the djambe. When he left, the wife approached the djambe herself, and asked him, “Who are you?” The djambe answered, “Do you really want to know? Then couch down here, spread your legs, and I will show you. I will make you rich, too.” The woman, being jealous of her husband’s success, crouched down, and, hop, the djambe entered into her belly. Thus the woman brought the djambe to the village. From this day on, the djambe in the belly of the woman demanded meat to eat. The woman gave it all the meat her husband brought back from hunting, but it was not enough. The djambe forced her to kill all the animals in the compound, but it still was not enough. Finally she had to give him her own children, one by one. (Geschiere 1997: 38-39)

We cited this passage at length since it perfectly illustrates a broad range of ingredients of traditional witchcraft notions. These ingredients were discussed earlier in the present section and include the association of witchcraft with success, material wealth, with killing, and with jealousy. The important point is that these ingredients are presented in the logic of the source domain EATING. Specifically, jealousy, the traditional driving force of witchcraft, is conceptually related to HUNGER. Also, the above passage exemplifies again that the traditional context is the “house,” i.e., witches are thought to feed preferably on their kin, again literally and metaphorically. The underlying conceptualization is thus KIN ARE FOOD. This interplay between WITCHCRAFT IS EATING and kinship is most directly expressed in many indigenous witchcraft notions. The Yoruba item aje (‘witch,’ also a loan word in Nigerian English), for instance, is reported to be a contraction of iya je meaning ‘mother eat’ (SMA 2004), and iya wa (meaning ‘our mothers’) is a common way of referring to witches in this language (Apter 1993: 117). These concepts are central to the Gelede cult among the Yoruba; cf.:157 The Gelede festival honors older Yoruba women, who are equally referred to as “our mothers” (awon iya wa) and “witches” (aje). [...] These females can be either nurturing or destructive. The masquerade is designed to elicit nurturing and protection from “our mothers”. (Emory University 2005: n.p.) 157

These descriptions again illustrate the ambiguity of witchcraft as to ‘good’ and ‘evil’ dealt with earlier in the present section.

144

The cultural model of community in African English

Because the Yoruba people know and understand the depth of the wickedness of witches, they created the Gelede cult which is dedicated to the witches who they addressed as Iya Wa (our mother). The aim was to appease them and turn their evil powers into good use for the development and well being of their communities. (Onyejekwe 2003: n.p.)

For a further illustration of the system of eating-based conceptualizations of witchcraft, see the below extract from another traditional West African witchcraft story. The title of the story is The Jealous Witch-wife, and here, too, JEALOUSY needs to be read in terms of HUNGER against the background of WITCHCRAFT IS EATING: (175) A man of the Orungu tribe in the Ogowe region had several wives, of whom the chief, commonly called the “queen” or head wife, had no children. This was a grief to her and a disappointment to the husband. But one of his younger women, who had now become his favorite, had a baby, and the head wife was jealous of her. [The story then goes roughly as follows: The baby is taken away by the head wife at night and returned ill. However, the head wife was caught in the act by the man. Our addition] The head wife, being accused, was silent, having nothing to say for herself; for she was both ashamed and afraid to confess that she had been eating the life of the baby. (The Jealous Witch-wife)

However, WITCHCRAFT IS EATING is not only central in the traditional context. It is also prevalent and productive in the contemporary context of the African community model. In the following example from Nigeria, for instance, the witchcraft and eating idioms are used to capture tensions between ethnically and religiously defined groups: (176) The Igbos are always bloodied by the northerners; and it seems their blood is desired by the witch-heads of Islam, who can only maintain the potency of their spells with the Igbo people’s blood in their stomach. (WCL: 96)

A further link between witchcraft and eating comes from the belief that witchcraft may be exercised through eating, i.e., that suspected witches give their victims food to eat or liquids to drink in order to gain power over them. For an illustration, see the following story reported by Onyejekwe (2003: n.p.): There was the story told by an “eye witness” of how some people went to a Buka – (a local restaurant) to eat. One of them demanded for fufu (cooked cassava mound) with egusi soup. However, when the food arrived and the

The cultural model of community in African English

145

man was about to eat, the fufu started “talking” – saying “don’t eat me, please don’t eat me”. Those around shouted drawing the attention of passers by. The owner of the restaurant was pounced upon. A medicine man was brought who forced the woman to confess that she was a witch and that this was one way she has been initiating unsuspecting people into witchcraft. Unfortunately for her, the customer’s spirit was too powerful for the witch.

From the above analysis we may conclude that the domain of WITCHCRAFT is saliently conceptualized in terms of EATING in the African cultural context. We provided evidence that the entire network of general EATING metaphors sketched in section 2.1. is drawn upon in the construal of witchcraft. The resulting network of specific metaphors includes WITCHCRAFT IS EATING (as a specification of ACHIEVING A PURPOSE IS EATING), JEALOUSY IS HUNGER (as a specification of STRONG DESIRES ARE HUNGER), and KIN ARE FOOD (as a specification of RESOURCES ARE FOOD). Finally, there is also a clear corresponding connotation of the related general metaphor IMPORTANT IS BIG: Qua association with the domain of witchcraft, big people may sometimes be seen with mixed feelings by Africans; cf. the following example from the ICE-EA: (177) The “big fish” eating somebody (ICE-EA)

At the lexical level, in addition to loan words which are taken from indigenous languages and are carriers of the above cultural conceptualizations of WITCHCRAFT in terms of EATING (e.g., aje in Nigerian English), the metaphor WITCHCRAFT IS EATING yields a specific sense of the verb to eat in African varieties of English. To eat somebody has the meaning ‘to harm, kill, or gain control of somebody by means of witchcraft.’ Importantly, the same pattern can be observed for francophone Africa. An online dictionary of African French (Le Français en Afrique 2000) lists the following subentries for manger (‘to eat’): 158 manger l’âme. loc.verb. Usuel, péj. Tuer par des moyens magico-religieux. [To eat somebody’s soul: To kill by magico-religious means; our translation].

158

Once again, the fact that the same pattern is observable in African French is a further strong argument for the contextualization view advocated in our book and it counters alienationist claims made against the former colonial languages. The systematic expression of culture is not bound to mother tongues alone; cultural conceptualization are systematically rendered in a speaker’s L2, too.

146

The cultural model of community in African English

manger qqn. v.tr. Fréq., péj. Pour un sorcier, détruire le principe de vie de qqn, se rendre maître de qqn. [To eat somebody: For a sorcerer, to destroy the life forces of somebody, to gain control on somebody; our translation].

Following the pattern of the previous sections, we will now give further substance to our discussion by providing data from comparative corpus analyses and from our questionnaire survey. We have argued repeatedly that the realm of witchcraft in the African setting cannot be separated from the broader domain of spirituality (cf. section 2.2.4.), and although certain lexemes in the corpora are identical in their forms, the concepts they stand for may be incommensurable. A case in point would be healer, which arguably does not comprise the notion of ‘magical power’ in the Western context, but does so in the African one. In other words, simple frequency statistics may not be very conclusive, but one has to look at collocational patterns and actual textual occurrences to understand the meaning of certain lexemes. Also, there is a whole range of loan words from indigenous languages in the specific varieties of African English; we did not include such items in our search list for reasons of comparability with Western English, since they do not or only partly belong to the common core of English.159 Thus, the general predicaments regarding the frequency data from the broader domain of spirituality outlined in section 2.2.4. also apply here. The following table 11 is restricted to a few core terms and needs to be read with the above caveats:

159

In the case of the CEC, i.e., for Cameroon English, for instance, such items would include loan words like nyongo (a witchcraft notion, 1x in the CEC), marabout(s) (1x CEC), and nganga (a witch-doctor, 1x CEC), but also terms like kwifon (associate of a traditional leader possessing occult power, 13x CEC) (cf. Wolf 2001: 266). Another group of problematic and thus excluded items is represented by words like juju-man (6x CEC, no token in FLOBFROWN), diviner(s) (18x ICE-EA, 2x CEC, no token in FLOBFROWN), medicine(-) man/men (12x ICE-EA, 1x CEC, 1x FLOBFROWN) since they are not normally used by Western speakers of English with reference to their own culture. Further items not included in our list are sooth-sayer(s) (4x CEC, 1x ICE-EA, no token in FLOBROWN) and seer (6x CEC, 1x FLOBFROWN, no token in ICE-EA).

The cultural model of community in African English Table 11.

147

Items linked to witchcraft. Frequency. item

CEC 160

witch-doctor witch 161 witchcraft 162 rite / ritual healer sorcerer / sorcery total

ICE-EA

12 7 11 80 5 7

(13)

(8)

5 18 74 65 7 4

122

(136)

173

(8) (12) (89) (6)

FLOBFROWN

(3)

0 27 28 88 2 23

(138)

168

(4) (14) (59) (52) (6)

(0) (13) (14) (43) (1) (11) (81)

As it stands, the core terms included in table 11 are thus about 1.7 times more frequent in the African corpora than in FLOBFROWN. In the light of the caveats mentioned earlier, this figure alone is, however, not very expressive. Besides, individual items pose additional problems due to specifics of the corpus, as in the case of sorcerer in the FLOBFROWN. Sorcerer is the brand name of a mountain bike described in a text in the FLOB corpus, which accounts for 11 of the tokens of this item in FLOBFROWN. These tokens need to be subtracted from the 23 occurrences listed above. The rest of the tokens of this item in FLOBFROWN stem from two fantasy stories in the FLOB component. The same holds true for two occurrences of sorcery, the third occurrence, interestingly enough, is an historical reference to this phenomenon in East Africa. In the CEC, sorcerer is used in religious texts, in the description of a local play, and in a tourist brochure; sorcery can be found in a religious treatise on what Christians need to abandon. In the ICE-EA, sorcerer is only used once, in reference to an historical work (in the Kenyan humanities sub-section), and sorcery three time in a Tanzanian PhD on witchcraft. This text also accounts for most of the occurrences of witchcraft in the written component of the ICE-EA. As to the item witch*, 13 of the tokens in FLOBFROWN come from a single text in FROWN on the Neo-Pagan sect movement in 160

161

162

We included the spelling variants witch doctor and witchdoctor in this entry. Correspondingly, none of these tokens was counted in the entry witch. All hyphenated forms other than witch-doctor are included here. If the spoken component of the ICE-EA were included as well, a further 45 (!) occurrences of witch and items which include this word would have to be added. We included the spelling variant witch-craft in this entry. Correspondingly, none of these tokens was counted in the entry witch.

148

The cultural model of community in African English

the US; most of the other occurrences are references to figures in plays or novels or slurs for persons (e.g., “save me from the old witch” – John Major about Margaret Thatcher ). In the CEC and in the ICE-EA, the distribution of the tokens of witch* and witch-doctor* across texts and text types is more balanced, and apart from a few exceptions (e.g., the mentioning in the ICE-EA of the Salem witch trials and political witch-hunts) the social phenomenon as described in this section is referred to. Thus, core terms like witch, witchcraft and witch-doctor do not only show up more frequently in the African corpora but also in reference to an acknowledged social practice. More subtle traces of this phenomenon in the African corpora can be found if other terms are considered. In the ICE-EA, traditional healers as a fixed expression occurs 6 times, and there is an additional collocation of healers with traditional. Synonymous terms are traditional practitioner and indigenous practitioner, and practitioner(s) collocates 3 times with traditional in the ICE-EA, and 4 times with indigenous in the CEC. As we have explained in section 2.2.4., witchcraft is an intrinsic part of the whole domain of ‘traditional practice,’ and reference to it in the context of this domain may be implicit or explicit. The following table 12 shows relevant collocations of traditional and indigenous in the ICE-EA and CEC respectively, in a search horizon of 5 items left and right of the target item: Table 12.

Collocations with traditional and indigenous.

collocates with traditional

collocates with indigenous

CEC doctor(s) rites practice(d) religious/religion(s) medicine healers sorcerer

9x 8x 6x 6x 5x 4x 1x

medicine(s) practitioner(s) religion/religionist divination heal

4x 4x 3x 1x 1x

ICE-EA healers beliefs/believe practices religious/religion ritual(s) medicine practitioner(s) rites witch/witchdoctors witchcraft practice(s) health medical/medicine rite(s) religion

7x 7x 6x 4x 4x 3x 3x 2x 2x 2x 9x 7x 6x 3x 2x

The cultural model of community in African English

149

The parallelism between the CEC and the ICE-EA for these collocational patterns is remarkable, and none of these collocations can be found in FLOBFROWN. The proportionally higher occurrence of rite and ritual in the African corpora is also noteworthy: In the CEC, one finds collocations like sacrifices (4x), (socio-)medico-religious (2x), death (2x), ancestral (1x), supernatural (1x), witch-doctor (1x) for ritual; and sacrifices (3x), death (2x), gods (2x), ancestor(s) (2x) for rite. In ICE-EA, ritual collocates with items like homicide (2x), oath (2x), divination (1x), health (1x), healing (1x), medicines (1x), murders (1x), yet collocations with rite do not point in the direction of witchcraft practices. Thus, the observation made in section 2.2.4. that religious discourse is underrepresented in the ICE-EA has to be qualified if references to traditional practices are taken into account; still, the fact is that the CEC has proportionally more references to the spiritual dimension as such than the written component of the ICE-EA, though an inclusion of the spoken component would tilt the balance in its favor (see footnote 161). More and overwhelming support for our general analysis of witchcraft – at least for West Africa – comes from the questionnaire data. In part 5.1. of the questionnaire, as with the other domains we tested, the participants were confronted with a list of keywords (16) and asked to indicate seven of these items that they associate most with WITCHCRAFT. A selection of the results is given below in figure 9. Cam in %

Ger

Figure 9.

pa st

le s ta

io n

fa iry

ss

rs tit

ne su

pe

il l

hb ig ne

fa

m

or

s

il y

ey on m

at h su cc es s

de

je al

ou

sy

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

QD 5.1. Concepts associated with witchcraft (selection).

150

The cultural model of community in African English

All the links that were discussed earlier in the present section show up unmistakably in the data obtained from the Cameroonian group, i.e., the association of witchcraft with JEALOUSY, ILLNESS, DEATH, SUCCESS, and MONEY, as well as the connection to the immediate social environment (FAMILY, NEIGHBORS). This clear picture is fully confirmed by the data on the perceived strength of the individual links tested in section 5.2 of the questionnaire. Consider first the traditional association of witchcraft with the immediate social environment, captured in the questionnaire by the keywords family and neighbors, cf. the following figures 10 and 11: in % 60

Cam Ger

50 40 30 20 10 0 none

weak

medium

strong

degree of strength

Figure 10. QD 5.2. Perceived link between witchcraft and family. in % 80

Cam

70

Ger

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 none

weak

medium

strong

degree of strength

Figure 11. QD 5.2. Perceived link between witchcraft and neighbors.

The cultural model of community in African English

151

Even among the younger generation of Cameroonians represented by the participants in the questionnaire study, these traditional links are clearly present. About 50% of the Cameroonians perceived the association between witchcraft and the two keywords to be strong or medium, while more than 90% of the Germans saw no link or a weak link. Also fully supportive of our analysis is the data on the link between WITCHCRAFT and JEALOUSY, the latter being the traditional driving force of witchcraft as explicated in our general discussion. This association is maximally persistent even among the younger generation of Cameroonians, as figure 12 shows. The same persistence can be observed for the traditional association of DEATH and, albeit to a lesser degree of strength, ILLNESS with witchcraft, as the figures 13 and 14 illustrate. in % 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Cam Ger

none

weak

medium

strong

degree of strength

Figure 12. QD 5.2. Perceived link between witchcraft and jealousy. in % 90

Cam

80

Ger

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 none

weak

medium

strong

degree of strength

Figure 13. QD 5.2. Perceived link between witchcraft and death.

152

The cultural model of community in African English

in % 60

Cam Ger

50 40 30 20 10 0 none

weak

medium

strong

degree of strength

Figure 14. QD 5.2. Perceived link between witchcraft and illness.

In Wolf and Polzenhagen (2007) we provide further corpus evidence of the specific link between WITCHCRAFT and DEATH and discuss this point from the angle of fixed expressions. We performed an exemplary comparative scan of all the tokens of kill* in the CEC and the FLOB, and looked for contextual clues to a link to witchcraft. None of the 166 occurrences of kill* in the FLOB corpus makes a reference to occult practices. By contrast, in the CEC, which has almost the same number of tokens of kill* (170x), several occurrences of this item are clearly witchcraft-related. Here are some of the examples we found in the CEC (taken from Wolf and Polzenhagen 2007; the italics mark items that bear the link to witchcraft): (178) He was sorry he had brought shame to the family by his diabolical activities. [...] He had developed a certain evil urge to kill and kill. He had talked of a large cocoa plantation somewhere in the Kube Plains where the victims were taken to some sort of slave labour Camp. (179) The first victim was a well-known trader based in Njinikom “round about” 43. He is alleged to have killed more than two people by witchcraft and some are still critically sick in their homes. (180) So, in Palm-Wine, Kwengong and the women’s secret cult successfully kill the Fon in order to liberate the people. (181) In The Inheritance, lights go off when Sanga Tete invokes evil spirits to kill Ma Mende. (182) She said he had been initiated in to the famous witch-craft society called “Nyongo” and named two young men he had killed.

The cultural model of community in African English

153

Such patterns are also numerically traceable in a comparative corpuslinguistic analysis. A defined search context of 5 items to the left and 5 items to right of the token, for instance, produces 2 occurrences of witch*, 2 of evil and 2 of spirit* as collocates of kill* in the CEC.163 In the FLOBFROWN corpus, none of these items is among the collocates of kill*. Technically speaking, such collocational patterns are, however, often awkward to trace, especially with highly frequent search words like kill*, given the often enormous amount of co-occurring content words even within a small search horizon. Some of the above corpus examples obtained via the search word kill* also bear the strong link between witchcraft and wealth discussed in the general part of the present section (manifest in the items nyongo and slave labour Camp). The salience of this link in the African context is again clearly evident in our questionnaire data. The perceived strength of the association of MONEY with witchcraft, and, closely related, of SUCCESS with witchcraft, was considerably higher among the Cameroonians than in the German reference group, as the following figures 15 and 16 show: in % 70

Cam

60

Ger

50 40 30 20 10 0 none

weak

medium

strong

degree of strength

Figure 15. QD 5.2. Perceived link between witchcraft and money. 163

In Wolf and Polzenhagen (2007) we argue that such patterns of distant cooccurrence may be seen as being part of a continuum with fixed expression. Underlying both distant collocates and fixed expression is often the same entrenched conceptual link between domains, in this case culturally induced. In the case of fixed expressions, this conceptual link is merely crystallized in an entrenched formal representation.

154

The cultural model of community in African English

in % 40

Cam

35

Ger

30 25 20 15 10 5 0 none

weak

medium

strong

degree of strength

Figure 16. QD 5.2. Perceived link between witchcraft and success.

Even more telling are the results from the open part of the questionnaire, since participants were not constrained by a fixed list of items but could freely associate on a given keyword. Among the keywords given in part 1.2 was money, and some of the data we obtained were discussed in the earlier section on the nurture aspect of the community model. However, the results on this keyword are also highly relevant to our present concern with witchcraft. The answers given by the Cameroonian group readily attest to the conceptual link between MONEY and WITCHCRAFT, as well as to other closely related links. From the 39 Cameroonians we obtained a total of 320 words on the keyword money. It is highly informative to have a close look at the most frequent words used in their answers. The most dominant cluster is represented by the items evil (16 tokens) and wickedness/wicked (5x), which make a clear reference to witchcraft. Here are three examples that are fully representative of the answers given by the Cameroonians when confronted with the keyword money: (183) a. b. c.

Happiness, problems, deads, envy, evil, corruption, exploitation etc. Happiness, jealousy, evil, death Corruption, embezzlement, good health, construction, development, bloodshed, evil, hatred

These answers also contain items that belong to two further relevant and dominant clusters, namely the one that is represented by killing (5 tokens), death/dead (4), bloodshed (3), and needs to be seen against the background

The cultural model of community in African English

155

of the money rituals discussed earlier in this section, and the one formed by the items jealousy (4), envy (1), hatred (2), which are central elements of the witchcraft discourse. One answer from the Cameroonian group made the link to witchcraft explicit by a direct reference; cf.: (184) Witchcraft, corruption, embezzlement, pride, death

Another Cameroonian informant made the following statement that readily attests to the ambiguity of wealth explicated in the general discussion earlier in the present section; cf.: (185) Symbol of comfort when well earned and well used, symbol of curse when earned in a evil or wicked manner

These three clusters are altogether absent from the German data, in which no reference to witchcraft is traceable. Only the keyword evil occurs twice, however, it is then part of the fixed expression necessary evil; cf. (186) a.

b.

Necessary evil, determines our life, you strive your whole life for it so that you’re able to afford certain things ĺ a house, travelling, a car etc. part of our tradition different currencies Money makes the world go round, is necessary evil

Here, the fixed expression necessary evil does certainly not bear a direct and active reference to the spiritual or occult dimension. Rather, in the German data, the material realm is clearly kept apart from the spiritual one, as expressed in the following statement we obtained: (187) It can make material dreams come true, but the spiritual dreams are much better and important than any material dream

The results from part 5.1. of the questionnaire also attest to the fact that witchcraft is perceived by many Africans, including the younger generation, as a present reality rather than a cultural notion only related to the past. More than 60% of our Cameroonian informants saw no link between witchcraft and the past or found the link to be weak, while the overwhelming majority of the Germans clearly associated witchcraft with the past, as figure 17 shows. Specifically, and closely related, among the Germans, there was an almost unanimous association of witchcraft with the realm of fairy tales, a link that is far less prominent among the Cameroonians; figure 18 shows the results.

156

The cultural model of community in African English

in % 70

Cam

60

Ger

50 40 30 20 10 0 none

weak

medium

strong

degree of strength

Figure 17. QD 5.2. Perceived link between witchcraft and the past.

in % 80

Cam

70

Ger

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 none

weak

medium

strong

degree of strength

Figure 18. QD 5.2. Perceived link between witchcraft and fairy tales.

Finally, we also tried to test the conceptual link between witchcraft and the domain of EATING by including the keywords hunger and eating in part 5 of the questionnaire. In our general analysis, the domain of EATING was found to be a major source domain in the conceptualization of witchcraft within the African community model. In the questionnaires, almost 40% of the Cameroonian informants perceived the link to the keyword eating to be medium or strong, and about 25% the link to hunger. These figures are certainly lower than expected. For the interpretation of the data it is,

The cultural model of community in African English

157

however, important to note that the keywords hunger and eating differ from the other ones on the list in that they directly cue a source domain. Also, the results in the Cameroonian group need to be seen in the light of the German reference data. In the latter group, no informant saw a strong link between witchcraft and eating or hunger, and only about 10% a medium link to eating and 3% to hunger. Maybe more importantly, for both keywords, the clear majority of the Germans (70%) saw no link at all, compared to 40% of the Cameroonians. The exact distribution is given in the following two figures (19 and 20). in % 70

Cam Ger

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 none

weak

medium

strong

degree of strength

Figure 19. QD 5.2. Perceived link between witchcraft and eating.

in % 70

Cam

60

Ger

50 40 30 20 10 0 none

weak

medium

strong

degree of strength

Figure 20. QD 5.2. Perceived link between witchcraft and hunger.

158

The cultural model of community in African English

Although far from being a full confirmation of the conceptual pair EATING and WITCHCRAFT in the African cultural model, these results at least reflect differences between the two cultural groups which were tested in our questionnaire study. With the partial exception of the data on the link between EATING and WITCHCRAFT, the questionnaire results are thus overwhelmingly supportive of our general analysis.

2.3.

Interim summary

In the previous sections, we provided an analysis of several dimensions that are crucial to the understanding of the African cultural model of community. We described these dimensions in terms of four relations central to the composition of the African community model: relations of group membership, relations of mutual obligations, spiritual relations, and relations of tensions. For the sake of systematicity, we analyzed these relations and dimensions in individual sections; however, as has been stressed several times and as the discussion has recurrently shown, these dimensions are highly interwoven and cannot be separated from each other. In our analysis of salient conceptualizations within the community model we argued that three source domains are pervasively drawn upon: KINSHIP, EATING, and WITCHCRAFT. At the linguistic level, this conceptual framework yields three dominant “idioms” that are used to express the above relations and dimensions: the kinship idiom, the eating-and-feeding idiom, and the witchcraft idiom.164 As we hope to have shown, these idioms are, however, not tied to specific relations alone. The kinship idiom certainly has a special place in the expression of group membership and the eating-and-feeding idiom is central to the expression of relations of mutual obligations. However, since the underlying source domains pervade the model as whole, the idioms, as we have seen, go across the various dimensions of the community model, too.

164

Speaking of several “idioms” in this context is not original. Evans-Pritchard already did so, and many anthropologists after him. We feel that this terminology is also consistent with a cognitive-linguistic approach, as it aptly captures that we are dealing with the systematic linguistic expression of salient conceptual patterns.

158

The cultural model of community in African English

Although far from being a full confirmation of the conceptual pair EATING and WITCHCRAFT in the African cultural model, these results at least reflect differences between the two cultural groups which were tested in our questionnaire study. With the partial exception of the data on the link between EATING and WITCHCRAFT, the questionnaire results are thus overwhelmingly supportive of our general analysis.

2.3.

Interim summary

In the previous sections, we provided an analysis of several dimensions that are crucial to the understanding of the African cultural model of community. We described these dimensions in terms of four relations central to the composition of the African community model: relations of group membership, relations of mutual obligations, spiritual relations, and relations of tensions. For the sake of systematicity, we analyzed these relations and dimensions in individual sections; however, as has been stressed several times and as the discussion has recurrently shown, these dimensions are highly interwoven and cannot be separated from each other. In our analysis of salient conceptualizations within the community model we argued that three source domains are pervasively drawn upon: KINSHIP, EATING, and WITCHCRAFT. At the linguistic level, this conceptual framework yields three dominant “idioms” that are used to express the above relations and dimensions: the kinship idiom, the eating-and-feeding idiom, and the witchcraft idiom.164 As we hope to have shown, these idioms are, however, not tied to specific relations alone. The kinship idiom certainly has a special place in the expression of group membership and the eating-and-feeding idiom is central to the expression of relations of mutual obligations. However, since the underlying source domains pervade the model as whole, the idioms, as we have seen, go across the various dimensions of the community model, too.

164

Speaking of several “idioms” in this context is not original. Evans-Pritchard already did so, and many anthropologists after him. We feel that this terminology is also consistent with a cognitive-linguistic approach, as it aptly captures that we are dealing with the systematic linguistic expression of salient conceptual patterns.

The cultural model of community in African English

159

Our second major point was to show that the community model has spread from its original reference point, the local, i.e., village setting, to all spheres of social life. In this process of extension, the conceptual matrix of the model was applied and adapted to these various spheres, and with it the corresponding idioms. Thus, it was and is a device to make sense of new realities, and in its present and transformed outlook is a crucial element in contemporary African societies. However, a community model is more than merely a sense-making device of social life. There is a dialectical relationship between this cultural model and the social realities. On the one hand, the former reflects the latter. On the other hand, the model also provides perspectives and guidelines for the present organization of social life, i.e., it is a structuring force.165 We will address this crucial point specifically in the following section (2.4.), by discussing the role, impact and implications of the kinship-based community model in the sphere of politics in modern SubSaharan African.

2.4.

The African community model and politics 166

In our discussion on the conceptualization of group membership (section 2.2.2.), we observed the salience and omnipresence of the general construal of COMMUNITY in terms of KINSHIP. In its specific forms NATION AS FAMILY and STATE AS FAMILY this general conceptualization also pervades the realm of contemporary politics in Sub-Saharan Africa. It is crucial to see that this kinship idiom is more than just an “African way” of talking about political power. Rather, it is the expression of a specific mode of politics, and its meaning can only be appraised against the background of the global community model. As we hope to have shown, this model rests on the conceptual triad KINSHIP-NURTURE-MAGIC, and none of these 165

166

Here, our understanding of the role of cultural models is again congenial to Bourdieu’s (e.g., 1990) concept of habitus. Habitus, for Bourdieu (1990: 5356), is a system of dispositions, of cognitive structures that are produced by past conditions and experience, and, most importantly, generate and organize present practices. It needs to be stressed that the relation between cultural models and the realities in not deterministic, in either direction, a point also emphasized by Bourdieu (1990: 55) for his concept habitus. This section is based on the discussion given in Polzenhagen (2007: ch. 3) and Polzenhagen and Wolf (2007).

The cultural model of community in African English

159

Our second major point was to show that the community model has spread from its original reference point, the local, i.e., village setting, to all spheres of social life. In this process of extension, the conceptual matrix of the model was applied and adapted to these various spheres, and with it the corresponding idioms. Thus, it was and is a device to make sense of new realities, and in its present and transformed outlook is a crucial element in contemporary African societies. However, a community model is more than merely a sense-making device of social life. There is a dialectical relationship between this cultural model and the social realities. On the one hand, the former reflects the latter. On the other hand, the model also provides perspectives and guidelines for the present organization of social life, i.e., it is a structuring force.165 We will address this crucial point specifically in the following section (2.4.), by discussing the role, impact and implications of the kinship-based community model in the sphere of politics in modern SubSaharan African.

2.4.

The African community model and politics 166

In our discussion on the conceptualization of group membership (section 2.2.2.), we observed the salience and omnipresence of the general construal of COMMUNITY in terms of KINSHIP. In its specific forms NATION AS FAMILY and STATE AS FAMILY this general conceptualization also pervades the realm of contemporary politics in Sub-Saharan Africa. It is crucial to see that this kinship idiom is more than just an “African way” of talking about political power. Rather, it is the expression of a specific mode of politics, and its meaning can only be appraised against the background of the global community model. As we hope to have shown, this model rests on the conceptual triad KINSHIP-NURTURE-MAGIC, and none of these 165

166

Here, our understanding of the role of cultural models is again congenial to Bourdieu’s (e.g., 1990) concept of habitus. Habitus, for Bourdieu (1990: 5356), is a system of dispositions, of cognitive structures that are produced by past conditions and experience, and, most importantly, generate and organize present practices. It needs to be stressed that the relation between cultural models and the realities in not deterministic, in either direction, a point also emphasized by Bourdieu (1990: 55) for his concept habitus. This section is based on the discussion given in Polzenhagen (2007: ch. 3) and Polzenhagen and Wolf (2007).

160

The cultural model of community in African English

dimensions can be seen in isolation. Taking a linguistic vantage point, the present section sets out to trace the interaction of the three corresponding idioms, i.e., the kinship idiom, the eating-and-feeding idiom, and the witchcraft idiom, in the realm of politics. 167 A good first case in point are fixed expressions of the son of the soil type, which are highly frequent in African varieties of English (a detailed account of the mappings underlying this type of expression is given by Medubi 2003: 169-175). Here are two representative text examples from Nigeria and Zambia, respectively: (188) But dealing with a son of the soil, even of Obasanjo’s hue, has presented the race with a fresh vista of difficulty. (WCL: 107) (189) The smartly dressed men in the delegation were very sad to announce the sudden disappearance of one of the sons of the soil. (Luangala 1991: 258)

The meaning of this item cannot be reduced to the notion of ‘origin.’ In addition, it expresses a set of mutual expectations and obligations between the individual and the group, specifically expectations of nurture and care, and also links up to the COMMUNITY IS AN ORGANISM conceptualization mentioned in footnote 98. As Medubi (2003: 172) observes for the Nigerian context, son of the soil entails that natives of a particular region are favored in the distribution of resources. In turn, the expression also entails the 167

This is not to say that other conceptualizations of social units are absent in African English. Consider the case of the conceptualization of the STATE. There is a whole range of alternatives to the kinship-based NATION AS A FAMILY, and African English shares many of them. Every-day conceptualizations include the STATE IS AN ORGANISM metaphor, which yields expressions like the head of state, the legislative branch, and the administrative body, the conceptualization of the state as a MACHINE, as in the state apparatus, as a BUILDING with different PARTS/DIVISIONS, to name only a few of them. These expressions belong to the common core of English. Further familiar and historically salient metaphors are those of the state as a SHIP, as a CONTRACT, or as a MONSTER (e.g., most prominently, Hobbes’ Leviathan), linked to specific politicophilosophical traditions. Each of these conceptualizations takes a specific perspective on its target domain STATE, and in that they are often characteristic and indicative of specific modes of politics. Our point is to say that in the African setting the perspective taken by the source domain KINSHIP is most salient and deeply entrenched, since it is in accordance with and captures the specific socio-cultural experience of the setting.

The cultural model of community in African English

161

expectation of support by the group. Medubi argues that in this complex sense son of the soil has developed into a veritable political concept. A further and parallel case in point is the conceptualization of leaders as FATHERS. This and the related conceptualization PERSONS OF RESPECT ARE FATHERS have a long history in the African context. They crystallize, for example, in numerous traditional titles and terms of address used in African English, many of which are borrowings from local indigenous languages. Each region has its specific set of such items. Nigerian English, for instance, has Baba (Yoruba, literally meaning ‘father’) as a term of address for an elder male (Dalgish 1982: 15) and Babalawo (Yoruba, literally meaning ‘father has secrets’) as the title of an Ifa cult diviner (Dalgish 1982: 15). Beyond traditional titles and terms of address and respect, at the level of contemporary African politics, LEADERS ARE FATHERS is an even more pervasive and influential political concept than ‘son of the soil.’ An excellent and detailed analysis of the role and spread of the LEADERS ARE FATHERS conceptualization as a political concept is given by Schatzberg (1986, 2001). He provides numerous examples of its presence and salience throughout Sub-Saharan Africa and discusses its implications from the perspective of a political analyst. At the linguistic level, this conceptualization shows up most prominently in the well-known fact that African leaders are referred to and readily present themselves as fathers of the nation,168 as illustrated by the following examples: (190) On the head of state’s contribution to the division, he said ‘it may not be as perfect as people may have wanted but people should know that the means are limited and that the president of the republic is the father of all divisions in the country.’ (WCL: 83) (191) Well, I have met the President a couple of times and he refers to me as a son therefore he is like a father to me. In Yorubaland we have this tradition that when somebody is far older than you he is like a father. (WCL: 140) (192) I want a situation where candidates would tell us what they can do rather than hide behind Pa Adesanya or any other leader, that is the only way we can develop. (WCL: 140; our emphasis)

168

In this context, note that in the ICE-EA, father collocates with nation 11 times (search horizon of 5 items to the left and 5 to the right of the search word).

162

The cultural model of community in African English

The entire range of kinship-based authority, including but also far beyond the FATHER concept, is drawn upon in the following passage from a report of an interview with Liberia’s former president Charles Taylor: (193) The day I spoke to Taylor in his carport, he talked feelingly of his concern for his fellow-Liberians, about their “need for a leader who understands” them. He had to be like “a father, uncle, godfather, teacher, and priest” to his countrymen. (Anderson 1998)

As Schatzberg (1986, 2001) observes, such evocations of kinship-based authority are frequently used as an effective means of legitimating a leader’s political power; in addition to or in the absence of other possible sources of justification (e.g., regular elections). The status related to the father role is thus employed for a largely unchallenged exercise of power. By a leader’s running the FATHER metaphor, political opposition may be and commonly is presented and sanctioned as the rebellion of wayward and ungrateful children against their legitimate father169 (see Schatzberg 1986, 2001 for numerous examples). Thus, as Schatzberg (1986: 16) observes, the father image also posits severe socio-psychological predicaments to any political opposition. Parallel to what was said with respect to son of a soil, the meaning of father of the nation cannot, however, be reduced to notions like ‘authority’ and ‘respect.’ Two further crucial points come into play: The first one is a marked spiritual dimension, an aspect that will be dealt with specifically later in this section. The second point was already foregrounded in our brief discussion of the son of the soil expression. The FATHER OF THE NATION conceptualization, too, is essentially about relations of nurture and care. Within the model, the FATHER is given the right to freely draw from the resources of each individual and of the community as a whole. In exchange, however, he is expected to exercise the duty to nurture. At the heart of the conceptualization is thus a reciprocal eating-and-feeding pattern (cf. Schatzberg 1986: 14-15): LEADERSHIP IS EATING and LEADERSHIP IS FEEDING. More specifically, FEEDING ONE’S KIN, that is, one’s community and adherents (cf. the above remarks on son of the soil) and the ability to FEED constitutes a major aspect of legitimatizing leadership in the African context. Politics in Sub-Saharan Africa is, as Bayart (1993) aptly puts it, a 169

African leaders are notorious for long terms in power. Note, for instance, claims like Siaka Stevens’ “pass I die” (‘Till I die, I will rule forever’) (WCL: 5 and 29).

The cultural model of community in African English

163

“politics of the belly,” i.e., a political discourse that is essentially about resources and that is systematically rendered in terms of EATING metaphors. Or, in the words of Ellis (1999: 221): “the description of politics using an idiom of eating, in which the assimilation of power is described by using the vocabulary of digestion, is actually widespread in Africa.” In the following, we will give an account of the underlying conceptual network based on the source domain of EATING. The starting point of our discussion is a non-linguistic example. 170 It is a Nigerian cartoon taken from Medubi (2003: 174), which perfectly illustrates the notion ‘politics of the belly.’ It alludes to the decamping of some 100 APP members in Osun State to the PDP, the ruling party of president Obasanjo, in 2001, after loosing elections.

The caption reads I beg God, make I no go chop and quench, which means ‘please God, make that I don’t go and eat and then die from eating’. Figure 21. Nigerian Cartoon (from Medubi 2003: 174)

The relevant mappings underlying the cartoon are the following: 170

Note that this is evidence of Lakoff and Johnson’s key claim that metaphor is a conceptual device rather than a merely linguistic phenomenon, and thus occurs in various modes of representation.

164

— —

—

—

—

The cultural model of community in African English

Resources are represented as food (bananas), i.e., RESOURCES ARE FOOD, MONEY IS FOOD Political power is represented by access to food and by the ability to feed (the PDP ape), i.e., POWER / LEADERSHIP IS EATING AND FEEDING Political power is represented by physical size, as the result of eating (the PDP ape), i.e., IMPORTANT IS BIG, HAVING POWER / BEING A LEADER IS BEING BIG Lack of power is depicted by small size and lack of food (the AD ape and the APP ape), i.e., HAVING NO POWER IS BEING SMALL Political aspiration is represented as the desire to eat (go chop, as the caption for the APP ape reads, and the watering mouth of the AD ape), i.e., POLITICAL ASPIRATION IS HUNGER.

The cartoon is thus a further instantiation of the entire network of general eating metaphors sketched in section 2.1. The specification of this network to the target domain of political power is deeply entrenched in the African cultural context. At the linguistic level, it is manifest in numerous expressions in African English that are generated by the conceptualizations involved. Examples for POWER / LEADERSHIP IS EATING abound: (194) They have taken food of his plate. [Said in Cameroon when a government official is dropped] (Waliggo n.d.: 12) (195) They have given him plenty to eat. [Said in Cameroon when a new government official is appointed] (Waliggo n.d.: 12) (196) Back stabbing democracy for a meal of porridge. (Ayetigbo 2002: n.p.) (197) All over the world, government is not bad, government is about service. It is the desire to serve. But here, you will hear people say ‘Ah, he don go chop money!’ (WCL: 90) (198) There is the case of those who use the second one perjoratively saying “self-reliant development means one should feed fat from the resources put at his disposal and which are meant to be used for the general good”. (CEC)

The cultural model of community in African English

165

(199) So like the noises of the Party when all the first promise had been eaten up and it had become a place where fat men found things to swell themselves up some more. (Armah 1988: 95) (200) After we’ve finished talking politics, you know what we look for? We want to eat. (Samuel Doe, cit. in Ellis 1999: 290; originally in Schatzberg 1993).

/ LEADERSHIP IS FEEDING, the counterpart conceptualization in the logic of the eating-and-feeding pattern, is expressed in the following text example: POWER

(201) But nothing can be as insane as that because the success of his Presidency does not depend on how badly he dishes the Igbos. (WCL: 113)

And both conceptualizations come in communion in: (202) I eat and let others eat also. I chop you chop. [Popular Nigerian adages in reference to political power] (Waliggo n.d.: 12; Schatzberg 2001: 40) (203) Besides, there is no opposition party in Nigeria anyway. All are YCIC (You Chop I chop) political arrangements. (Ayetigbo 2002: n.p.) (204) For I do honestly believe that in the fat-dripping, gummy, eat-andlet-eat regime just ended – a regime which inspired the common saying that a man could only be sure of what he had put in his gut or, in language evermore suited to the times: ‘you chop, me self I chop, palaver finish’. (Achebe 1988: 149)

The conceptualization of state resources in terms of food crystallizes in the notion of ‘national cake,’ which is omnipresent in the African political discourse171: (205) he would not only eat the national cake, but also huge mouthfuls of national chin chin!172 (WCL: 69) (206) Now his mouth was so full of the national cake that he could not even raise his voice against what he did not agree with. Power was very sweet to chew. (Luangala 1991: 146) 171

172

We are aware of the synonymous expression “national pie” in native varieties of English; this expression, however, is not tied to an EATING and FEEDING pattern in the political arena, as in the African context. Chin chin is a staple Nigerian dish.

166

The cultural model of community in African English

(207) What is happening is that due to the culture of corruption in the land, there is no more real production taking place as everyone is looking for a chance to take his slice of the immoral national cake baked with the oil from the Niger Delta without lifting a finger to do any productive work. (WCL: 143) (208) Also, look at the 2001 budget in which the southwest got a very disproportionate share of the national cake where they bake none. In all these, the idea is to let Yorubas get as much as possible before the eventual break-up Afenifere is engineering. What goes to the Niger Delta where the national cake comes from? (WCL: 110) (209) President Obasanjo knows he has unwittingly provoked the intensity of the economic liberation struggle in the Niger-Delta. He has disconnected that by his actions or in-actions, politics or impolitic, he has infuriated the owners of the cake to veer from just asking for a big share of the cake to saying I want to share my cake myself. And that is why Mr. President has of late been desperately trying to counter and stop the escalating demands for resource control. (WCL: 102) (210) Many believe that fighting that has been going on since 1983 is essentially about the distribution of the national cake. The SPLA argues that successive Sudanese governments have not been fairly distributing the wealth of the country. (Arabic News 1997: n.p.)

The following examples are further manifestations of the conceptualization STATE RESOURCES ARE FOOD: (211) “My brother frog chop –” shows that Francophones should eat all what we have in our coffers, “Frog” refers to Francophones. (CEC) (212) “This national coffers koraa, where is it?” “As for you, the thing is empty and you are cross-examining me about it. They’ve chopped everything in it.” “But when you look at them, especially their mouths, nothing indicates they can chop so much money in so short a time o.” (WCL: 147) (213) Eating the country. (ICE-EA)

The interaction of the kinship idiom and the eating-and-feeding idiom exemplified so far is a clear linguistic indicator of the fact that politics in contemporary Sub-Saharan Africa is and continues to be made, to a significant degree, according to the logics of the kinship-based model. This observation is in line with numerous recent studies on politics south of the Sahara, e.g., Schatzberg (2001), Bayart (1993), Chabal and Daloz (1999),

The cultural model of community in African English

167

and Bayart, Ellis and Hibou (1999). These political analysts argue that the mechanisms of politics in Sub-Saharan Africa have been thoroughly misunderstood by the West precisely because the West failed to recognize and take into account the persistence of the kinship-based logics in this realm. From the side of the West, there was the expectation that the African states would develop according to the patterns of the then popular modernization theories,173 i.e., that “traditional” forms of government and social organization would be replaced by “modern” forms modeled on the Western system. As these modernization theories posited an antagonism between “tradition” and “modernity” and tied the notion of ‘modernity’ to the Western understanding of the term, the path taken by African states remained largely incomprehensible and alien to the West. As Chabal and Daloz (1999: 5-8, 27-26), leaning on Max Weber, observe, the modern Western state is first of all characterized by its significant emancipation from society. It is precisely this emancipation and institutionalization of the state that has never been thoroughly established in Black Africa,174 and the African state has largely remained an “empty shell.” Van Binsbergen (2000: n.p.) gets to the heart of the problem when he states: The single most important defining feature of the state is not its monopoly of violence, but its radical rejection of the kinship order.

With politics being made to a large extent according to the patterns of the kinship model, the design and logics of the African state are thus in sharp contrast to the concept of the “modern” state as developed in the Western world. The two modes of politics are often incompatible and conflicting, as they rest on different necessities and considerations. In other words: Politics in the African context has to operate in different and often incompatible registers. This conflict is expressed in the following examples: (214) When the Senate President goes back to Ebonyi, the Igbos will ask him how many of his Igbo brothers did he manage to install as heads of prominent Senate Committees. He will find that surrounding himself with his schoolmates as aides has nothing to do with adequate representation of his tribe. (WCL: 73)

173

174

For a discussion of the logic underlying Western modernization theories, see, e.g., Knöbl (2002). For the situation in the colonial state, see Comaroff (2002).

168

The cultural model of community in African English

(215) Elections itself is a mystery, just imagine being in a voting booth and deciding within some few minutes who is to rule you, haven’t earlier being subjected to multiple images by multiple candidates, most of whom say the same thing(s), some doing no more than appealing to your tribal sentiments and nakedly over exaggerating what they can deliver to your community. (WCL: 47) (216) Opportunistic Tom Kamara argued that the Standard Bearer of the LPP, Dr. Togba-Nah Tipoteh is a cheap man who does not like to give money to his partisans. Kamara said that Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf is his choice for the Presidency because according to Kamara, Ellen is connected with the United Nations and has lot of money and that she can easily dash the funds to her partisans for their personal use. (Corpus Liberia)

These examples target the thriving system of patronage, favoritism, and clientelism, which are indeed a major trait of African politics. As Tangri (1999: 137) puts it: African governments have been built around patronage networks whereby followers are rewarded for their support in the form of public jobs and resources. Politicians and bureaucrats have used the public sector to generate the benefits needed to fashion patron-client linkages of support.

This system may be regarded as an immediate manifestation of the eatingand-feeding pattern observed above to be at the core of the kinship-based community model. It rests, in its essence, on the availability and distribution of resources along vertical structures, and its impact on political decision making is significant (cf. Ellis 1999: 283). According to Chabal and Daloz (1999: 15): The notion that politicians, bureaucrats or military chiefs should be servants of the state simply does not make sense. Their political obligations are, first and foremost, to their kith and kin, their clients, their communities, their regions or even to their religion. All such patrons seek ideally to constitute themselves as ‘Big Men’, controlling as many networks as they can. But to succeed as a ‘Big Man’ demands resources; and the more extensive the network, the greater the need for the means of distribution. The legitimacy of the African political elites, such as it is, derives from their ability to nourish the clientele on which their power rests. It is therefore imperative for them to exploit governmental resources for patrimonial purposes.

This mode of politics has a number of important implications. When much of the resources need to be spent to fulfill the feeding requirements of the

The cultural model of community in African English

169

clientele in order to maintain legitimacy, these means are lost for long-term and global national interests. Furthermore, “young men and women educated to believe that leaders of society have a duty to redistribute goods to their social juniors may be embittered in cases where this fails to happen” (Ellis 1999: 122-123). Finally, when legitimacy is largely defined along the lines of the kinship model and, in particular, in terms of immediate eatingand-feeding structures, political opposition is of little value as it is deprived of resources (cf. Chabal and Daloz 1999: 55-56). The crucial point is that patronage, favoritism, and clientelism fall, partly at least, within the logic of the kinship-based model or can at least be deduced from it, while they are outside, for example, the model of an institutionalized state that is emancipated from society. In a political system largely based on the former model, the above practices can be expected to have a particularly wide presence and to be performed overtly, as it is the case in Sub-Saharan Africa. In a political system based on the latter model, overt forms of such practices should be expected to be sanctioned.175 So far, we discussed the interplay between the kinship idiom and the eating-and-feeding idiom, arguing that they express specific modes derived from the logics of kinship model, pertaining to political leadership and the distribution of resources. In the following, we will turn to the spiritual and occult dimension of politics in Sub-Saharan Africa. Detailed discussions of this dimension can be found, for instance, in Schatzberg (2001: ch. 2, ch. 4) and Chabal and Daloz (1999: ch. 5) from the perspective of political analysts, and in Geschiere (1997: ch. 4-5) and Niehaus (2001) from an anthropological vantage point. It is a commonplace that religious beliefs and religiously motivated value matrices are an important element of politics, and the religious dimension of politics in itself is by no means peculiar to the African setting. Also, political theories generally do take this dimension into consideration. However, as authors like Schatzberg (2001: 73-74) argue, these political theories are based on assumptions that are not prepared to account for the specific cosmology underlying African 175

This, however, is a statement on models, not on realities. In fact, it is rather a matter of degree. Everywhere, politics is about representing, serving, and putting through the interests of certain groups, and in the political realm, everywhere, personal ties are as crucial as in any other social network. Patronage, favoritism, and clientelism are thus an issue in any society, including “modern” Western ones. There is, for instance, no clear-cut boundary between such practices and “legitimate lobbying” in the Western context, and lobbyism is often a euphemistic term for clientelism.

170

The cultural model of community in African English

spirituality discussed in section 2.2.4. and for its impact on political life. As Schatzberg (2001: 71) explains: Empirical political scientists are more than occasionally uncomfortable dealing with any spiritual phenomena in their analyses for these are, by definition, “other”-worldly, “super”-natural, or “para”-normal and thus cannot be observed directly. But as we have already seen, in middle Africa there is no “other” world where the spirits, ancestors, and mystical forces reside. They are in our world, the real world, the natural world, and they form an integral part of it while playing a role in politics and shaping political perceptions. They also have a great deal to do with power and are directly relevant to the definition of the frontiers of the political kingdom.

Chabal and Daloz (1999: 67) make a parallel observation: The [...] tendency of politicians to favour their own may well have to do with more than mere ethnic bias. It may include a religious dimension which has hitherto almost never been taken into consideration but which could turn out to be deeply significant to the reality of politics in contemporary Africa.

Specifically, concepts like ‘magical leadership’ and ‘occult politics’ have no place in theories that take the Western model of politics as their reference point. If they were recognized at all, the impact of these concepts on Sub-Saharan politics has rarely been taken seriously; they have been more often than not dismissed as “irrational” and the general expectation was that they are “transitional” and would gradually disappear in the process of “modernization” of the African state. The realities, however, seem to prove this expectation wrong. As authors like those cited above show, political occultism, for instance, is thriving and increasing in many parts of Africa rather than diminishing, both at the level of local and national politics. This is confirmed by the following observation by a Ghanaian journalist: (217) Over the past 10 years, as journalist, I have come in contact with a lot of African Big Men – Sani Abacha, Ibrahim Babangida, Siaka Stevens, Abass Bundu, Amos Sawyer, Samuel Doe, Charles Taylor, Jerry Rawlings, Mohammed Ibn Chambers, Saidu Momoh, Valentine Strasser, Julius M. Bio, Lansana Conteh, Thaimu Bangura, and many more. While most are nice and silly at the same time, I came to observe that most of their thoughts, attitudes and worldviews were directed by juju/marabou. I know a former top politician and Minister who, with the ‘advise’ of a juju/marabou man, slept every night for a week in a cemetery. (WCL: 27)

The cultural model of community in African English

171

It is an obvious suggestion that the persistence of concepts like ‘magical leadership’ and ‘occult politics’ is a direct manifestation of the general persistence of the kinship model in African politics. As stated in section 2.2.4., the notion ‘magical leadership’ derives from the special position of the elders and leaders in the overall cosmological constellation; they are closer to the realm of the ancestors, spirits and godly beings, and, qua this position, they are mediators between the cosmological realms. We also pointed to the intrinsic link of this notion to the FATHER concept, since this is the concept associated with elders and leaders. This spiritual and sacred dimension of leadership is used by contemporary African politicians as an effective means of legitimating political power.176 Most middle African understand that “politics” and “religion” are parts of the same terrain; that power flows between the visible material world and the invisible spiritual world; and that the political kingdom contains a politically significant spiritual terrain. Moreover, intelligent and gifted politicians know the contours of this terrain and are comfortable traversing it in either its material or spiritual manifestations. They understand that in their culture power is unitary and cannot be divided into separate boxes. (Schatzberg 2001: 74)

It needs to be stressed again that the spiritual power ascribed to leaders is markedly ambiguous: It may be perceived as a positive force when applied for the good of the community but negatively if used for selfish ends. In our discussion, we will focus on the latter case, since it is clearly dominant in the African discourse on politics. The following example illustrates the political instrumentalization of the spiritual aspect of leadership, and, closely related, of kinship-based authority: (218) Sankoh claims to vanish into the thin air, ability to transform himself into cat, dog mouse and whatever. With his grasp of native psychology, he has been able to mix his grandfather image, he is 63, with the gullibility and superstitious believes of the average Sierra Leonean, and disturbingly, his unsuspecting followers. [...] Sankoh’s so-called charisma, paraded more by the Western media, who do not understand the Sierra Leonean society, than those at home, is as a result of his age – 63. Since African culture has great respect for age, and the aged are not overly [sic] criticised, Sankoh has been able to 176

For a discussion of the notion ‘magical leadership’, see Bernault (n.d.), who also observes some reconfiguration of traditional patterns and traces the historical development of “magical politics.”

172

The cultural model of community in African English exploit this against his drugged, gun-totting youthful followers who call him “Paa” (Father). With benefit of hindsight he has exploited this to mean charisma, mixed with the supernatural equal to a saviour of Sierra Leone. (WCL: 34)

With numerous contemporary African politicians, one may witness this strong recourse to occult practices and symbolism (cf., e.g., Schatzberg 2001; Geschiere 1997; Bernault n.d.; Ellis 1999), as the following passages further illustrate: (219) One afternoon, Charles Taylor formally received me in the carport of his residence, and I asked him about the juju aspects of his consecration [...] A carved oxblood-colored swagger stick lay on the table, a kind of sceptre that he carries around with him. I asked him about it, and he told me it was made from the wood of a “sacred tree,” under which no grass grows, and which causes any animal that comes near it to die. (Anderson 1998: n.p.) (220) Wrapped around Doe’s waist were goat horn, human teeth and other human parts and assorted talismans. (WCL: 6) (221) [Doe] came to believe increasingly in his own invulnerability as he surrounded himself with ever more numerous religious advisors, diviners and suppliers of amulets and other spiritual protection. (Ellis 1999: 62-63; drawing from Sawyer 1987)

The occult is perceived and employed as a major and effective means of defending one’s power against opponents, as the following examples confirm: (222) Close to almost all-African seats of power there is almost always talk of the leadership dabbling in juju and the employment of the services of marabouts in order to enhance their power and prolong their rule no matter how unpopular. (WCL: 4) (223) Taylor feared that Johnson was becoming more and more powerful by the spiritual and ritualistic help of Johnson’s mother and that eliminating her was the only course open to him to demoralize Johnson. (Ellis 1999: 82, citing from Huband 1998). (224) On the other hand, politicians even of young African democracies, playing the superstition card, direct their marabouts to attack their rivals or wage a psychological warfare by threatening potential voters and political opponents that they would be able to see who is voting for them, and threatening to react accordingly. (WCL: 4)

The cultural model of community in African English

173

(225) In addition to Kebe, the wives of the barons du regime used naked “black magic” in the fight against their political opponents. (WCL: 7) (226) Nigerian press reports reveal human sacrifices and other fearful juju/ marabou rituals at Aso Rock177 to “protect” Abacha from Nigerians crying for democracy and human rights, and transform him into civilian president a la President Jerry Rawlings of Ghana. (WCL: 13) (227) The less democratic and illegal an African regime is, the more it relies heavily on jujumen and marabous to contain its insecurity. (WCL: 5)

The use of witchcraft for the accumulation of political power is also the underlying theme in John Luangala’s novel The Chosen Bud, referred to earlier. This type of political occultism culminates in extremes like politically motivated “ritual murders,” reported throughout the region (also see Ellis 1999: passim):178 (228) Juju, as witchcraft and sorcery are called in Liberia, has long been associated with Liberia’s political culture, and its most malevolent practices – ritual human sacrifice and cannibalism – are usually linked to people seeking power or to those who fear losing it. Samuel Kofi Woods, the director of the Justice and Peace Commission, a human-rights organization run by the Catholic Church, blames Taylor for what he says is an upsurge of politically motivated ritual murders. Woods says that the consecration ceremony sent the message that Taylor believes in juju. Indeed, in early June there were several local news stories about “heart men” at large. Human hearts were reportedly being removed and eaten by candidates for various offices to enhance their chances of winning elections. (Anderson 1998: n.p.) (229) Woewiyu and others have made detailed allegations that Jackson Doe was assassinated, ‘slaughtered with a bayonet and his blood taken to Taylor’. Woewiyu also claimed that Taylor personally drank the blood of his murdered rival. (Ellis 1999: 85, citing from an interview with an anonymous source in the New Democrat 1, 30, 1994)

177 178

Aso Rock is the seat of the Nigerian president. Note the striking parallel to the “money rituals” discussed in section 2.2.5. The common denominator is the notion of ‘accumulation,’ be it of material wealth or political power, both expressed in the witchcraft idiom.

174

The cultural model of community in African English

(230) The killing and eating of Bokassa’s opponents is wrapped around the juju practices that by eating the dead body of one’s enemies one would acquire the desired qualities of the person eaten, especially the brave enemy – Liberia’s President Samuel Doe is said to have eaten the heart of Gen. Thomas Quiwompa [Quiwonkpah], his enemy, who attempted to overthrow him and failed in his bid. Juju and marabou men also believe that by eating one’s enemy body his/her spirit would be utterly destroyed, thus leaving no room for his/her ghost to live. (WCL: 10)179 (231) As election drums beat in Africa today we are increasingly hearing of ritual murders in Ghana, Sierra Leone, Cote d’Ivoire, Tanzania, Kenya and Malawi. (WCL: 7) (232) Human sacrifice and cannibalism are very real here, but not expected to emerge as the next fast food franchise concept. It is believed by some that eating an opponent’s still-beating heart gives them strength. (Corpus Liberia) (233) Human hearts were reportedly being removed and eaten by candidates for various offices to enhance their chances of winning elections. (Anderson 1998: n.p.)

Again, we shall not be concerned with the question of whether or not such reports necessarily have a factual basis (though do not doubt this possibility; cf. Ellis 1999: ch. 6). Our point is that they are a clear manifestation of the general pattern that undue individual aspiration at the expense of the community is readily construed in terms of witchcraft. This belief is already present in traditional witchcraft notions. Onyejekwe (2003), for example, reports that among the Tivs in Nigeria excesses in performance or ambition or exercise in authority are traditionally believed to be a moral fault and may be readily ascribed to evil occult powers. The application to the context of modern politics, as illustrated by the above quotes, is thus an extension and transformation of a major aspect of traditional witchcraft defined by van Binsbergen (2000: n.p.) as “the celebration 179

The idea of acquiring the qualities of a person eaten is not confined to the African context. In the widely-covered recent case of cannibalism in Germany, the cannibal is quoted as “having acquired some of Brandes’ [the person eaten] abilities. He was good at speaking English, for example, and Meiwes [the cannibal] believes to speak English markedly better than before” (Stern 2003: 56). For Cambodia, “the practice of eating one’s opponent liver [...] [is] well attested” (Fenton 2005: 30).

The cultural model of community in African English

175

of individual desires and powers at the expense of one’s kin.” The underlying conceptualization is THE ABUSE OF POLITICAL POWER IS WITCHCRAFT. The massive application of this extension to the realm of national politics appears to be a relatively new phenomenon, as the following passage suggests: (234) “Such ritual murders are uncharacteristic in this land. Its occurrence now must be blamed on the keen competition for political offices in the country,” remarked a veteran political observer. (WCL: 51)

This observation may be related to our suggestion that the witchcraft idiom is a major means of expressing tensions in the community. After a period of relative concord following independence, tensions have massively and dreadfully increased in many parts of the region. It should thus not come as a surprise that the witchcraft idiom has taken a significant place in the African discourse on political power and crisis. By those who suffer from the crises, political leaders are perceived as a threat and a source of evil, and hence as an incarnation of what are traditionally linked to negative witchcraft. There is indeed much traditional witchcraft imagery in the discourse on political power, as the following examples illustrate: (235) To challenge the bewitching of our impoverished populations by selfish dictators and politicians who suck the blood off the social and economic fabric for their own ends. (WCL: 77) (236) What more does Taylor need to do for us to remove him from this society? If we do not get this man out of our country sooner or later, he might go around with syringes to draw blood from our people for money. (Corpus Liberia)

Unlike the earlier text examples that reported “real” occultism in politics, witchcraft is evoked metaphorically in these quotes. Note the eating (or, rather, drinking) metaphors in these examples and compare the imagery to that of traditional witchcraft, e.g., in the following passage: (237) Yorubas believing that witches are associated with birds like nightjars which flies about at dusk, suck the blood of their victims till they die. (WCL: 44)

The association of political power with occult forces thus instantiates the entire network of eating-related conceptualizations linked to witchcraft: Leadership and the abuse of power in particular are conceptualized as EATING, community members (the conceptual KIN) and political opponents as FOOD, political aspirations, accordingly, as HUNGER.

176

The cultural model of community in African English

The following figure 22 gives a graphic representation of this conceptual network; the general eating metaphors that are instantiated are included at the periphery. RESOURCES ARE FOOD

STRONG DESIRES ARE HUNGER

COMMUNITY MEMBERS / OPPONENTS ARE FOOD

ACHIEVING A PURPOSE IS EATING

IMPORTANT IS BIG

POLITICAL ASPIRATIONS ARE HUNGER

LEADERSHIP IS EATING

BEING A LEADER IS BEING BIG

Figure 22. Conceptual network. LEADERSHIP IS EATING.

It is worth noting that occult practices also appear in their “leveling” function in the political context, i.e., as a counter-force to the undue exercise of power. This is expressed in the following examples: (238) While most [witchcraft stories on political leaders] appear too wild to believe, it still persist among the gullible and superstitious populace who, on the other hand is said to use these marabouts and jujumen against the leadership, thus making the leadership reinforce their own dabbling in defences and offences against their perceived and imaginary opponents. And such developments put the mass poor and deprived in disadvantaged position creating the impression among the leadership that that the people, particularly their opponents, are threatening them with marabouts and juju. (WCL: 4) (239) For in an era where African are hard-pressed economically, most cases of witchcraft accusations work to the disadvantage of the poor and deprived, but under particular circumstances they become a means of the poor in the struggle against oppression of all kind. (WCL: 44)

The cultural model of community in African English

177

Here, the occult is employed as a means to reinforce particular demands that are perceived as legitimate, a pattern that was already observed for the domain of WEALTH in the sections 2.2.2. and 2.2.5. Political activities and regulations are thus strongly connected to the need to keep the balance between the benevolent and the malevolent mystical capacities of the leaders (cf. Bernault n.d.). Given that the realm of modern politics continues to be perceived along the lines of the kinship model, the witchcraft idiom thus has its corresponding place. According to van Binsbergen (2000: n.p.), it should be interpreted as an expression for the fact that social experiences would be less and less governed by the kinship order, and at the same time would continue to be judged from the perspective of that order.

As should have become apparent in our discussion, the three idioms, i.e., the kinship idiom, the eating-and-feeding idiom, and the witchcraft idiom, overlap and mutually evoke each other in the African discourse on politics. This interplay crystallizes most prominently in the African notion of ‘big men.’ ‘Big man’ implicates the dimensions covered in our analysis, i.e., leadership, access to resources, and spiritual/occult powers, both in the positive and in the negative interpretation. This is confirmed by the following observation made by Matory (1993: 79) on tabloid comics in Nigeria: Detractors of the postcolonial “big men” allege that these nonroyal businessmen and politicians have women with pots behind them – implicitly witches – guiding their greedy acquisition and providing the mystical means of their enemies’ undoing. In tabloid comics, their diurnal personae are enormously fat women who stand alongside overfed men in flowing agbada gowns. The Alagbada – “Wearers of Agbada” – are the stereotypic embezzlers of government funds and receivers of kickbacks.

As we hope to have shown in the analysis given in this section, the persistence of the kinship-based model in the realm of modern politics is clearly manifest at the linguistic level. The three central idioms of the kinship-based model are omnipresent in the African political discourse, which attests to the underlying conceptualization of this domain along the lines and logics of the general cultural model of community.

178

The cultural model of community in African English

2.5.

Summary and implications of the analysis

In this chapter, we provided an example analysis along the lines of a corpus-based and metaphor analytic cognitive-sociolinguistic approach to language varieties. The first general conclusion we feel comfortable to draw from this analysis is that the combination of the cognitive-linguistic framework with a corpus-linguistic approach is fruitful and mutually beneficial. For the former, this combination is an excellent means of meeting the declared commitment to a usage-based approach, and the corpus data provide a sound and broad empirical basis against which assumptions about the conceptual level may be tested. In turn, the corpus data may inspire and invite further interpretations at the conceptual level. For corpus-linguistic work, the combination with CL is beneficial in that the latter may provide a set of prior assumptions that can serve as an input to corpus analyses. Given the enormous amount of data represented by and retrievable from computer corpora, one can hardly approach corpora without such prior assumptions in a fruitful way. More often than not, linguistic patterns lay hidden in the mass of data, and can only be elicited when the scope of analysis is clearly delineated. Still at the more general level, the approach underlying our analysis is in line with the usage-based commitment of CL in yet another way. Usagebased implies variational, as Geeraerts (2003b) has aptly put it in his programmatic paper on the inevitability of a Cognitive Sociolinguistics, and, in turn, variational implies a social, i.e., a group perspective (cf. Geeraerts 2005: 173). Sociolinguistics is concerned with groups, and the approach taken in our book provides a cognitive-linguistic handle on capturing group-specific conceptual and linguistic patterns by being based on corresponding ideas like ‘cultural model,’ ‘cultural conceptualizations,’ and ‘distributed representation.’ Also, through its focus on the group level, the cognitive-sociolinguistic approach is prone to meet specific interdisciplinary challenges from neighboring social sciences. Disciplines like cultural anthropology, sociology, or political theory are by their very nature sciences primarily concerned with groups rather than individuals, and conceptualizations at group level are thus the meeting ground between these sciences. In this interdisciplinary orientation towards the “sciences of the group,” the cognitive-sociolinguistic approach is complementary to the endeavor of the cognitivist strand in CL, which, with its focus on the individual, is predestined to seek exchange with the “sciences of the individual,” most prominently the neurosciences.

The cultural model of community in African English

179

We perceive, however, no opposition between these two orientations; rather, it is a particular strength of Cognitive Linguistics that it allows for strands with various foci within a common theoretical framework. Importantly, vis-à-vis traditional sociolinguistics, the cognitive-linguistic approach to culture and language meets these interdisciplinary challenges beyond the established interdisciplinariness of standard descriptive accounts of language variation180 in that it addresses the level of conceptualizations underlying language and linguistic interaction rather than placing a narrow focus on linguistic form alone. It is precisely through this commitment to the conceptual level that the incorporation of ideas and findings from neighboring social sciences is facilitated or is made possible. These sciences, most notably again cultural anthropology, sociology, and political theory, analyze, describe, and provide models of social interaction. With the key concept ‘cultural model,’ the approach outlined here makes use of an analytical tool that allows us to draw from these models developed elsewhere, either because the very concept of ‘cultural model’ is in itself common ground, e.g., with strands in cognitive anthropology, or in that this notion provides a metalanguage that is agreeable across disciplinary boundaries. The interdisciplinariness is bidirectional. Models incorporating findings from the other social sciences may be made the in-put of a linguistic analysis, as we hope to have shown in our discussion of the linguistic expression of the African community model. In turn, the linguistic analysis may be an inspiration to social scientists from the various disciplines. Still vis-à-vis traditional sociolinguistics, at the more specific level of linguistic analysis, the cognitive-sociolinguistic approach captures dimensions of variation that are virtually unaddressed or only partly covered by standard descriptive research. This includes the following aspects: —

Against its theoretical background in the cognitive-linguistic framework, Cognitive Sociolinguistics systematically relates linguistic patterns to conceptual patterns (and vice versa), i.e., formal variation is seen and analyzed as the expression of conceptual variation. With this perspective, socio-cultural cognition becomes an integral part of linguistic analysis.

180

For an overview of descriptivist and other paradigms in research on world Englishes, see the discussion in section 1.2.

180

—

—

—

The cultural model of community in African English

The cognitive-sociolinguistic approach captures systematic relations between linguistic expressions and lexical items that are not normally considered in standard descriptive accounts, in particular relations established by metaphoric and metonymic mappings. Here, it meets with traditional structuralist notions like ‘lexical field’ (in the tradition of Jost Trier), but elaborates such notions in a significant way. The framework presented here explicitly acknowledges frequency as an important parameter of variation. It provides, through its corpus-linguistic component, a reliable handle on the issue of frequency, and, through its cognitive-linguistic component, a theoretical footing for ‘frequency’ in the context of ‘cultural keywords’ (see section 1.3.3.). The framework we advocate also explicitly recognizes collocational patterns as a dimension of variation, beyond the level of fixed expressions that is addressed by traditional sociolinguistic accounts. Again, the corpus-linguistic component allows to reliably analyze the dimension in question, and the cognitive-linguistic component provides a corresponding theoretical footing by modeling collocational patterns as the manifestation of the simultaneous activation and mutual evocation of cognitive domains.

It is a major argument of our book that this type of framework lends itself to application, first of all, to the comparative study of regional and sociocultural varieties of a given language. Here, globally spread languages like, most prominently, English, are an excellent field of research, since they exist in a whole range of L1 and L2 varieties that are firmly anchored in different socio-cultural settings that may be directly compared. We provided an exemplary analysis of conceptualizations, and their linguistic manifestations, from the broader cultural model of community in African compared to Western-based varieties of English. We observed variation and differences as regards the following parameters: — — — — — —

global cultural models specific cultural conceptualizations cultural keywords or key-concepts salient source domains for a specific target domain the status of a specific conceptualization, i.e., as metaphoric rather than metonymic or vice versa the degree of systematicity of a specific conceptualization, i.e., as being isolated or as being embedded in an entire network of related conceptualizations

The cultural model of community in African English

—

181

the degree of entrenchment and conventionality of a particular conceptualization.

These conceptual differences were related to and explained by diverging socio-cultural patterns in the settings under analysis. At the level of linguistic form, these differences have been found to be manifest in the following ways: — — — — —

differences in the frequency of lexical items from specific domains differences in collocational patterns of particular lexical items specific fixed expressions specific senses of common-core English lexical items the integration of loan words from indigenous languages.

The particular kind of CL approach we have applied in this chapter and are advocating in this book as a new paradigm in WE is not only a major step forward in the study of the varieties of English, but also has reverberations in related fields. One case in point is the pragmatics of intercultural communication, in particular, intercultural communication in English. The methodological apparatus of CL, in conjunction with its pronounced semantic orientation, allows for a new take on and new insights into the study of intercultural encounters. We will explore this further in the following chapter.

3

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

3.1.

Arguments for a hermeneutic approach to the study of intercultural communication

3.1.1. Some general problems with current functionalist pragmatics In this chapter, we will consider some of the consequences the findings discussed in the previous chapters have for intercultural pragmatics and, in turn, for CL itself. We start from the observation that the field of intercultural pragmatics is currently dominated by functional approaches, and, although we are not in opposition to the functional perspective, we argue that these approaches, in their present form, do not adequately address and represent several of the issues raised in our analysis. Our main points of critique vis-à-vis these approaches concern three interrelated functionalist tenets: —

— —

the focus on “observable linguistic behavior” and the “effective functioning” of the participants in an intercultural communicative act (cf. Blommaert and Verschueren 1991) the partial or full exclusion of culture-specific categories and conceptualizations from intercultural analysis the scepticism towards the relevance of cultural conceptualizations at the group level.181

An earlier and detailed discussion of these points is given in Wolf and Polzenhagen (2006), and the present chapter elaborates on our arguments outlined in this paper. Underlying our criticism is the claim that the recognition of cross-cultural variation at the conceptual level calls for a strongly meaning-oriented and interpretative approach to the study of intercultural 181

Our critique of functionalist approaches in intercultural pragmatics does not mean that we ignore the strong semantic orientation of many pragmatists and their acknowledgment of the role conceptual structures play in (intercultural) understanding; cf., e.g., Yule’s (1996: 85) recognition of “pre-existing knowledge structures in memory.”

184

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

communication. With this orientation, we are close to the concerns of the hermeneutic tradition in philosophy and language science. We will make a proposal of how a hermeneutic perspective, particularly along the lines of Gadamer’s hermeneutic philosophy, may be incorporated into a meaningbased theory of intercultural communication, and will attempt to integrate this perspective with CL in general.182 Another aim of Wolf and Polzenhagen (2006) was to call for a systematic analysis of cross-varietal conceptual differences played out in intercultural encounters in English. Only in recent years have researchers on intercultural communication begun to turn their attention to intercultural communication in lingua francas, in particular to the international lingua franca per se, English (see House 1999: 74; Clyne 2006). With its various native and second-language varieties, many of which rooted in vastly different cultural systems, the specific challenge – both for the researcher and the interlocutor – is to come to grips with the variant meanings and different conventional pragmatic effects of the same linguistic surface material (cf. House 2003: 573-574). All of the lexical items and collocational expressions discussed in chapter 2 fall under this category. The present chapter on the pragmatics of intercultural communication picks up on this specific context of cross-varietal communication.

3.1.2. Gadamer’s hermeneutics and Cognitive Linguistics The observation that there is fertile and extensive common ground between CL and the hermeneutic tradition is not new. It was Geeraerts (1992, 1997) to first point to the affinities between Cognitive Semantics and hermeneutics, especially in the Diltheyan strand, in which Gadamer’s philosophy can be placed.183 Or, to speak with Harder (2007: 1257), “the tradition of Dilthey and Gadamer ... is a necessary dimension in the landscape in which 182

183

We are certainly not qualified to provide an up-to-date evaluation of Gadamer’s philosophy, and do not intend to enter such a debate, but would like to utilize his thoughts for the problems at hand and for further strengthening the hermeneutic orientation in CL. A detailed discussion of Gadamer’s relevance to intercultural understanding and further references to works on intercultural hermeneutics can be found in Vasilache (2003). In many ways, Gadamer’s philosophy can be seen as a development of Dilthey’s (see Gadamer 1989); to discuss their relationship would be outside of the scope of this chapter.

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

185

Cognitive Linguistics belongs.” The basic common denominator is the “emphasis on lived experience” and the view of language as “experientially embodied” (Geeraerts 1992: 267, and 1997: 180). In the specific case of Gadamer’s philosophy, the commonalities go much further. As Malpas (2005) explains, “Gadamer’s commitment to the linguisticality [‘Sprachlichkeit’] of understanding also commits him to a view of understanding as essentially a matter of conceptual articulation”; in that, his philosophy gives “primacy to language and conceptuality in hermeneutic experience.” Gadamer (1989: 403-403) explicitly distinguishes hermeneutics from a linguistics that separates form from all content and states that the former is concerned with “the conceptual character of all understanding” (Gadamer 1989: 403). It is not trivial to say that this triad of conceptuality, language, and understanding agrees with basic tenets of Cognitive Linguistics. The central meeting point of our approach with Gadamer’s hermeneutics is his notion of ‘prejudice’ and the role of these “fore-projections” in communication. As Gadamer (1989: 267) states: A person who is trying to understand a text is always projecting. He projects a meaning for the text as a whole as soon as some initial meaning emerges in the text. Again, the initial meaning emerges only because he is reading the text with particular expectations in regard to a certain meaning. Working out this fore-projection, which is constantly revised in terms of what emerges as he penetrates into the meaning, is understanding what is there.

For our purpose, “text,” of course, can be substituted by “discourse” in intercultural encounters.184 “Fore-projections,” “fore-meanings,” or “foreconceptions” (Gadamer 1989: 267) are the “prejudices” we inevitably bring into the process of understanding. One cannot fail to notice that Gadamer’s notion of ‘prejudice’ is close in spirit to cognitive-linguistic concepts like ‘folk model’ and ‘cultural model,’ or to what Geeraerts’ (1992: 269) calls “paradigms,” i.e., “expectational patterns that shape our experience of novel situations” (also see Geeraerts 1997: 181).185 Becoming aware of these pre-conceptions is as necessary for the individual in intercultural encounters as is, at a different level, studying them scientifically in works 184

185

In his writings, Gadamer also uses the terms “dialogue” and “conversation”; see, e.g., Gadamer 1976b, and below. For Geeraerts (1992: 269), the prototypically structured lexical categories function as paradigms, but these paradigms may well be understood in a wider sense, viz., as the culturally and historically contingent but individually varied conceptual set up as such.

186

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

of intercultural pragmatics if understanding is to be achieved. We cannot argue them away, and ignoring them does not mean that they disappear. In fact, what Gadamer (1989: 277) wants is to “rehabilitate the concept of prejudice.” In order to rehabilitate prejudice, Gadamer has to rehabilitate tradition as well, which, he finds, has been discredited since the Enlightenment (see Gadamer 1989: 277-285): We are always situated within traditions, and this is no objectifying process––i.e., we do not conceive of what tradition says as something other, something alien. It is always part of us, a model or exemplar, a kind of cognizance that our later historical judgment would hardly regard as kind of knowledge but as the most ingenuous affinity with tradition. (Gadamer 1989: 282)

This passage, of course, again brings to mind the metaphors, folk and cultural models we live by.186 Our prejudices are embodied traditions, though qua a hermeneutic consciousness, we are not trapped in them. In dialogic interaction, we can become aware of them, and they can change when we have contact with people who have other traditions. Beyond the commonalities between the notions ‘prejudice’ and ‘foremeaning’ in Gadamer’s hermeneutics and concepts like ‘cultural model’ in CL, Gadamer’s emphasis on the historical nature of experience has important metatheoretical and methodological implications. Adopting the insights of hermeneutic philosophy, it is Geeraerts (1992: 268) again who makes the crucial metatheoretical point that the theoretical views are themselves part of our history and “influenced by previously established conceptualizations” (Geeraerts 1992: 273). According to Geeraerts (1992: 273), “a ‘paradigmatic’ conception of cognition encompasses both the structure of common-sense knowledge (as embodied in everyday language concepts), and the structure of sophisticated knowledge (as embodied in scientific theories).” Another way of putting this is that the dichotomy between folk and expert theories may not be a dichotomy after all; expert theories are as much a part of our tradition as folk theories are, and, positively or negatively, are subject to the same hermeneutic principles. Our theories require a critical self-consciousness and an awareness of their historical boundedness. Expert theories, as much as folk theories (if one 186

See Wachterhauser’s (2002: 65) interpretation of Gadamer’s notion of tradition, which “includes the models, the analogies, and the metaphors that exercise a substantial influence over our imaginations.”

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

187

still wants to go by the distinction) can lead us to some truth in understanding but expert theories cannot claim objective knowledge of the world and hence superiority (see Wolf 1994: ch. 4). Geeraerts (1992: 273) cuts to the heart of the matter when he writes that if the non-objectivist position is a general characterization of human cognition [...] how can it establish its own superiority except by the existence of some kind of objective method? Or conversely, if its claim to superiority does not paradoxically rest on an implicit assumed objective knowledge of the objective world (of the mind) what is it based upon?187

The important point is to accept CL as a human and hence interpretative science (see Geeraerts 1992: 273-274). This acceptance could resolve the apparent paradox at a higher level, as it would follow that our interpretative efforts will inherently be bound by human imperfection and historical situatedness (cf. Ratzinger 2003: 205-208). Yet, within these confines one does not have to relinquish claims to truth and objectivity. A viable concept of truth could be the mutual understanding humans achieve in their fusion of horizons (see below). Human experience is exteriorized in manifold ways (cf. Geeraerts 1992: 274), and the methods applied to attain understanding should reflect the diversity of human expression. Attuning methods to the variegation of human life will yield more objective results than the application of one method alone. Not only does this requirement of diversity call for a variety of disciplinary approaches (cf. Geeraerts 1992: 268, 1997: 181), but also for an “eclectic exploitation of all possible sources of [...] data” (Quinn and Holland 1987: 16; also see Wolf and Polzenhagen 2006). In our analysis of the African model of community we have relied heavily on corpuslinguistic methods, and corpus linguistics is a prime example of how objective and subjective perspectives merge in a hermeneutic approach. Understanding cultural (or other kinds of) patterns is an ongoing process. One does not approach the raw data of the corpus without any preconceptions (prejudices) (see section 1.4.). Without such pre-conceptions, the data could not be interpreted, would not make sense at all. However, in the course of the investigation – as a hermeneutic circle – the object of study, the data, refines and changes these pre-conceptions which in turn 187

Geeraerts refers here to Lakoff’s (1987) supposedly non-objectivist stance towards linguistic semantics. “Supposedly”, because one still finds a lingering objectivism in Lakoff’s writings and a number of unresolved theoretical contradictions (for an extensive account and criticism, see Wolf 1994: ch. 3).

188

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

will lead to a further interpretation of the data until understanding is achieved (which may be open to revision in future rounds of analysis). The interpretation is subjective (though the pre-conceptions may be culturally shared), yet the statistical and computational methods by which the data is processed and analyzed are objective. Thus corpus linguistics also bears out a hermeneutic principle at a general methodological level, as it constitutes a fusion of interpretative methods of the human sciences and computational methods of the natural sciences. In general, the methods developed and used in CL – which includes the corpus-linguistic approach important in Cognitive Sociolinguistics – can make the conceptual structures upon which human understanding is based explicit and thus contribute to this understanding itself. In the following sections, we will outline how Gadamer’s general emphasis on “fore-projection” and his positive understanding of “prejudice” may be applied to the study of intercultural communication. We will develop our argument from a criticism of the main functionalist tenets listed in the introductory section of this chapter. Our discussion aims at explicating four cornerstones of the envisaged hermeneutic approach to intercultural communication: the focus on meaning, the recognition of conceptualization at group level, the emphasis on succeeding communication, and the view of understanding as a “fusion of horizons.” Our critique of pragmatic functionalism and the problem of intercultural communication in culturally different varieties of English converge on metatheoretical issues and call for the same answers. In the course of the chapter, we will briefly (re)consider these issues and suggest that by taking a hermeneutic orientation, ways can be found that lead out of theoretical and practical dilemmas that come with pragmatic functionalism and intercultural communication in English.

3.2.

Foci of a hermeneutic approach to intercultural communication and a critique of functionalist positions

3.2.1. Emphasis on meaning The first programmatic tenet of functional pragmatics is the focus on observable linguistic behavior. This primary orientation is expressed in Verschueren’s (1999: 7) definition of the field as “a general cognitive, social, and cultural perspective on linguistic phenomena in relation to

188

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

will lead to a further interpretation of the data until understanding is achieved (which may be open to revision in future rounds of analysis). The interpretation is subjective (though the pre-conceptions may be culturally shared), yet the statistical and computational methods by which the data is processed and analyzed are objective. Thus corpus linguistics also bears out a hermeneutic principle at a general methodological level, as it constitutes a fusion of interpretative methods of the human sciences and computational methods of the natural sciences. In general, the methods developed and used in CL – which includes the corpus-linguistic approach important in Cognitive Sociolinguistics – can make the conceptual structures upon which human understanding is based explicit and thus contribute to this understanding itself. In the following sections, we will outline how Gadamer’s general emphasis on “fore-projection” and his positive understanding of “prejudice” may be applied to the study of intercultural communication. We will develop our argument from a criticism of the main functionalist tenets listed in the introductory section of this chapter. Our discussion aims at explicating four cornerstones of the envisaged hermeneutic approach to intercultural communication: the focus on meaning, the recognition of conceptualization at group level, the emphasis on succeeding communication, and the view of understanding as a “fusion of horizons.” Our critique of pragmatic functionalism and the problem of intercultural communication in culturally different varieties of English converge on metatheoretical issues and call for the same answers. In the course of the chapter, we will briefly (re)consider these issues and suggest that by taking a hermeneutic orientation, ways can be found that lead out of theoretical and practical dilemmas that come with pragmatic functionalism and intercultural communication in English.

3.2.

Foci of a hermeneutic approach to intercultural communication and a critique of functionalist positions

3.2.1. Emphasis on meaning The first programmatic tenet of functional pragmatics is the focus on observable linguistic behavior. This primary orientation is expressed in Verschueren’s (1999: 7) definition of the field as “a general cognitive, social, and cultural perspective on linguistic phenomena in relation to

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

189

their usage in forms of behaviour” (also cf. Verschueren, Östmann and Blommaert 1995: ix). The key notion of pragmatics, in this functional understanding, is ‘successful communicative functioning’ (cf. Blommaert and Verschueren 1991). This notion is certainly hard to define, since it is a matter of debate what “successful” communication may be. However, from the functional perspective, the question is basically pinned down to two issues: communicative behavior appropriate to some communicative context, norm or rule, and the reaching of some communicative goal. This perspective is characteristic of the functional paradigm in general, and it has been mapped onto the specific field of intercultural communication. Numerous studies along these lines document and analyze, inter alia, cross-cultural variation in the exercise of speech acts or formulaic routines, in the expression and perception of politeness and face, conversational maxims, variation in the organization of discourse, small talk, linguistic means of expressing respect, the negotiation of meaning, and the solution of communicative disturbances due to intercultural differences in verbal interactions. These studies have led to a differentiated view of intercultural communication by making clear that pragmatic rules, principles, and maxims can only be defined relative to the respective cultural context (also see Clyne 1998: 250; 1994: 3). With these insights, the functional research paradigm, no doubt, captures important aspects of cross-cultural and crosslinguistic variation, and we need to stress that we are not in any opposition to the functional concern. However, it is crucial to see that the primary focus of this paradigm is on “observable linguistic behavior” and on the “effective functioning” of the communication process itself, and, favoring this focus, the meaning aspect is often placed in the background or even bypassed. The fact that observable linguistic behavior is tied to underlying cultural conceptualizations may be acknowledged by functionalists, but is at the same time excluded from their investigative scope. This deliberate restriction may be exemplified by the following statements from Blommaert (1991). As he at first rightly observes, “when two individuals with a different cultural background meet, two different sets of concepts, categories, customs, routines and presuppositions are involved” (Blommaert 1991: 22). Also, one cannot agree more when he notes that besides situation-specific cultural elements in a communicative encounter, there is an a priori “ethnic habitus” (in the sense of Bourdieu) of the interactants. And Blommaert does not fall short of noticing that a number of findings “would point towards fundamental cultural categories and concepts [...] which hold true for the whole speech community to which the interlocutors belong” (Blommaert

190

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

1991: 26).188 In other words: the problem of diverging cultural conceptualizations is acknowledged as such. However, Blommaert (1991: 23) explicitly bars the full exploration of this dimension from the actual pragmatic analysis when he postulates that “the object of the study of intercultural communication is not the culture-specific categories [...] but the way in which these categories etc. contribute to the construction of a situationdependent consensus.” The task of analyzing and clarifying the ethnic habitus, for instance, is assigned to the anthropologist (see Blommaert 1991: 27). We take issue with this view on several grounds: First of all, the “division of labor” implied in Blommaert’s statement does not sit well with the interdisciplinary outlook of pragmatics. Specifically, this division is counter-productive, since linguistic data are among the best clues to underlying conceptual patterns, also for the anthropologist, and it should be a key concern of pragmatic studies to make these patterns transparent and available to neighboring disciplines. Also methodologically, the implications of such a deliberate restriction are undesirable: Excluding the study of culturespecific categories this way would mean that in every “pragmatic” analysis they need to be either presupposed, which obviously runs the risk of introducing stereotypical preconceptions, or an investigation of them would have to precede any specific pragmatic study of intercultural communication. Problems of cross-cultural analysis occur when the functionalist foci on “observable linguistic behavior” and “effective functioning” meet with a partial or full exclusion of culture-specific categories, as the following example taken from Wolf and Polzenhagen (2006) illustrates: During his first stay in Cameroon, HGW [...] met a male Cameroonian acquaintance who was in the company of a woman, whom the Cameroonian introduced as his “cousin.” HGW had had no prior intense contact with African culture and little knowledge of specific African conceptualizations at that time. Led by his own Western family and community model, HGW assumed that the two Cameroonians were genealogically related. Yet, as he later found out, in reality (the Western reality), the woman was ‘only’ a friend of the Cameroonian man from the same village.

What is important to note here is that the actual misunderstanding did not result from a violation of pragmatic rules but from conceptual-semantic differences. In terms of traditional functional pragmatics, the interaction of 188

It needs to be added, however, that not all cultural categories and concepts may be equally shared across a speech community (see below).

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

191

the three persons may well be considered “successful,” if introducing the “cousin” was the communicative goal and the participants felt that rules of politeness and other conventions were observed. Both HGW and his Cameroonian acquaintance may erroneously believe that they have “understood” each other, and there would be no immediate recognition of a misunderstanding. The important point is that at the level of “observable linguistic behavior” there are no clues at all that would suggest a potential or actual instance of “misunderstanding.” It is entirely a matter of the different cultural models involved. As the reader would have guessed, the use of the kinship term cousin by the Cameroonian expresses the conceptualization of COMMUNITY AS KINSHIP, a central element of the African cultural model of community we discussed in the previous chapter. For Germans, who have the same family and community model as most Western and Northern Europeans, the conceptualization of COMMUNITY AS KINSHIP is at best marginal; terms like brother, sister, or cousin are generally used and interpreted in the framework of a genealogical FAMILY concept (see Wolf and Polzenhagen 2007). Proponents of linguistic pragmatics may argue that the above case of “misunderstanding” involves “figurative” language and may correspondingly be explained by standard pragmatic models. Consider, however, the treatment of metaphorical and other “non-literal” expressions in the two major models of linguistic pragmatics, in the tradition of Grice and Searle, respectively. Both approaches would assume a discrepancy between sentence meaning (what is said) and utterance meaning (what is meant), which would trigger a pragmatic reinterpretation (for a criticism of this view of metaphor, see Leezenberg 2001). In fact, however, the Cameroonian meant precisely what he said when he called his female acquaintance a cousin, i.e., he did not speak “figuratively.” Then, from a Gricean perspective, explicating what cousin “means” would even violate the principle of quantity, since, for the Cameroonian, there is no need for explication. Thus the Cameroonian cannot be accused of having broken any conversational maxim. Sperber and Wilson’s (1995) neo-Gricean relevance theory does not provide a “pragmatic” solution to this instance of intercultural misunderstanding either. According to relevance theory, the speaker, in order to be optimally relevant, should formulate the utterance in such a way that it is understandable without undue effort. This also demands to take into account the cultural knowledge of the hearer. In the case of intercultural communication, speakers need to be more explicit or provide additional context for their listeners. While this is, of course, a valid principle, it still

192

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

fails to account for cases as our example above. It presupposes that the Cameroonian understands that, from the point of view of the hearer, he, the Cameroonian would be talking “loosely,”189 though this is not from his own point of view; or, in other words, it presupposes that the Cameroonian is familiar with the discrepancy between the two cultural models involved. This, however, is precisely what cannot generally be assumed.190 Rather, the Cameroonian is likely to be unaware that he and HGW do not share a contextual framework; he takes for granted that he is understood on the basis of his own model. Hence, he will not provide a definition of “cousin” according to his own model, since “people avoid verbalizing what they take for granted,” as Hall (1981 [1976]: 153) put it. There is thus no violation of relevance on the side of the speaker. Also from the point of view of the hearer (here HGW), the relevance argument fails. The theory has it that the hearer is required to go for the first acceptable interpretation, or, as Sperber and Wilson (1995: 234) state in their treatment of “loose” language: The hearer should take an utterance as fully literal only when nothing less than full literality will confirm the presumption of relevance. In general, some looseness of expression is to be expected. For example, if someone says, ‘It’s 5 p.m.’, she should not be taken to task if it turns out to be five or two minutes to, unless the relevance of the utterance depends on that kind of exactitude. If someone says ‘I’m exhausted’, there is no point in quibbling over whether exhausted is exactly what she is: as long as she can be taken to have conveyed an acceptable range of implications, she will have achieved optimal relevance.

From HGW’s point of view, would “cousin” in the sense of ‘acquaintance from the same village’ be within the acceptable range of implications, even if “looseness of expression” is expected? The answer is clearly “no.” The first acceptable interpretation is along the lines of his genealogical model, and he has no reason to assume any other interpretation. Furthermore, in the interaction between HGW and the Cameroonian, there was no tertium comparationis, no third model which could serve as a neutral or objective reference point for both interlocutors. Without 189

190

In the Sperber and Wilson framework, phenomena like metaphor are treated as instances of “loose” language. Mind that the Cameroonian is not talking “loosely” from his own perspective. Otherwise, to put it to the extreme, one would need to require the speaker to be aware of all his own and the other’s cultural models, prior to the actual communicative act, and to be explicit on any point of possible divergence.

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

193

further talks with the Cameroonian man or further cultural contacts with Africa(ns), HGW would have stored this piece of information about the “cousin” on the basis of his own cultural model. Should he meet the woman again, learns that she ‘only’ stems from the same village, but is not biologically related to his neighbor, he may think his neighbor lied to him, or he may eventually come to a non-universalist understanding of his own family model. To be sure, as we have detailed in Wolf and Polzenhagen (2006), the issue of intercultural misunderstanding cannot be reduced to a problem of mistaking the meaning of a kinship term, i.e., to a purely lexical issue. Rather, these terms activate specific conceptual networks, convey attitudes and specific patterns of expectation, and signal aspects of social identity. This short episode demonstrates two other important theoretical points: The first is that the underlying family and community models are languageindependent. In other words, both the Cameroonian and the German communicated in English, but the Cameroonian expressed a cultural conceptualization which was alien to the German. If certain critical linguists were right, particularly those espousing the “linguistic imperialism” and “English as a killer language” view (see section 1.2.2.2.), then the Cameroonian should have acquired the Western community model along with English, as these linguists assume that English is intrinsically tied to Western culture. For intercultural communication this would mean that problems of intercultural communication would diminish proportionally to the spread of English in the world, as every speaker of English would share the same cultural reference system. This is clearly counter-factual. As not only the example episode but all of chapter 2 showed, second-language speakers use their specific form of English to express their own cultural models. In sum, our short example thus illustrates a set of specific problems that a theory of intercultural communication has to account for, highlighted by a constellation in which a common non-native language is involved: (1) The same lexical material may be used by the interactants against the background of different cultural models, often unnoticed by the participants and often without explicit clues at the level of “observable linguistic behavior.” (2) We cannot expect people to be aware of their own culture-specific conceptualizations when they enter inter-cultural communication. This lack of awareness is what Hall (1981 [1976]: 166) meant by “the cultural unconscious, those out-of-awareness cultural systems that have as yet to be made explicit.” (3) In general terms, intercultural understanding depends upon the willingness and/or necessity to further deal with a different culture,

194

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

including failed attempts at understanding. Sporadic contacts may offer little more than pragmatic successes, while continued encounters with people from different cultures and studying these cultures offer the chance to correct our own erroneous or deficient understanding.191 In other words, it is not so much a question of meeting what ever kind of norm or principle in an inter-cultural encounter, but rather to prepare the ground for bringing succeeding communications to a higher level of understanding. We argued that these points are not adequately addressed or not even recognized by approaches that focus on “observable linguistic behavior” rather than underlying conceptualizations, on pragmatic principles and rules, and on individual talk exchanges rather than succeeding communication in recurrent encounters. In the hermeneutic tradition, and in Gadamer’s approach in particular, we find, in turn, that the problems posed above are made central. As we have seen in our example episode, a major challenge comes from the fact that people are not necessarily aware of conceptualsemantic differences in intercultural encounters. Mutual understanding, then, depends by and large on the ability to examine the legitimacy of one’s “fore-meanings,” i.e., in our specific context, one’s cultural conceptualizations. Dealing with the question how this basic requirement can be fulfilled, Gadamer (1989: 268) observes: Especially in the field of semantics we are confronted with the problem that our own use of language is unconscious. How do we discover that there is a difference between our own customary usage and that of the text?

Gadamer’s first answer to his own question is that we discover and become aware of the difference if we are “being pulled up short by the text,” i.e., if “it does not yield any meaning at all or its meaning is not compatible with what we had expected” (Gadamer 1989: 268). He continues: “Someone who speaks the same language as I do uses the words in the sense familiar to me––this is a general presupposition that can be questioned only in particular cases.” Intercultural communication in English is such a particular, but more common a case than Gadamer may have imagined. As we saw, terms like cousin, sister, father, brother are used in different senses in 191

It is right, necessary, and justified to place the development of meta-level awareness among the tenets of intercultural communication (and to emphasize it, e.g., in training programs), as it is stressed by many scholars in the field. However, meta-cultural and meta-linguistic awareness may only grow gradually, and it is unrealistic to expect interactants to systematically “check” all the elements of the conversation in each verbal encounter.

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

195

African English than in Western varieties of English, or their equivalents in German, for that matter. Thus, as pointed out already, in singular encounters, where both interactants from different cultures presuppose that they use words in a sense familiar to the other, it may well be the case that understanding never occurs. Gadamer (1989: 268; also see Gadamer 1976c: 92) is fully aware of the possibility that fore-meanings “can go entirely unnoticed” and lead to misunderstanding, as it is the case in our example episode. “Being pulled up,” the recognition of difference, may often only take place in more extensive encounters. Gadamer asks to “remain open to the meaning of the other person or text.” Thus, openness, “a questioning of things” and sensitivity to alterity in discourse are indispensable for a “hermeneutically trained consciousness” (Gadamer 1989: 269), especially so in intercultural encounters.

3.2.2. The recognition of conceptualizations at group level As noted in the previous section with reference to Blommaert (1991), cultural conceptualizations, albeit recognized, tend to be excluded from the scope of present functionally oriented analyses, i.e., are not considered to be an issue of linguistic pragmatics “proper.” Closely related, there is a specific skepticism regarding inter-individual cultural conceptualizations at group level as a valid parameter of linguistic-pragmatic studies. At the more general level, this skepticism is a consequence of the perspective taken by studies within the linguistic-pragmatic tradition. This point comes to the fore in a distinction between different types of studies in the field proposed by Scollon and Scollon (2001). The authors distinguish between what they call studies of “cross-cultural communication,” in which different systems are compared, and studies of “intercultural communication,” which analyze direct interaction (Scollon and Scollon 2001: 1213). Although they accept and appreciate research of the former type, Scollon and Scollon (2001: 13-14) emphasize that their own study pertains to the latter type and that their scope is “on people in social interaction with each other, not upon abstract or independently conceived differences between members of different groups” (original emphasis). The problem they see with studies comparing different systems is that this type of research “does not directly come to grips with what happens when people are actually communicating across the boundaries of social groups.” Specifically, “in many situations some aspects of so-called cultural difference are of no

196

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

relevance at all whereas other aspects that might be thought extremely minor might assume central importance.” This argument is most certainly true and apt. Importantly, however, it also applies to the culture-specific or language-specific discursive or pragmatic norms and rules that are the scope of functional approaches. These rules and norms, too, are postulated prior to actual analysis. Yet whether and how these rules and norms are eventually followed is a matter of each individual talk exchange. Also, their violation does not necessarily lead to the failure or disturbance of a particular communicative event, and, in turn, their pursuance does not guarantee successful communication beyond, maybe, mere effective functioning. Generally speaking, Scollon and Scollon’s distinction between studies of “cross-cultural communication” and studies of “intercultural communication,” in the sense described above, may be useful to delineate perspectives but should not be understood in terms of a dividing line between system-oriented studies and studies of direct interactions. The latter type cannot do without prior assumptions often obtained from studies of the former type, neither as regards pragmatic rules and norms nor as regards cultural models and conceptualizations of the participants. Eventually, at a global level, both perspectives need to come in communion. However, the matter cannot be reduced to an issue of different perspectives alone. The real questions are whether or not conceptualizations at group level are recognized, are made part of a pragmatic analysis, and how they are viewed. Here, the positions expressed in Verschueren (1999, 2003) can be made the target of our criticism of the currently dominant approaches in the study of intercultural communication. In many ways, our criticism mirrors that given in the previous section. Again, in functional pragmatics, there is no lack of general awareness of conceptualizations at group level. Verschueren (2003: 7), for instance, rightly notes that “just as social structures and dynamics are processed by individual minds, many seemingly individual processes require a social level of ‘distributed cognition’ in order to ‘work’,” a statement that is in line with the concept of ‘distributed representation’ we embrace in our own analysis. However, in his “recipes” for a view of culture, Verschueren explicitly bypasses this level of “distributed cognition” when he states the following: Regard the individual as the proper locus of cultural variability. Every individual occupies a unique position in a network of intersecting parameters of variation. (Verschueren 2003: 6)

As he made clear in an earlier paper, according to him,

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

197

a truly pragmatic approach to linguistic behavior does not place social variability at the level of idealized groups, but along a range of intersecting dimensions contributing to interlocutors’ social identities. (Verschueren 1999: 92; his italics)

The dimensions he deems relevant “include the contrast between oral and literate societies, rural versus urban patterns of life, or a mainstream versus a sub-cultural environment,” and social parameters like “social class, ethnicity and race, nationality, linguistic group, religion, age, level of education, profession, kinship, gender” (Verschueren 1999: 92). Yet are these dimensions not, to a high degree, culturally defined? Can they be identified and described independent of the corresponding cultural categorizations of specific groups? To our mind, it does not suffice to see problems of intercultural communication as a question of variability along some matrix of parameters and to reduce them to “a lack of attention for [...] the pervasiveness of variability” (Verschueren 1999: 228). This type of reductionism disregards the conceptual level, where the culturally relevant conceptualizations are made. Consider, in this light, a further of the “recipes” for a view of culture given by Verschueren (2003: 6; his italics): Avoid the plural form cultures. There are cultural differences and contrasts (which, when in contact, are often responsible for change) but these do not amount to clusters of features that are identifiable, let alone separable, coherent entities.

True to the functionalist perspective, Verschueren thus sees culture in terms of a matrix of parameters of contrast, and de facto leaves “culture” an empty category. It should not come as a surprise that we strongly disagree with this position. As we hope to have shown throughout our book, “culture” may well be described positively in terms of interrelated conceptualizations held by groups, specifically in terms of cultural models. Also, we feel that the above claims by Verschueren are at odds with his call for a comparative approach to culture “which would be to talk about culture in terms of practices and concepts,” and at odds with his statement that “practices cannot be fully understood unless a researcher also manages to grasp the concepts in terms of which the participants themselves interpret what they are engaged in” (Verschueren 2003: 8). When Verschueren (2003: 8) explicitly argues against taking groups seriously as a locus of culture, he does so on the grounds that this would give way to “stereotyping and homogenization” (see below). With respect to the more narrowly linguistic dimension, Verschueren questions culture

198

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

as a “social-world correlate to linguistic choices” and warns against a pretheoretic reification or even mythologizing of culture in linguistic analyses (Verschueren 1999: 92). The dangers of essentialism, stereotyping, and determinism are real and need to be taken seriously. The irony, of course, is that disregarding the influence of group-based cultural conceptualizations in studies of intercultural communication could lead to this very stereotyping and homogenization, as the nature of cultural differences would have to be presupposed or remain opaque. The reality of these dangers is thus no argument against research in cultural conceptualizations in general, and against the incorporation of the conceptual orientation in pragmatic studies of intercultural communication in particular. A pre-theoretic reification or even mythologizing of culture may not be countered by a deliberate exclusion of a full exploration of the category “culture.” Rather, a broad empirical basis, methodological pluralism and interdisciplinary openness are required in order to avoid such fallacies. For the sake of a more pointed presentation of our criticism, we will now briefly discuss Verschueren’s (2003: 8-11; drawing from Bulcaen and Blommaert) analysis of an actual example of an intercultural talk exchange. The original conversation is in Dutch; however, the example is parallel and comparable to the constellation covered in our book since it involves an L1 and L2 speaker of that language. It is a talk exchange between a Flemish female welfare worker and a young Muslim Turkish woman who seeks refuge in a safe house for battered women. The communication between the two women involves a serious “misunderstanding,” which is rightly attributed by Verschueren (2003) to the impact of the welfare worker’s “stereotypes” about Muslim immigrant women. The young Turkish woman seeks help as she is in conflict with her family. What she tries to communicate, however, is first of all that she sees herself as a “good” member of the Muslim community and in line with Muslim values and religion. The real source of her conflict is that this is not recognized and even denied to her by her immediate family context. The welfare worker, however, led by her own idealized ‘cultural model’ of an integrated and emancipated immigrant woman, obviously misinterprets the Turkish girl’s conflict as the desire to “escape” from the “oppressive” Muslim community and to embrace Western notions of individual accomplishment, emancipation, and freedom. This completely misses the girl’s point, as she explicitly defends her, as we may say, ‘cultural model’ of the Muslim immigrant community and has no intention to break with the latter and not even with her family. While Verschueren’s parallel discussion of the talk exchange is, up to this point,

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

199

fully agreeable, his conclusion is not. He argues that “examples of this kind [...] should serve as a warning against an unreflective appeal to culture in (the study of) interaction” (Verschueren 2003: 11) and sees it as an illustration of his view that “taking groups seriously as the locus of culture and diversity [...] amounts to giving in to stereotyping and homogenization” (Verschueren 2003: 8). This conclusion is altogether surprising. First of all, the talk exchange took the course it took (or went wrong at the level of understanding) precisely because of the impact of the cultural models involved. The welfare worker interpreted the statements by the young Turkish woman against the background of the dominant cultural model of an integrated and emancipated immigrant woman that is shared and favored by the Flemish majority and, apparently, by the welfare worker herself. In doing so, she even neglects the clear clues given by the Turkish woman about the real source of the conflict; i.e., the welfare worker’s cultural model shapes her perception of the entire talk exchange. In turn, the concern of the young Turkish woman cannot be understood without knowledge of cultural models held within the immigrant community. In other words, the talk exchange is a clear illustration of the impact of diverging cultural models held by groups and cannot be adequately analyzed without taking these models into account. One may argue that these cultural models are “stereotypical,” more or less appropriate or inappropriate, “useful” or misleading, and one may critically analyze the ideologies underlying them.192 Yet this criticism is irrespective of the fact that these models “exist” and shade into communication, and the models can only be dealt with critically when they are recognized and made part of the analysis in the first place. One may reject the underlying ideology, yet one cannot ignore the reality and the impact of the (stereotypical) concepts themselves. With the hermeneutic perspective, and with Gadamer’s (1989: 277) notion of ‘rehabilitation of prejudice’ in particular, the role of fore-meanings (including stereotypical ones as in Verschueren’s example) receives full recognition in analysis. First of all, the hermeneutic approach explicitly starts from the recognition that these fore-meanings are part of the conceptual stock with which the participants enter communication, i.e., part of their ‘horizon of expectation.’ Identifying the conceptual make-up of these fore-meanings is hence an essential part of any interpretative account of a communicative act. Importantly, a hermeneutic approach along the lines of Gadamer takes a positive stance towards these fore-meanings by 192

The criticism of these ideologies, in turn, involves its own ideology.

200

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

emphasizing and making clear the fundamental role they play in “opening up” communication. Second, the hermeneutic approach sets out to trace how these fore-meaning, as the conceptual “input” to a communicative act, are altered in the process of communication itself. These crucial points crystallize in Gadamer’s notion of ‘rehabilitation of prejudice.’ As Malpas (2005: n.p.) explains (also see Grondin 2002: 44-46): Rather than closing us off, our prejudices (or ‘pre-judgments’) are themselves what open us up to what is to be understood [...] The way in which our prejudices open us up to matter at issue in such a way that those prejudices are themselves capable of being revised exhibits the character of the Gadamerian conception of prejudice, and its role in understanding [...] The prejudicial character of understanding means that, whenever we understand, we are involved in a dialogue that encompasses both our own selfunderstanding and our understanding of the matter at issue. In the dialogue of understanding our prejudices come to the fore, both inasmuch as they play a crucial role in opening up what is to be understood, and inasmuch as they themselves become evident in that process. As our prejudices thereby become apparent to us, so they can also become the focus of questioning in their own turn.

In section 3.1.2., we pointed to the strong commonalities between Gadamer’s notions of ‘fore-meaning’ or ‘prejudice’ and cognitive-linguistic concepts like ‘cultural model.’ The latter lends itself as a handle on explicating the former within a hermeneutic approach to the pragmatics of communication, and of intercultural communication in particular. Moreover, cognitivesociolinguistic studies by Kristiansen (see 2003, 2007, and section 1.3.4.) share the above positive view of “stereotypes,” in that they highlight the importance of social and linguistic stereotyping in social categorization and speaker identification. Finally, there is another strong linguistic argument against the disregard of the group level: Group-specific conceptualizations, whether or not they are shared by an individual group member, have a direct and wide-ranging impact on communication. In particular, they influence linguistic choices, for instance via entrenched linguistic expressions they yield (see Polzenhagen and Wolf 2007; Wolf and Polzenhagen 2007; and chapter 2). The whole field of corpus linguistics hinges upon the assumption that a corpus represents the language of a group of speakers, and without that assumption the investigation of certain collocational patterns as reflections of culturally shared conceptualizations would not make sense. If these arguments have any validity, then the scope of intercultural pragmatics has to be widened, i.e., go beyond functioning in microscopic

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

201

communicative situations, and needs to include a cognitive, hermeneutic perspective.

3.2.3. Emphasis on succeeding communication As observed earlier, the hallmark of functionally-oriented approaches to intercultural communication are microscopic pragmatic studies of individual talk exchanges. This is the realm where the paradigm’s key notions like ‘successful communication,’ ‘effective functioning,’ and ‘appropriate linguistic behavior’ are located. Without denying the merits of these studies, we pointed out several times that research of this type takes but an inherently restricted perspective on intercultural communication. Placing the foci this way, we believe, confuses, to some degree, the means with the goals, as appropriate linguistic behavior and effective functioning in intercultural verbal exchanges should be auxiliary to the higher aim of coming to an understanding of the other person, the other culture. Since we will address the issue of intercultural understanding in a separate section (3.3.) following the present one, we will here confine ourselves to a brief summary of arguments that call for a broadening of the scope beyond individual talk exchanges. The first argument comes from the analyses of example episodes given in earlier sections. In our account of the example involving kinship terms (section 3.2.1.), we made note of the fact that instances of “misunderstanding” due to diverging cultural models of the interactants may pass entirely unnoticed in individual encounters, since overt linguistic clues to the divergence are often missing. The problem comes to the fore in constellations where a common lingua franca, notably English, is used by L1 and L2 speakers of that language, since here the same lexical material is often conventionally employed against the background of different cultural conceptualizations. What remains opaque in a sporadic encounter may only become transparent in successive communication. The second argument is, in many respects, a correlate of our call for a full recognition of conceptualizations at group-level. These conceptualizations and the cultural models they form may only be identified and explicated when a maximally broad range of data is used; individual intercultural encounters are just one of the relevant sources, communication between cultures takes place at many levels. As we have seen in the case of the example reported by Verschueren (2003) (see section 3.2.2.), these

202

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

conceptualizations shade into individual acts of communication in many ways, e.g., in the shape of salient stereotypes about the other. The third argument, finally, relates to the key claim of the historical nature of experience (see section 3.1.2.). Communication between cultures is a historical process, and when the focus is on “understanding,” the evolution of this process and the evolution of cultural conceptualizations have to be taken into consideration. Again, sources other than individual talk exchanges need to be drawn upon in order to incorporate this historical dimension. These arguments are a direct consequence of a hermeneutic, i.e., interpretative perspective on intercultural communication.

3.3.

Intercultural understanding and the problem of relativism

In this section, we will address a number of questions related to the problem of relativism, which we deem to be fundamental in the context of intercultural communication. Relativism (including its various interrelated forms, such as moral relativism and conceptual and linguistic relativity) is, of course, a widely covered topic.193 Therefore, only some aspects which directly relate to our topic can be mentioned here. When dealing with different cultures, the confrontation with relativism is inevitable on two interrelated levels. The first level is that of theory formation: Is relativism realized as a theoretical problem at all and are cultural differences in the conceptual systems accounted for by a theoretical model? With respect to the latter question, we have argued that it is not adequately addressed by the functionalist approaches in intercultural communication, since many of the relevant issues are deliberately excluded from their scope of investigation (see Wolf and Polzenhagen 2006). As the above-mentioned examples demonstrated, there is no culturally neutral basis from which the conceptual systems of speakers from different cultures can be compared and described. Our view of the “other” will always 193

It goes beyond our scope to discuss the evolution of relativist thinking in linguistics. For an analysis of Whorf’s (1956) views, see, e.g., Lee (1996). For discussions from a cognitive-linguistic perspective, see, e.g., Lakoff (1987: 304-337), and the articles in Pütz and Verspoor (2000) and Niemeyer and Dirven (2000).

202

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

conceptualizations shade into individual acts of communication in many ways, e.g., in the shape of salient stereotypes about the other. The third argument, finally, relates to the key claim of the historical nature of experience (see section 3.1.2.). Communication between cultures is a historical process, and when the focus is on “understanding,” the evolution of this process and the evolution of cultural conceptualizations have to be taken into consideration. Again, sources other than individual talk exchanges need to be drawn upon in order to incorporate this historical dimension. These arguments are a direct consequence of a hermeneutic, i.e., interpretative perspective on intercultural communication.

3.3.

Intercultural understanding and the problem of relativism

In this section, we will address a number of questions related to the problem of relativism, which we deem to be fundamental in the context of intercultural communication. Relativism (including its various interrelated forms, such as moral relativism and conceptual and linguistic relativity) is, of course, a widely covered topic.193 Therefore, only some aspects which directly relate to our topic can be mentioned here. When dealing with different cultures, the confrontation with relativism is inevitable on two interrelated levels. The first level is that of theory formation: Is relativism realized as a theoretical problem at all and are cultural differences in the conceptual systems accounted for by a theoretical model? With respect to the latter question, we have argued that it is not adequately addressed by the functionalist approaches in intercultural communication, since many of the relevant issues are deliberately excluded from their scope of investigation (see Wolf and Polzenhagen 2006). As the above-mentioned examples demonstrated, there is no culturally neutral basis from which the conceptual systems of speakers from different cultures can be compared and described. Our view of the “other” will always 193

It goes beyond our scope to discuss the evolution of relativist thinking in linguistics. For an analysis of Whorf’s (1956) views, see, e.g., Lee (1996). For discussions from a cognitive-linguistic perspective, see, e.g., Lakoff (1987: 304-337), and the articles in Pütz and Verspoor (2000) and Niemeyer and Dirven (2000).

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

203

be shaped by our own conceptualizations.194 This, however, pertains to all understanding, and not just to understanding people with different cultural backgrounds (Wolf and Polzenhagen 2006). The other level relates to the act of intercultural communication itself and crystallizes in the question what “successful” communication may actually be. Given the functionalist scope on appropriate linguistic behavior, the, to our minds, higher aim of understanding the other person, the other culture is largely eclipsed. Functionalists rarely address such fundamental questions as to whether an understanding of a different culture is possible at all, as to how far this understanding goes, and as to which role language plays in this. In seeking answers to these problems and questions, one may again turn to Gadamer’s hermeneutics. The notion of ‘understanding’ (Verstehen), i.e., the issue that we find has not been given due consideration in functionalist approaches, is central to his influential book Truth and Method (Wahrheit und Methode). Wachterhauser (2002: 55) has suggested a “hermeneutical fork” to divide hermeneutical or “relativist” philosophers into “those who think that it no longer makes sense to clarify such philosophically or rationally normative terms as truth, reason, reality, fact, object, value, good, right, correct, and so forth, and those who think this task is still worth pursuing.” This division could rightfully be extended to include the impossibility or possibility of understanding “the other.” It is not too sweeping to say that all scholars theoretically engaged in the study of intercultural communication share the implicit optimism, to varying degrees, that some kind of understanding is possible. However, as our reference to Sperber and Wilson showed, a quasi-objectivist stance is hard to maintain if participants in a conversation do not share the same contextual framework and if a neutral reference point is not available.195 The point is then: How can the 194

195

This crucial point is also expressed in Geeraerts (1997: 184) questions “can there be a general interpretative method that universally spans the entire range of the history of mankind, disregarding the historical differences between the objects of its interpretative activities? Can all historical products be interpreted on the same basis? [...] can interpreters free themselves from their own historical background when confronting products from the past?” Accepting and emphasizing the historicity of human experience implies the acceptance of a relativist element (cf. Geeraerts 1997: 184). See a summary critique of relevance theory in Downes (1998: 350, 410) and his suggestion to recast relevance theory as a hermeneutic methodology for post facto interpretations.

204

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

possibility of understanding be argued for from a relativist perspective given this cultural distance? In order to come to terms with the problem of cultural distance, one may seek inspirations in Gadamer’s (1989: 291-300) notion of ‘temporal distance,’ developed by him in reference to the study of historical texts. According to Gadamer (1989: 298), temporal distance “lets the true meaning of the object emerge fully. But the discovery of a true meaning of a text or a work of art is never finished; it is in fact an infinite process.” This process, as Gadamer explains, filters out sources of error but also provides “new source of understanding” with “unsuspected elements of meaning.” It “not only lets local and limited prejudices die away, but allows those that bring about genuine understanding to emerge clearly as such” (Gadamer 1989: 298). Temporal distance, in Gadamer’s (1989: 298-299) view, can help “to distinguish the true prejudices, by which we understand, from the false ones, by which we misunderstand.” Applying the notion of temporal distance to intercultural understanding, however, is not unproblematic. We cannot simply equate temporal distance with cultural distance, because the infinite process of discovering new elements of meaning is along a temporal trajectory (an aspect that would be missing if cultures are involved that exist synchronically). Also, temporal distance in Gadamer’s writing refers to understanding passed down through historical periods, whereas in intercultural understanding, it would have to refer to understanding by a person over his/her lifetime.196 Still, Gadamer’s (1989: 299) notion of “historical consciousness” could reasonably be extended to include “cultural consciousness” as well: It [historical/cultural consciousness] will make conscious the prejudices governing our own understanding [...] Foregrounding (abheben) a prejudice clearly requires suspending its validity for us [...] It is impossible to make ourselves aware of a prejudice while it is constantly operating unnoticed, but only when it is, so to speak, provoked.

Finding out that the use of kinship terms in African English, for example, is incongruous with our own usage would be such provocation. The inclusion of culture into Gadamer’s idea of history and historical consciousness can be further pursued. According to Gadamer (1989: 301), all our understanding is affected by history, and “consciousness of being 196

On the problem of equating intercultural and historical understanding with reference to Gadamer, also see Vasilache (2003: 14, 53).

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

205

affected by history (wirkungsgeschichtliches Bewußtsein) is primarily consciousness of the hermeneutical situation.” Since we cannot step outside of our own history and culture, we cannot come to an objective understanding thereof. As historical/cultural beings, “knowledge of oneself can never be complete” (Gadamer 1989: 302). Leaning on phenomenologists like Husserl, Gadamer (1989: 302) uses a metaphor of vision and defines a situation as representing “a standpoint that limits the possibility of vision.” In turn, “horizon,” is defined as “the range of vision that includes everything that can be seen from a particular vantage point.” He rejects the romantic idea of culture as a closed horizon, for “the historical movement of human life consists in the fact that it is never absolutely bound to any one standpoint.” Our own horizon, “which exists in the form of tradition, is always in motion” (Gadamer 1989: 304). Gadamer (1989: 303, 305) writes that in order to understand the other situation, we need to transpose ourselves into it. This transposition leads to a “higher universality that overcomes not only our own particularity but also that of the other” (Gadamer 1989: 305). In this transposition, we bring along our own horizon, so to say, i.e., do not abandon it, and the higher universality of understanding is what he calls the “fusion of horizons” (Gadamer 1989: 306). We do not transpose ourselves into another person, but “come to an understanding about the subject matter” (Gadamer 1989: 383). Malpas’ (2005) explanation of this specific aspect of Gadamer’s philosophy is directly relevant to the issue of “understanding” in intercultural communication: A‘fusion of horizons’ [...] always involves the formation of a new context of meaning that enables integration of what is otherwise unfamiliar, strange or anaomalous. In this respect, all understanding involves a process of mediation and dialogue between what is familiar and what is alien in which neither remains unaffected.

For Gadamer (1989: 383-384), language is “the medium of hermeneutic experience [...] in which substantive understanding and agreement takes place between two people.” In a conversation or dialogue, as in interpreting a text, “the language in which something comes to speak is not a possession at the disposal of one or the other of the interlocutors” (Gadamer 1989: 378). He further explains that “a common language must first be worked out” (Gadamer 1989: 379), though not in a sense of adapting to the partner. In a way, a new meaning emerges from the conversation beyond the immediate control of the partners (cf. Gadamer 1989: 383):

206

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

To reach an understanding in a dialogue is not merely a matter of putting oneself forward and successfully asserting one’s own point of view, but being transformed into a communion in which we do not remain what we were. (Gadamer 1989: 379)

If one applies these insights to intercultural communication in English, several things become immediately clear: In L1-L2 lingua franca interactions, it is often the L1-speaker that assumes hegemony over the meaning of the language, thus preventing true intercultural understanding to occur. Besides, in lingua franca interaction, the use of the same linguistic forms may deceive the partners that they already have the same horizon, so to say (see above). Under these two conditions, intercultural understanding is difficult, if not impossible. If the communion Gadamer mentions takes place in language and is not something mystical or spiritual,197 then one needs to be able to describe it linguistically and grasp it theoretically. Gadamer is somewhat opaque on this point, but we could perhaps say that some expansion of the conceptual apparatus occurs, in which different cultural models are not given up but, in the long run of cultural contact, fuse and become hybrid. Gadamer (1989: 385-389) likens interpretation to translation from a foreign language, and people using English for lingua franca interactions should keep in mind that foreign cultural models may be expressed through the same medium. Thus, Gadamer’s (1989: 387) claim that “reaching an understanding in conversation presupposes that both partners are ready for it and are trying to recognize the full value of what is alien and opposed to them” holds especially true for such interactions. In a hermeneutic pragmatics (see Wolf and Polzenhagen 2006 for the term) then, the study of intercultural communication cannot be separated from the demands of intercultural communication itself. Both levels involve conversation with textual material from a different culture.198 At both levels, a hermeneutical consciousness would be required whose foremost aim is to come to an understanding, self-critically of our own cultural 197

198

For Gadamer, “understanding is linguistic and dialogical” (Dostal 2002: 3), and “all that can be understood is language” (Schmidt 2000: 137; also see Wachterhauser 2002: 66-67). The philosophical question of whether language constitutes the boundaries of understanding, or whether there exists a dimension of intersubjective human understanding beyond language (as suggested, for example, by Buber 2002: ch. 1, 1958), shall, however, not be further explored here (see Wolf 1994: 108, 284-285 for a more detailed discussion). See Gadamer (1976a: 45): “A text can begin to speak.”

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

207

models as well as of the cultural models of the others we are engaged with.199 In realizing differences, we not only understand ourselves and the other better, but are able to transcend these differences and come to what in German is called sich verstehen (‘understand one another,’ in a sense that is not fully captured by ‘like each other,’ ‘get along with each other’; also see Gadamer 1989: xvi-xvii), i.e., achieve amicability based on a fusion of horizons.

3.4.

Concluding remarks

In this chapter, we looked at some of the consequences the cognitivesociolinguistic approach we have adopted in this book would have for intercultural pragmatics, particularly with reference to intercultural communication in English. We picked up on our discussion of the shortcomings of functionalist pragmatics in Wolf and Polzenhagen (2006), and tried to further develop a meaning-based take on intercultural pragmatics. Gadamer’s hermeneutics was found to provide a solid philosophical base and justification for such a move. Understanding is central to Gadamer’s philosophy, and to our minds, should be central to intercultural communication as well. We suggested how certain of Gadamer’s notions – like ‘prejudice,’ ‘tradition,’ ‘hermeneutic consciousness,’ and ‘fusion of horizons’ – apply to this field. This application was seen to be twofold; on the practical level, these concepts are relevant to understanding the other in actual intercultural encounters; on the theoretical level, these notions are helpful in understanding the process of intercultural communication itself or in framing the analyses in less restricting ways. With Geeraerts (1992), we also noted a congeniality of Gadamer’s hermeneutics and CL, and pointed to some metatheoretical and methodological consequences the fusion of horizons of CL and hermeneutics would have. The hermeneutic approach, on the one hand, would be placed on a firm empirical footing, as called for in Cognitive Sociolinguistics. Empirical data would concretize interpretations – not only of a cross-cultural nature – and could serve as their “reality check.” Besides, the use of computer corpora in hermeneutics would vastly expand the textual basis such interpretations rest upon. Still, the empirical element would not imply a “cult of the objective,” as the data itself only becomes meaningful through interpretative efforts. On the other hand, 199

On the importance of self-understanding, see Gadamer (1976a).

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

207

models as well as of the cultural models of the others we are engaged with.199 In realizing differences, we not only understand ourselves and the other better, but are able to transcend these differences and come to what in German is called sich verstehen (‘understand one another,’ in a sense that is not fully captured by ‘like each other,’ ‘get along with each other’; also see Gadamer 1989: xvi-xvii), i.e., achieve amicability based on a fusion of horizons.

3.4.

Concluding remarks

In this chapter, we looked at some of the consequences the cognitivesociolinguistic approach we have adopted in this book would have for intercultural pragmatics, particularly with reference to intercultural communication in English. We picked up on our discussion of the shortcomings of functionalist pragmatics in Wolf and Polzenhagen (2006), and tried to further develop a meaning-based take on intercultural pragmatics. Gadamer’s hermeneutics was found to provide a solid philosophical base and justification for such a move. Understanding is central to Gadamer’s philosophy, and to our minds, should be central to intercultural communication as well. We suggested how certain of Gadamer’s notions – like ‘prejudice,’ ‘tradition,’ ‘hermeneutic consciousness,’ and ‘fusion of horizons’ – apply to this field. This application was seen to be twofold; on the practical level, these concepts are relevant to understanding the other in actual intercultural encounters; on the theoretical level, these notions are helpful in understanding the process of intercultural communication itself or in framing the analyses in less restricting ways. With Geeraerts (1992), we also noted a congeniality of Gadamer’s hermeneutics and CL, and pointed to some metatheoretical and methodological consequences the fusion of horizons of CL and hermeneutics would have. The hermeneutic approach, on the one hand, would be placed on a firm empirical footing, as called for in Cognitive Sociolinguistics. Empirical data would concretize interpretations – not only of a cross-cultural nature – and could serve as their “reality check.” Besides, the use of computer corpora in hermeneutics would vastly expand the textual basis such interpretations rest upon. Still, the empirical element would not imply a “cult of the objective,” as the data itself only becomes meaningful through interpretative efforts. On the other hand, 199

On the importance of self-understanding, see Gadamer (1976a).

208

Reflections on the study of intercultural communication

hermeneutics, especially as developed by Gadamer, offers rich insights into conceptual relativism, an important question for the CL enterprise. Furthermore, the acceptance of hermeneutics would mean the acceptance of part of its own legacy and would serve as an antidote to scientistic tendencies one finds in the writings of some of the CL proponents.

4

Conclusion

With this book, we tried to make a contribution to two vibrant fields in linguistics – Cognitive Linguistics and world Englishes – by means of synthesis. In recent years, Cognitive Linguistics has witnessed an increasing interest in issues of language variation and culture-specific conceptualizations, which has led to the emergence of a Cognitive Sociolinguistics. In WE, a field which is intrinsically concerned with variation, the treatment of culture has been mixed. As we outlined in chapter 1, more conventional descriptivists in the tradition of Saussure by and large disregard the role of culture in the formation of language and language varieties, beyond loanwords. Others, who basically hold a negative view towards the spread and use of English in second language contexts, identify English with Western culture and do not acknowledge or accept that English has been and is being transformed in non-Western contexts, and is used by second language speakers as a means to express a variety of cultural experiences. These cultural transformations and expressions, in turn, is the research focus of a third group of scholars within WE, yet they lack the methodological means to describe cultural variation rigorously and systematically. It is here where the methods developed in CL, as well as corpus linguistics, as an integral part of Cognitive Sociolinguistics, help to move WE a major step forward. We understand our study to be an example of how this could be done. Our immediate topic of investigation has been the African cultural model of community. We argued that it is a pan Sub-Saharan model, and the one constitutive of African cosmology and spirituality. This model is flexible enough to admit cultural change, as, for instance, the incorporation of Islam and Christianity – which has at least in part resulted in a cultural fusion – has shown. In fact, as Tengan (1994: 128-129) has argued, flexibility and incorporation is intrinsic to the African cultural system. Still, for incorporation or assimilation to take place, there have to be fairly stable structures to which new elements can be attached or on the basis of which fusion can occur. From a CL perspective, we take these structures to be conceptual structures, specifically, a network of conceptualizations. In our analysis, we concentrated on four social “relations” expressive of this network: Relations of group membership, pertaining to the social identities of the persons holding the model; relations of mutual obligations, which

210

Conclusion

we identified to be primarily understood in terms of nurture; relations of spirituality, tying community members to cosmological forces; and relations of tensions, prototypically conceived in terms of witchcraft. These dimensions are strongly interrelated, and we found that conceptualizations drawing from the source domain of EATING are highly prevalent in the nurture and tensions discourses. Just to remind the reader, it is in English that these matters are talked about and that the culture-specific conceptualizations are expressed in. Our examples came from all regions of SubSaharan Africa, and we used three different methodologies to arrive at these conceptualizations: the reading of texts, making use of “traditional” metaphor and conceptual blending analysis; corpus linguistic methods, with frequency analysis, the elicitation of cultural keywords, and the tracing of collocational patterns; and, as a supplement, a questionnaire survey involving different tasks. Findings from all three approaches confirmed each other, though the regional corpora we used – the CEC as our West African corpus and the ICE-EA as our East African corpus – were somewhat imbalanced in the expression of the spiritual dimension. It is important to note that our discussion of the African model of community was not exhaustive; due to constraints of time and space, we could not deal, for instance, with the conceptualization ANIMALS ARE SIGNIFIERS OF THE SUPERNATURAL (see Wolf 2001: 292-293, and also Palmer and Neal Arin 1999), witchcraft relations in sports, and more general philosophical underpinnings relating to the notions of time and timelessness. However, we are optimistic to not only have provided a linguistic analysis, but also to have contributed to a unified anthropological understanding of the central parts of the model. The fact that such a complex model is present in second language varieties of English and can be traced linguistically calls for the need to give prominence to semantic approaches in the field of intercultural pragmatics. We argued that such approaches are often neglected by functionalist theorists in this field, and we proposed a hermeneutically-oriented CL as a theory whose rich methodological framework can significantly enhance the understanding of the conceptual-semantic processes underlying intercultural encounters. In turn, we saw hermeneutic philosophy as a philosophy that can make a constructive contribution to the problem of conceptual relativism on the one hand, and serve as a corrective to a lingering objectivism, if not scientism, in CL itself.

Appendix 1. Dictionary sample

Note on the rationale and the design of the dictionary sample The sample below is meant to be a call for the systematic representation of conceptual information in dictionaries in general, and in variety dictionaries in particular.200 Among the monolingual standard dictionaries of the “big” native varieties of English, Macmillan’s MED (2002) made a first step towards the inclusion of such information for BrE, by providing so-called “metaphor boxes” (for the design and the rationale of these “metaphor boxes,” see MED 2002: Language Awareness Section LA8). These boxes list conventional metaphors and their linguistic expression for specific target domains (e.g., TIME, IDEAS, UNDERSTANDING) and are attached to the entries for central target-domain keywords. The number of these boxes in the MED (2002) was still small (about 40), but has been augmented to more than 60 in the second edition (MED 2007), and will continue to grow in future editions (Gwyneth Fox [Macmillan], personal communication). This is an altogether remarkable new development in practical lexicography; in our opinion, the most remarkable one since the break-through to corpus-based and thus more explicitly usage-oriented dictionaries. With respect to the lexicographic description of the New Englishes, this development necessarily and naturally leads to the explicit representation of salient culture-specific conceptualizations characteristic of these varieties. It is only when this type of information is made retrievable and available that a crucial dimension of linguistic commonalities and differences between the various varieties is indeed made transparent. Our following proposal for the design of a variety dictionary strives to make conceptual information maximally explicit by adopting a multicomponent approach. Part I of the dictionary sample provides the standard description of selected lexical items as regards form, regional distribution, origin, and meaning. Most of the entries contain an authentic text example. 200

A related proposal is made by Kövecses (2001) for an idiom dictionary. Adegbija (2003) provides a discussion of Kövecses’ proposal in the context of second-language idioms. The present section is an elaboration of Polzenhagen (2007: 3.6).

212

Appendix 1: Dictionary sample

Each entry then includes an indication of conceptualizations underlying the meaning of the item. The information given there establishes the link to the second, thesaurus-like component of the dictionary. The thesaurus lists selected key domains and salient conceptualizations therein. Part A of the thesaurus is arranged according to target domains and provides crossreferences to relevant lexical items listed in the dictionary component. This allows to recover lexical fields and relations between lexical items that are not or only partly retrievable from the alphabetically organized component. This part also provides space for representative text examples illustrating the conceptualizations listed, which adds to the usage-based element of the dictionary. Part B of the thesaurus has a source-domain arrangement and contains references to the target-domain component, thus allowing the uncovering of further relevant conceptualizations and lexical items. The sample covers but a small set of selected lexical items from the domains analyzed in our book, and the entries only include information specific to these domains and to African English (i.e., general senses and senses possibly shared by other varieties of English are not included). Due to our own research focus, most of the items stem from West African varieties of English, and the other African varieties are thus certainly underrepresented. Also, the country labels included in the entries do not claim to be fully exclusive but only mark the varieties in which an item is safely attested though the data available to us. Furthermore, the source language of loan words is often difficult to identify given the multitude of indigenous African languages in contact and the limited access to information on and speakers of these languages. Hence, our sample does not claim to be exhaustive even for this relatively small portion of lexis. In light of the present state of the art as regards the lexicographic description of the New Englishes, a more comprehensive incorporation of the culturalconceptual component remains a desideratum and a challenging task for future research.

Appendix 1: Dictionary sample

PART I.

213

Dictionary component. Selected sample entries.

Big Man. (fixed expression). (AfrE). definition: ‘wealthy man’, ‘influential man’, ‘man with spiritual power’. text example: Their customers range from bureaucrats to Presidents, the Small Man to the Big Man. (WCL). underlying conceptualization: BEING RICH IS BEING BIG, ENRICHMENT IS EATING, HAVING POWER IS BEING BIG, IMPORTANT IS BIG, SUCCESS IS THE RESULT OF WITCHCRAFT [source domain Ÿ PHYSICAL SIZE] [target domain Ÿ MATERIAL WEALTH, Ÿ POWER]. Big Woman. (fixed expression). (AfrE). definition: ‘wealthy woman’, ‘influential woman’, ‘woman with occult powers’. text example: A young girl … told the police that she saw big men and women with flashy cars at the hideout where she was taken after being kidnapped. (WCL) underlying conceptualization: IMPORTANT IS BIG, BEING RICH IS BEING BIG, ENRICHMENT IS EATING, HAVING POWER IS BEING BIG, SUCCESS IS THE RESULT OF WITCHCRAFT [source domain Ÿ PHYSICAL SIZE] [target domain Ÿ MATERIAL WEALTH, Ÿ POWER]. brother. (n.). (AfrE). definition: ‘male friend’, ‘male age-mate in a social/cultural/ religious/ethnic/political group’; term of address. text example: The health development of brothers and sisters in Cameroon. (CEC). underlying conceptualization: COMMUNITY IS KINSHIP [source domain Ÿ KINSHIP] [target domain Ÿ COMMUNITY]. brown envelope. (fixed expression). (NigE). definition: ‘a bribe’. text example: party faithfuls, brown-envelope co-ordinators, gossip engineers of our local rumour factories. (WCL). underlying conceptualization: CONTAINER FOR CONTENTS. (to) chop money. (fixed expression). (WAfrE). source language: Pidgin English (to chop ‘to eat’). definition: ‘to extort money from somebody’, ‘to waste money’, ‘to enrich oneself’. text example: The dream of every Nigerian is to be in politics where there’s unrestrained opportunity to chop money. (WCL: 66). underlying conceptualization: MONEY IS FOOD [source domain Ÿ EATING] [target domain Ÿ RESOURCES, Ÿ CORRUPTION]. cold water (fixed expression). (WAfrE). definition: ‘gift to soothe ruffled feelings: tip or bribe’. text example: Appearing before the Senate Standing Committee on Public Corporations and Autonomous Agencies Monday to clarify allegation that a Senator had requested US$50,000 as cold water, Mr. Greaves told the committee that he was not referring to the Liberian Senate instead, it was a member of the House of Representatives who asked for such amount. (allAfrica.com). underlying conceptualization: MONEY IS FOOD [source domain Ÿ DRINKING] [target domain Ÿ CORRUPTION].

214

Appendix 1: Dictionary sample

(d)jambe. (n.). (CamE). source language: unknown. definition: ‘a Maka witchcraft notion’. underlying conceptualization: WITCHCRAFT IS A HUNGRY BEAST LIVING IN ONE’S BELLY [source domain Ÿ EATING] [target domain Ÿ WITCHCRAFT]. (to) eat money. (fixed expression). (WAfrE). definition: ‘to extort money from somebody’, ‘to waste money’. text example: How many million promises can fill a bucket when you eat money the way locusts eat tons of green. (CEC). underlying conceptualization: MONEY IS FOOD [source domain Ÿ EATING] [target domain Ÿ RESOURCES, Ÿ CORRUPTION]. (to) eat sb. (fixed expression). (WAfrE). definition: ‘to destroy the life forces of somebody by occult means’, ‘to gain control on somebody by occult means’. underlying conceptualization: WITCHCRAFT IS EATING, KIN / COMMUNITY MEMBERS ARE FOOD [source domain Ÿ EATING] [target domain Ÿ WITCHCRAFT]. evu. (n.). (CamE). source language: Ewondo. definition: ‘a Beti witchcraft notion’. text example: The force of witchcraft evu is found in each person - it can be activated for evil or for good. (WCL). underlying conceptualization: WITCHCRAFT IS A HUNGRY BEAST LIVING IN ONE’S BELLY [source domain Ÿ EATING] [target domain Ÿ WITCHCRAFT]. father. (n.). (AfrE). definition: ‘elder male community member’, ‘male person of respect’, ‘male leader in a social/cultural/religious/ethnic/political group’; term of address. text example: The president of the republic is the father of all divisions in the country. (WCL). fixed expression: father of the nation. underlying conceptualization: LEADERS ARE FATHERS, COMMUNITY IS KINSHIP [source domain Ÿ KINSHIP] [target domain Ÿ LEADERSHIP, Ÿ COMMUNITY]. gombo (gambo / ngombo). (n.). (CamE). source language: unknown. definition: 1. ‘okra sauce’. 2. ‘a bribe’. text example: And this is not a guarantee that your "element" will be aired, unless the realizer and the assembler in the studio have received their share of "gombo". (www.africanindependent.com). underlying conceptualization: TAKING A BRIBE IS EATING [source domain Ÿ EATING] [target domain Ÿ CORRUPTION]. kola. (n.). (WAfrE, EAfrE). source language: Temne, Pidgin English. definition: 1. ‘cola nut’. 2. ‘a bribe’. text example: An unqualified contractor is allowed to bid on a project – in exchange for a little kola and a little dash. (WCL). fixed expressions: to give / take kola ‘to bribe / to accept a bribe’. underlying conceptualization: A BRIBE IS A FOOD GIFT (from the ritual of welcoming a guest with a food gift) [source domain Ÿ EATING, Ÿ GIFT-GIVING] [target domain Ÿ CORRUPTION]. long throat. (fixed expression). (NigE). definition: ‘greediness’. text example: He disliked journalists because of their long throat. “They will always want you to bribe them ...” he said. (WCL: 97). underlying conceptualization: GREED IS HUNGER (metonymically extended from body parts involved in food intake) [source domain Ÿ EATING] [target domain Ÿ MATERIAL WEALTH].

Appendix 1: Dictionary sample

215

makalapati (makala pati). (n.). (CamE). source language: Douala (makala), Ewondo (mekali), Basaa (makala). definition: 1. ‘a sort of doughnut’ 2. ‘a bribe’. underlying conceptualization: A BRIBE IS FOOD [source domain Ÿ EATING] [target domain Ÿ CORRUPTION]. mimbo. (n.). (CamE). source language: unknown. definition: 1. ‘beer-like drink obtained from the raffia palm tree’. 2. ‘drink in general’. 3. ‘a bribe’. underlying conceptualization: A BRIBE IS A DRINK [source domain Ÿ DRINKING] [target domain Ÿ CORRUPTION]. money magic. (fixed expression). (WAfrE). definition: ‘producing wealth through occult means’. text example: Men staying at home while the women go and do the money magic for them. (www.nairaland.com). underlying conceptualization: BEING RICH IS A SIGN OF WITCHCRAFT [source domain Ÿ WITCHCRAFT] [target domain Ÿ MATERIAL WEALTH]. money ritual. (fixed expression). (WAfrE). definition: ‘producing wealth through occult means’. text example: The tabloid revealed that Mr. Abiodun Olaleye, the cobbler, became a millionaire in less than four months after using his wife, Fatima, for the money ritual (www.expotimes.net). underlying conceptualization: BEING RICH IS A SIGN OF WITCHCRAFT [source domain Ÿ WITCHCRAFT] [target domain Ÿ MATERIAL WEALTH]. mother. (n.). (AfrE). definition: ‘elder female community member’, ‘female person of respect’; term of address. underlying conceptualization: COMMUNITY IS KINSHIP [source domain Ÿ KINSHIP] [target domain Ÿ COMMUNITY]. national cake. (fixed expression). (AfrE). definition: ‘national resources’. text example: Also, look at the 2001 budget in which the southwest got a very disproportionate share of the national cake where they bake none. (WCL). underlying conceptualization: RESOURCES ARE FOOD [source domain Ÿ EATING] [target domain Ÿ RESOURCES]. nyongo. (n.). (CamE). source language: unknown. definition: 1. ‘under-world’. 2. ‘place in the other-world where bewitched people work for a witch’. text example: Nyongo is some how a satanic owned business, where people are being sold in to, to work for others who are on earth. (WCL). underlying conceptualization: WITCHCRAFT IS EXPLOITATION, EXPLOITATION IS WITCHCRAFT (from the belief that witches live at the expense of their victims) [source domain Ÿ EXPLOITATION] [target domain Ÿ WITCHCRAFT]. (to) settle. (v.). (NigE). definition: 1. ‘to reach an agreement’, ‘to make sb. calm’. 2. ‘to bribe’. text example: And with the natives pacified, civilised and rid of ignorance, superstition, malaria and paganism, and their leaders duly “settled”, every body [sic] was happy! (WCL). underlying conceptualization: BRIBING IS NEGOTIATING [source domain Ÿ NEGOTIATION] [target domain Ÿ CORRUPTION].

216

Appendix 1: Dictionary sample

sister. (n.). (AfrE). definition: ‘female friend’, ‘female age-mate in a social/cultural/ religious/ethnic/political group’; term of address. text example: The health development of brothers and sisters in Cameroon. (CEC). underlying conceptualization: COMMUNITY IS KINSHIP [source domain Ÿ KINSHIP] [target domain Ÿ COMMUNITY]. small thing. (fixed expression). (NigE). definition: 1. ‘a gift’. 2. ‘a bribe’. underlying conceptualization: A BRIBE IS A GIFT, BRIBING IS GIFT-GIVING [source domain Ÿ GIFT-GIVING] [target domain Ÿ CORRUPTION]. son of the soil. (fixed expression). (WAfrE, SAfrE, EAfrE). definition: ‘person who represents and pushes through the political and economic interests of his group of origin’. text example: The smartly dressed men in the delegation were very sad to announce the sudden disappearance of one of the sons of the soil (Luangala). underlying conceptualization: COMMUNITY IS KINSHIP [source domain Ÿ KINSHIP] [target domain Ÿ COMMUNITY]. soya. (n.). (CamE). source language: Haussa. definition: 1. ‘fried beef skewers’. 2. ‘a bribe’. text example: The council allows … citizens to be able to do their work, to tell who has eaten soya (The Grasslanda). fixed expression: to have eaten soya ‘to have accepted a bribe’. underlying conceptualization: A BRIBE IS FOOD [source domain Ÿ EATING] [target domain Ÿ CORRUPTION]. soli (extra soli). (fixed expression). (GhanE). source language: English (solidarity) definition: ‘a bribe’. text example: There is no doubt that this announcement asking all the ex-officials to return the extra soli they took to the government chest is going to cause severe wahala in many houses (Ghanaian Chronicle). underlying conceptualization: A BRIBE IS A SOLIDARITY SURCHARGE [target domain Ÿ CORRUPTION]. tchoko (choko). (n.). (CamE). source language: English (to choke). definition: ‘a bribe’. text example: ‘Tchoko’, ‘Gombo’ are regularly demanded for service to be rendered for various public services. (WCL). underlying conceptualization: TAKING A BRIBE IS EATING, A BRIBE IS FOOD [source domain Ÿ EATING] [target domain Ÿ CORRUPTION]. thick madam. (fixed expression). (CamE, NigE). definition: ‘wealthy woman’. underlying conceptualization: IMPORTANT IS BIG, BEING RICH IS BEING BIG, ENRICHMENT IS EATING [source domain Ÿ PHYSICAL SIZE] [target domain Ÿ MATERIAL WEALTH]. zombie. (n.). (WAfrE, EAfrE). definition: 1. ‘dead body that has been made alive again by witchcraft’. 2. ‘bewitched person working for a witch as labor slave in the other-world’. text example: And so the mind is lured to a witch growing rich from the work of zombies. (WCL). underlying conceptualization: WITCHCRAFT IS EXPLOITATION (from the belief that witches live at the expense of their victims) [source domain Ÿ EXPLOITATION] [target domain Ÿ WITCHCRAFT].

Appendix 1: Dictionary sample

PART II.

217

Thesaurus A. Target-domain arrangement.

COMMUNITY COMMUNITY IS KINSHIP COMMUNITY MEMBERS ARE KIN

brother, father, mother, sister, son of the soil COMMUNITY ELDERS ARE FATHERS/MOTHERS father, mother FRIENDS ARE BROTHERS/SISTERS brother, sister LEADERS ARE FATHERS father, father of the nation PERSONS OF RESPECTS ARE FATHERS/MOTHERS father, mother SOCIAL UNITS ARE FAMILIES father of the nation

COMMUNITY MEMBERS ARE FOOD

Cameroon immigration use Nigerians to grow fat.

CORRUPTION BRIBERY IS EATING AND FEEDING

Corrupt citizens dish out heavy bribes. (WCL) kola, makalapati, mimbo, soya

A BRIBE IS FOOD / A DRINK cold water, gombo, A BRIBE IS A GIFT kola, small thing A BRIBE IS A SOLIDARITY SURCHARGE (extra) soli BRIBING IS NEGOTIATING (to) settle

LEADERSHIP LEADERS ARE FATHERS father, father LEADERSHIP IS EATING AND FEEDING

of the nation

They have taken food of his plate. (said in Cameroon when a government official is dropped) They have given him plenty to eat. (said in Cameroon when a new government official is appointed) I chop, you chop. BEING A LEADER IS BEING BIG big man

218

Appendix 1: Dictionary sample

MATERIAL WEALTH

(to) chop money, (to) eat money As soon as her mother recovers let her come and eat Nanga’s wealth. (Achebe 1988: 88) BEING RICH IS BEING BIG big man, big woman, thick madam BEING RICH IS A SIGN OF WITCHCRAFT money-magic, money-ritual GREED IS HUNGER long throat ENRICHMENT IS EATING

POWER POWER IS EATING

Now his mouth was so full of the national cake that he could not even raise his voice against what he did not agree with. Power was very sweet to chew. (Luangala 1991: 146) BEING POWERFUL IS BEING BIG big man POWER IS MAGIC

RESOURCES

national cake self-reliant development means one should feed fat from the resources put at his disposal (CEC)

RESOURCES ARE FOOD

WITCHCRAFT WITCHCRAFT IS EATING (to) eat sb. WITCHCRAFT IS A HUNGRY BEAST LIVING IN ONE’S BELLY WITCHCRAFT IS EXPLOITATION nyongo, zombie HAVING OCCULT POWER IS BEING BIG big man, big woman

(d)jambe, evu

Appendix 1: Dictionary sample

PART II.

Thesaurus B. Source-domain list.

EATING

Ÿ CORRUPTION Ÿ LEADERSHIP Ÿ MATERIAL WEALTH Ÿ POWER Ÿ RESOURCES Ÿ WITCHCRAFT GIFT-GIVING

Ÿ CORRUPTION KINSHIP

Ÿ COMMUNITY Ÿ LEADERSHIP PHYSICAL SIZE

Ÿ LEADERSHIP Ÿ MATERIAL WEALTH Ÿ POWER Ÿ WITCHCRAFT WITCHCRAFT

Ÿ EXPLOITATION Ÿ LEADERSHIP Ÿ MATERIAL WEALTH Ÿ POWER

219

Appendix 2. Questionnaire Nationality: ___________________ Sex: ___________ Age: ____ Mother tongue: _____________________

Please give a brief characterization of what you associate with the following concepts: Ghosts

Members of my family

Family support

Family activities

Money

Ancestors

222

Appendix 2: Questionnaire

Please fill in four different words so each sentence makes sense to you

___________________________ is a family ___________________________ is a family ___________________________ is a family ___________________________ is a family

Whom would you address as

father

________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________

mother

________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________

brother

________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________

sister

________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________

aunt or auntie ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ uncle

________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________

cousin

________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________

Appendix 2: Questionnaire

223

Please draw lines to the 7 items that you relate most with ‘eating’ Brushing the teeth TV

Dinner

Restaurant

Friends

Drinks

Family Eating

Business

Overweight

Nutrition

Children

Parents

Health Cold food

Warm food

Please indicate the strength of the link you perceive between the following items and ‘eating’

Dinner Friends Family Nutrition TV Restaurant Drinks Business Brushing the teeth Parents Children Overweight Health Warm food Cold food

no link

weak link

medium link

strong link









Are there any further items that you strongly associate with ‘eating’? __________________________

__________________________

__________________________

__________________________

224

Appendix 2: Questionnaire

Please draw lines to the 7 items that you relate most with ‘family’ Obedience Business

Relatives

Money

Dinner

Restaurant

Friends Family

Ancestors

Warmth

Eating

Values

Respect

Society

Spirits/Ghosts

Country Tradition

Reunions

Please indicate the strength of the link you perceive between the following items and ‘family’

Dinner Friends Warmth Values Society Country Reunions Tradition Spirits/Ghosts Respect Eating Ancestors Restaurant Money Obedience Relatives Business

no link

weak link

medium link

strong link









Are there any further items that you strongly associate with ‘family’? __________________________

__________________________

__________________________

__________________________

Appendix 2: Questionnaire

Please draw lines to the 7 items that you relate most with ‘age’ Pride

Indignity

Ancestors

Family

Security

Insecurity

Poverty

Wisdom Age

Grandchildren

Dependence

Respect

Loneliness

Forgetfulness Retirement home Power

Health problems Immobility Dignity

Please indicate the strength of the link you perceive between the following items and ‘age’

Respect Health problems Forgetfulness Poverty Dignity Security Wisdom Family Loneliness Insecurity Ancestors Power Indignity Grandchildren Dependence Immobility Pride Retirement home

no link

weak link

medium link

strong link









Are there any further items that you strongly associate with ‘age’? __________________________

__________________________

__________________________

__________________________

225

Appendix 2: Questionnaire

226

Please draw lines to the 7 items that you relate most with ‘witchcraft’ Jealousy Power

Fear

Family

Superstition

Death

Illness Witchcraft

Fairy tales

Success

Money

Neighbours

Sports

Hunger Eating

Health Past

Please indicate the strength of the link between the following items and ‘witchcraft’

Jealousy Power Fear Family Superstition Death Fairy tales Money Sports Eating Health Success Illness Neighbours Hunger Past

no link

weak link

medium link

strong link









Are there any further items that you strongly associate with ‘witchcraft’? __________________________

__________________________

__________________________

__________________________

References

Aarts, Jan and Willem Meijs (eds.) 1990 Corpus Linguistics: Recent Developments in the Use of Computer Corpora in English Language Research. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Abe, Keiko 2006 ‘How may I help you?’ – Advice by radio in Japan and the U.S. In: Ana María Hornero, María José Luzón and Silvia Murillo (eds.), Corpus Linguistic: Applications for the Study of English, 79-92. [Linguistic Insights, Studies in Language and Communication 25]. Frankfurt (Main) – Berlin: Peter Lang. Abunaw, Joyce A. 2004 Writing woman writing culture: The scripting of Potent Secrets. In: Anne Schröder (ed.), Crossing Borders: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Africa, 43-51. [Afrikanische Studien 23]. Münster: LIT Verlag. Achard, Michel and Suzanne Kemmer (eds.) 2004 Language, Culture, and Mind. Stanford: CSLI Publications. Achebe, Chinua 1958 Things Fall Apart. London – Nairobi: Heinemann. 1975 English and the African writer. In: Ali A. Mazrui (ed.), The Political Sociology of the English Language, 216-223. [Contributions to the Sociology of Language 7]. The Hague: Mouton. 1984 The Trouble with Nigeria. London – Nairobi: Heinemann. 1988 A Man of the People. London – Nairobi: Heinemann. Adegbija, Efurosibina 1989 Lexico-semantic variation in Nigerian English. World Englishes 8(2): 165-77. 1994 Language Attitudes in Subsaharan Africa: A Sociolinguistic Overview. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. 2003 Idiomatic variation in Nigerian English. In: Peter Lucko, Lothar Peter and Hans-Georg Wolf (eds.), Studies in African Varieties of English, 4156. Berlin – Frankfurt (Main): Peter Lang. Adimora-Ezeigbo, Akachi 1996 The Last of the Strong Ones. Lagos: Vista Books. 1999 Echoes in the Mind. Lagos: Vista Books. Alembong, Nol 1993 Oral traditions in literary imagination: The case of spirit possession in Bole Butake’s And Palm-Wine Will Flow. In: Nalova Lyonga, Eckhard Breitinger and Bole Butake (eds.), Anglophone Cameroon writing, 130139. [Bayreuth African Studies 30]. Bayreuth: Bayreuth University.

228

References

Alexander, Neville 2003 Language education policy, national and sub-national identities in South Africa. Language Policy Division, DG IV – Directorate of School, Out-ofSchool and Higher Education. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. [www.coe.int/T/E/Cultural_Co-operation/education/Languages/ Language_Policy/Policy_development_activities/Studies/AlexanderEN. pdf access 10/02/04]. 2004 Socio-political factors in the evolution of language policy in postapartheid South Africa. LAUD Paper N° 619. Essen: LAUD. Alo, Moses 1989 A prototype approach to the analysis of meanings of kinship terms in non-native English. Language Sciences 11(2): 159-176. Alobwede, Charles d’Epie 1982 The language of traditional medicine in Bakossi: A study in the power of language. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Yaounde. Altendorf, Ulrike 2004 Language change and changing ideologies in and around RP. In: Martin Pütz, JoAnne Neff-van Aertselaer, and Teun A. van Dijk (eds.), Communicating Ideologies: Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Language, Discourse, and Social Practice, 203-224. [Duisburg Papers on Research in Language and Culture 53]. Frankfurt (Main) – Berlin: Peter Lang. Ambanasom, Shadrach A. 1993 The orality of the works of four anglophone writers: Linus Asong, Bole Butake, Bpongasu Kishani, Fale Wache. In: Nalova Lyonga, Eckhard Breitinger and Bole Butake (eds.), Anglophone Cameroon Writing, 117129. [Bayreuth African Studies Series 30]. Bayreuth: Bayreuth University. Ameka, Felix 2002 Cultural scripting of body parts for emotions: On ‘jealousy’ and related emotions in Ewe. Pragmatics & Cognition 10 (1), 1-25. Ameka, Felix and Anneke Breedveld 2004 Areal cultural scripts for social interaction in West African communities. Intercultural Pragmatics 1(2), 167-188. Anderson, John Lee 1998 The devil they know. From The New Yorker 27/07/1998. [www.republicofliberia.com/thedevil.htm access 12/02/02]. Apter, Andrew 1993 Atinga revisited. Yoruba witchcraft and the cacao economy. In: Jean Comaroff and John Comaroff (eds.), Modernity and Its Malcontents: Ritual and Power in Postcolonial Africa, 111-128. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Arabic News.Com 1997 Sudanese and the national cake (Sudan, Analysis, 22/08/1997). [www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/970822/1997082217.html access 10/10/2006].

References

229

Armah, Aye Kwei 1988 The Beautiful Ones Are Not Yet Born. London – Nairobi: Heinemann. Ashcroft, Bill 2001 Post-Colonial Transformation. Electronic resource. London: Routledge. Ashcroft, Bill, Gareth Griffiths, and Helen Tiffin (eds.) 1989 The Empire Writes Back: Theory and Practice in Post-Colonial Literature. London: Routledge. 1995 The Post-Colonial Studies Reader. London: Routledge. Ashforth, Adam 2005 Muthi, Medicine and Witchcraft: Regulating ‘African Science’ in PostApartheid SouthAfrica? Social Dynamics 31:2, 211-242. [www.africanstudies.uct.ac.za/downloads/SD31_2_-Ashforth-as.pdf access 20/09/2006]. Aston, Guy and Lou Burnard 1998 The BNC Handbook: Exploring the British National Corpus with SARA. [Edinburgh Textbooks in Empirical Linguistics]. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Atechi, Samuel Ngwa 2006 The Intelligibility of Native and Non-Native English Speech. Göttingen: Cuvillier. Auer, Peter 2000 Die Linguistik auf dem Weg zur Kulturwissenschaft? Freiburger Universitätsblätter 147: 55-68. Austen, Ralph A. 1993 The moral economy of witchcraft. An essay in comparative history. In: Jean Comaroff and John Comaroff (eds.), Modernity and Its Malcontents: Ritual and Power in Postcolonial Africa, 89-110. Chicago: Chicago University Press. 2001 The Slave Trade as History and Memory: Confrontations of Slaving Voyage Documents and Communal Traditions. The William and Mary Quarterly 58(1) online. [www.historycooperative.org/journals/wm/58:1/austen.html access 01/02/02]. Ayetigbo, Ayodele 2002 Back stabbed, frontally bruised Nigeria/Africa will survive. The U.S. African Voice Online, December 02. Baldauf, Richard B. and Robert B. Kaplan 2004 Language Planning and Policy in Africa, Vol. 1. Botswana, Malawi, Mozambique and South Africa. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Bamgbose, Ayo 1991 Language and the Nation: The Language Question in Sub-Saharan Africa. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. 2000 Language and Exclusion: The Consequences of Language Policies in Africa. Hamburg: LIT Verlag.

230

References

Bamgbose, Ayo, Ayo Banjo, and Andrew Thomas (eds.) 1995 New Englishes: A West African Perspective. Ibadan: Mosuro. [Trenton (NJ) (1997): Africa World Press]. Barbag-Stoll, Anna 1983 Social and Linguistic History of Nigerian Pidgin English as Spoken by the Yoruba with Special Reference to the English-derived Lexicon. Tübingen: Stauffenberg. Barcelona, Antonio (ed.) 2000 Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroad. A Cognitive Perspective. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Barnbrook, Geoff 1996 Language and Computers: A Practical Introduction to the Computer Analysis of Language. [Edinburgh Textbooks in Empirical Linguistics]. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Bartsch, Renate 1998 Dynamic Conceptual Semantics. A Logico-Philosophical Investigation into Concept Formation and Understanding. [Studies in Logic, Language and Information]. CSLI Publications Stanford. Distributed by Cambridge University Press. 2002 Generating polysemy: Metaphor and metonymy. In: René Dirven and Ralf Pörings (eds.), Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast, 49-74. [Cognitive Linguistic Research 20.] Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Bastian, Misty L. 1993 ‘Bloodhounds who have no friends’. Witchcraft and locality in the Nigerian press. In: Jean Comaroff and John Comaroff (eds.), Modernity and Its Malcontents: Ritual and Power in Postcolonial Africa, 129-166. Chicago: Chicago University Press. 1995 “My head was too strong!”: Body parts and money magic in Nigerian popular discourse. [www.lib.uchicago.edu/e/harper/e-text/bastian.html access 01/02/02]. 2001 Vulture men, campus cultists and teenaged witches. Modern magics in Nigerian popular media. In: Henrietta L. Moore and Todd Sanders (eds.), Magical Interpretations, Material Reality: Modernity, Witchcraft and the Occult in Postcolonial Africa, 71-96. London: Routledge. Batibo, Herman M. 2006 Marginalisation and empowerment through educational medium: The case of the linguistically disadvantaged groups of Botswana and Tanzania. In: Martin Pütz, Joshua Fishman, and JoAnne Neff-van Aertselaer (eds.), Along the Routes to Power: Explorations of the Empowerment through Language, 261-283. [Contributions to the Sociology of Language 92]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Bauer, Laurie and Peter Trudgill (eds.). 1998 Language Myths. London – New York: Penguin.

References

231

Bayart, Jean-François 1993 The State in Africa: Politics of the Belly. London – New York: Longman. Bayart, Jean-François, Stephen Ellis and Béatrice Hibou (eds.) 1999 The Criminalization of the State in Africa. Bloomington – Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. Behrend, Heike and Ute Luig (eds.) 1999 Spirit Possession, Modernity and Power in Africa. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Bennett, Tony, Lawrence Grossberg, and Meaghan Morris 2005 New Keywords: A Revised Vocabulary of Culture and Society. Malden (Mass.): Blackwell. Bernault, Florence n.d. Magical politics in equatorial Africa. [history.wisc.edu/bernault/magical%5Cbernault%20magical%20politics.htm access 08/01/02]. Bhatt, Rakesh M. 2001 World Englishes. Annual Review of Anthropology 30: 527-570. Bird, Norman 2001 The most common Hong Kong English language errors and how to avoid them. The Hong Kong Linguist. Journal of the Institute of Linguists. Hong Kong Regional Society 22: 7-10. Bisong, Joseph 1995 Language choice and cultural imperialism. A Nigerian perspective. ELT Journal 49(2): 122-132. Black, Max 1993 [1977]. More about metaphor. In: Andrew Ortony (ed.), Metaphor and Thought, 19-42. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Blench, Roger 2005 A dictionary of Nigerian English [draft circulated for comment]. [www.rogerblench.info/Language%20data/Africa/Nigeria/NE%20 Dictionary%20draft.pdf access 14/06/2006]. Blommaert, Jan 1991 How much culture is there in intercultural communication? In: Jan Blommaert and Jef Verschueren (eds.), The Pragmatics of International and Intercultural Communication (Selected papers of the International Pragmatics Conference, Antwerp, August 17-22, 1987, III, and the Gent Symposium), 13-31. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 2003 Commentary: A sociolinguistics of globalisation. Journal of Sociolinguistics 7(4): 607-623. Blommaert, Jan and Jef Verschueren 1991 Intercultural and international communication. Introduction. In: Jan Blommaert and Jef Verschueren (eds.), The Pragmatics of International and Intercultural Communication (Selected papers of the International Pragmatics Conference, Antwerp, August 17-22, 1987, III, and the Gent Symposium), 1-12. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

232

References

Bokamba, Eyamba G. 1992 The Africanization of English. In: Braj B. Kachru (ed.), The Other Tongue: English across Cultures, 125-147. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Bokamba, Eyamba G. and Loreto Todd 1992 African English. In: Tom McArthur (ed.), The Oxford Companion to the English Language, 20–22. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bolton, Kingsley 2003 Chinese Englishes: A Sociolinguistic History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2005 Where WE stands: Approaches, issues, and debate in world Englishes. World Englishes 24(1): 69-83. Bolton, Kingsley (ed.) 2002 Hong Kong English: Autonomy and Creativity. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. Bolton, Kingsley and Hans-Georg Wolf 2005 Exploring the cultures of Asian Englishes: Evidence from corpus linguistics. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the International Association for World Englishes (IAWE). The Multiple Expressions of World Englishes. Purdue, USA, July 21-23, 2005. Bourdieu, Pierre 1990 The Logic of Practice. Oxford: Polity Press. Boyer, Pascal 1992 Explaining religious ideas: Elements of a cognitive approach. Numen 39(1): 27-57. Branford, Jean and William Branford 1991 A Dictionary of South African English. 4th ed. Cape Town: Oxford University Press. British National Corpus (BNC) 2000 Reference Guide for the British National Corpus (World Edition). Edited by Lou Burnard. [www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/docs/userManual/ access 02/09/06] Brockman, John 2001 ‘Philosophy in the Flesh’. A talk with George Lakoff. A Parte Rei. Revista de Filosofia 14. [Available on serbal.pntic.mec.es/~cmunoz11/interview.pdf access 09/10/06]. Brock-Utne, Birgit 2006 Understanding what the teacher is saying – code-switching and codemixing in the Tanzanian classroom. In: Albert Weideman and Birgit Smieja (eds.), Empowerment through Language and Education: Cases and Case Studies from North America, Europe, Africa and Japan, 75-89. [Duisburg Papers on Research in Language and Culture 65]. Frankfurt (Main) – Berlin: Peter Lang.

References

233

Brown, Kimberley 2001 World Englishes and the classroom: Research and practice agendas for the year 2000. In: Edwin Thumboo (ed.), The Three Circles of English, 371-382. Singapore: UniPress. Brutt-Griffler, Janina 2002 World English: A Study of Its Development. [Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 34]. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Buber, Martin 1958 I and Thou. 2nd. ed. Transl. by Ronald Gregor Smith. Edinburgh: T & T. Clark. 2002 [1947]. Between Man and Man. Translated by Ronald Gregor-Smith; with an introduction by Maurice Friedman. Electronic resource. London – New York: Routledge. Caffi, Claudia 1998 Metapragmatics. In: Jacob Louis Mey (ed.), Concise Encyclopedia of Pragmatics, 581-586. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Calvet, Louis-Jean 1998 Language Wars and Linguistic Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cameroon Tribune (Cameroon) 1995 Boy, 6, found dead under bed after rat bite. May 9: 1. CEC. Corpus of English in Cameroon. n.d. Compiled as part of the International Corpus of English Project. Unfinished version. Chabal, Patrick and Jean-Pascal Daloz 1999 Africa Works: Disorder as Political Instrument. [African Issues.] Bloomington – Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. Charteris-Black, Jonathan 2004 Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. Cheng, Winnie and Martin Warren 2001 The use of vague language in intercultural conversations in Hong Kong. English World-Wide 22(1): 81-104. Cheshire, Jenny (ed.) 1991 English Around the World: Sociolinguistic Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CIA (Central Intelligence Agency. United States Government) 2004 The World Factbook. [Country files: www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/ access 02/03/05]. Clyne, Michael 1994 Intercultural Communication at Work. Cultural Values in Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1998 Discourse in cross-linguistic and cross-cultural contexts. In: Jacob Louis Mey (ed.), Concise Encyclopedia of Pragmatics, 244-251. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

234

References

2006

Some thoughts on pragmatics, sociolinguistic variation, and intercultural communication. Intercultural Pragmatics 3(1): 95-105. Cognitive Linguistics 11(3-4) 2000 Special issue: Conceptual Blending. Ed. by Seana Coulson and Todd Oakley. Comaroff, Jean and John Comaroff (eds.) 1993 Modernity and its Malcontents: Ritual and Power in Postcolonial Africa. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Comaroff, John 2002 Governmentality, materiality, legality, modernity: On the colonial state in Africa. In: Jan-Georg Deutsch, Peter Probst and Heike Schmidt (eds.), African Modernities: Entangled Meanings in Current Debate, 107-134. Oxford: James Currey. Conceptual Metaphor Home Page. 1994 Berkeley: University of California. [cogsci.berkeley.edu/lakoff/metaphors/Ideas_Are_Food.html access 17/03/04]. Concise Oxford English Dictionary 2002 10th ed., revised. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cook Summer, Susan 2005 Glossaire de Camfranglais. Camfranglais glossary. [www.columbia.edu/~summer/cfg1.html access 14/06/06]. Corpus Calixthe 1998 Compiled by Bettina Peters and Susan Navissi. Humboldt University, Berlin. Corpus Ghana 2002 1999-2002. Compiled by Jana Trommer and Susanne Gehl. Humboldt University Berlin. Corpus Liberia 2004 Humboldt University, Berlin. Corpus Nigeria 2001 1999-2001. Compiled by Jana Trommer and Thomas Gonsior. Humboldt University Berlin. Cortazzi, Martin and Wei Wei Shen 2001 Cross-linguistic awareness of cultural keywords: A study of Chinese and English speakers. Language Awareness 10(2/3): 125-142. Croft, William 1993 The role of domains in the interpretation of metaphor and metonymies. Cognitive Linguistics 4(4): 335-370. 2002 The role of domains in the interpretation of metaphors and metonymies. In: René Dirven and Ralf Pörings (eds.), Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast, 161–205. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Crystal, David 1997 English as a Global Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

References 2000 2003a 2003b

235

Language Death. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. English as a Global Language. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Csábi, Szilvia 2001 The concept of America in the Puritan mind. Language and Literature 10(3): 195-209. d’Andrade, Roy G. 1987 A folk model of the mind. In: Dorothy Holland and Naomi Quinn (eds.), Cultural Models in Language and Thought, 112-147. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. d’Andrade, Roy G. and Claudia Strauss (eds.) 1992 Human Motives and Cultural Models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DAE [Association for the Development of African Education] 1996 Formulating Education Policy: Lessons and Experience from subSaharan Africa Six Case Studies and Reflections from the DAE 1995 Biennial Meetings (October 1995 – Tours, France). Dako, Kari 2001 Ghanaianism: towards a semantic and a formal classification. English World-Wide 22(1): 23-53. 2003 Ghanaianisms: A Glossary. Accra: Ghana Universities Press; Oxford: Distributed in Europe and North America by African Books Collective. Dalgish, Gerard M. 1982 A Dictionary of Africanisms. Contributions of Sub-Saharan Africa to the English Language. Westport (Connecticut) – London: Greenwood Press. Dalphinis, Morgan 1986 African language influences in creoles lexically based on Portuguese, English and French, with special reference to Casamance Kriul, Gambian Krio and St. Lucian Patwa. PhD thesis, University of London 1981; available from Ann Arbor (MI): University Microfilms International. de Féral, Carole 1989 Pidgin-English du Cameroun. Description linguistique et sociolinguistique. [SELAF 313]. Paris: Peeters – Selaf. de Kadt, Elizabeth 1997 McWorld versus local cultures: English in South Africa at the turn of the millennium. In: Larry E. Smith and Michael L. Forman (eds.), Word Englishes 2000, 146-168. Honolulu: University of Hawaii & East-West Center. Deignan, Alice 2005 Metaphor and Corpus Linguistics. Electronic resource. [Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research 6]. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

236

References

Deutsch, Jan-Georg, Peter Probst, and Heike Schmidt (eds.) 2002 African Modernities: Entangled Meanings in Current Debate. Oxford: James Currey. Dirven, René 1990 Metaphor and ideology. In: Jean-Piere van Noppen (ed.), La Pratique de la Métaphore: How to Do Things with Metaphors, 565-575. Special Issue of Rèvue Belge de Philologie et d’Histoire LXVIII (3). 1994 Metaphor and Nation: Metaphors Afrikaners Live by. [Duisburg Papers on Research in Language and Culture 22]. Frankfurt (Main) – Berlin: Peter Lang. 2004 Major strands in Cognitive Linguistics. LAUD Paper N° 634. Essen: LAUD. 2005a Major strands in Cognitive Linguistics. In: Francisco J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez and M. Sandra Peña Cervel (eds.), Cognitive Linguistics. Internal Dynamics and Interdisciplinary Interaction, 17-68. [Cognitive Linguistics Research 32]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 2005b. Review of Peter Trudgill. 2002. Sociolinguistic Variation and Change. Washington (D.C.): Georgetown University Press. Studies in Language 29(1): 313-317. Dirven, René and Marjolijn Verspoor (eds.) 2004 Cognitive Exploration of Language and Linguistics. 2nd revised ed. [Cognitive Linguistics in Practice 1]. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Dirven, René and Ralf Pörings (eds.) 2002 Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast. [Cognitive Linguistic Research 20]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Dirven, René, Frank Polzenhagen, and Hans-Georg Wolf 2007 Cognitive Linguistics, ideology, and Critical Discourse Analysis. In: Dirk Geeraerts and Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, 1222-1240. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dirven, René, Hans-Georg Wolf, and Frank Polzenhagen 2007 Cultural studies. In: Dirk Geeraerts and Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, 1203-1221. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dirven, René, Roslyn Frank, and Martin Pütz (eds.) 2003 Cognitive Models in Language and Thought. Ideology, Metaphors and Meanings. [Cognitive Linguistic Research 24]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Dissanayake, Wimal 1997 Cultural studies and World Englishes: Some topics for further exploration. In: Larry E. Smith and Michael L. Forman (eds.), World Englishes 2000, 126-145. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press. Dixon, Robert 1997 The Rise and Fall of Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

References

237

Dostal, Robert J. 2002 Introduction. In: Robert J. Dostal (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to Gadamer, 1-12. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Downes, William 1998 Language and Society. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Duranti, Alessandro 1997 Linguistic Anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Echu, Georg 2003 Multilingualism as a resource: The lexical appropriation of Cameroon indigenous languages by English and French. Trans. Internet-Zeitschrift für Kulturwissenschaften 13. [www.inst.at/trans/13Nr/echu13.htm access 14/06/06]. Edwards, John 2002 Ecolinguistic ideologies: A critical perspective. LAUD Paper N° 531. Essen: LAUD. 2004 The power of language, the language of power. LAUD Paper N° 588. Essen: LAUD. Egbokhare, Francis O. 2003 The story of a language. Nigerian Pidgin in spatiotemporal, social and linguistic context. In: Peter Lucko, Lothar Peter, and Hans-Georg Wolf (eds.), Studies in African Varieties of English, 21-40. Berlin – Frankfurt (Main): Peter Lang. Eggington, William 1997 The English language metaphors we plan by. In: William Eggington and Helen Wren (eds.), Language Policy: Dominant English, Pluralistic Challenges, 29-46. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins, Canberra: Language Australia. Ellis, Stephen 1999 The Mask of Anarchy: The Destruction of Liberia and the Religious Dimension of an African Civil War. New York: New York University Press. Elugbe, Ben O. and Augusta Ph. Omamor 1991 Nigerian Pidgin: Background and Prospect. Ibadan: Heinemann Educational Books Nigeria. Emory University 2005 Efe/Gelede headdress, Apasa. [carlos.emory.edu/COLLECTION/AFRICA/africa03.html access 12/04/05]. English World-Wide: A Journal of Varieties of English. 2000 Index to Volumes 1-20. 1980-1999. 2000-04 Volumes 21(1) - 25(1). Evans-Pritchard, Edward E. 1934 Lévy-Bruhl’s theory of primitive mentality. Bulletin of the Faculty of Arts 2: 1-36. 1937 Witchcraft, Oracles and Magic Among the Azande. Oxford: Clarendon.

238

References

Eyoh, Hansel Ndumbe 1993 Historicity and new anglophone Cameroon drama. In: Nalova Lyonga, Eckhard Breitinger and Bole Butake (eds.), Anglophone Cameroon writing, 100–108. [Bayreuth African Studies 30]. Bayreuth: Bayreuth University. Eze, Smart N. 1980 Nigerian Pidgin English Sentence Complexity. [Beiträge zur Afrikanistik 8]. Vienna: University of Vienna. Faraclas, Nicholas G. 1996 Nigerian Pidgin. London: Routledge. Fauconnier, Gilles 1997 Mappings in Thought and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Fauconnier, Gilles and Mark Turner 1998 Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science 22: 133-187. 1999 Metonymy and conceptual integration. In: Klaus-Uwe Panther and Günter Radden (eds.), Metonymy in Language and Thought, 77-90. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 2002 The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books. Feinberg, Richard and Martin Ottenheimer (eds.) 2001 The Cultural Analysis of Kinship. The Legacy of David Schneider. Illinois: The University of Illinois Press Fenton, James 2005 The cruel carpenter. Pol Pot: Anatomy of a nightmare, by Philip Short. New York Review of Books 52(10): 28-30. Figueroa, Esther 1994 Sociolinguistic Metatheory. New York: Elsevier. Fill, Alwin 1993 Ökolinguistik: Eine Einführung. Tübingen: Gunter Narr. Fill, Alwin (ed.) 1996 Sprachökologie und Ökolinguistik: Referate des Symposions Sprachökologie und Ökolinguistik an der Universität Klagenfurt 27.-28. Oktober 1995. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. Fillmore, Charles 1975a Santa Cruz Lectures on Deixis 1971. Bloomington (Indiana): Indiana University Linguistics Club. 1975b An alternative to checklist-theories of meaning. Proceedings of the 1st Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society, 123-131. 1982 Frame semantics. In: Linguistics in the Morning Calm – Selected Papers from SICOL 1981. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing Company. Firth, John R. 1957 [1935]. The technique of semantics. Papers in Linguistics 1934-1951, 733. London: Oxford University Press.

References 1968

239

[1957]. A synopsis of linguistic theory, 1930-55. In: F.R. Palmer (ed.), Selected Papers of J.R. Firth 1952-59. London – Harlow: Longman. Fisher, Allestree E. C. 2000 Assessing the state of Ugandan English. English Today 61 16(1): 57-61, 110. Fishman, Joshua 2002 Endangered minority languages: Prospects for sociolinguistic research. International Journal on Multicultural Societies 4(2). Protecting Endangered Minority Languages: Sociolinguistic Perspectives. Ed. by Matthias Koenig. UNESCO. [www.unesco.org/most/vl4n2fishman.pdf access 10/02/04]. FLOB. The Freiburg LOB Corpus of English 1999 Compiled by Christian Mair et al. University of Freiburg, Germany. On ICAME collection of English language Corpora, 2nd edition. CD-ROM. The HIT Centre. University of Bergen, Norway. Foley, William A. 1997 Anthropological Linguistics. An Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fowler, Roger 1991 Language in the News: Discourse and Ideology in the Press. London – New York: Routledge. Francis, W. Nelson and Henry Kucera 1964 BROWN Corpus Manual. Manual of information to accompany A Standard Corpus of Present-Day Edited American English. Revised 1971, revised and amplified 1979. Providence (Rhode Island): Brown University. [On ICAME] Frank, Roslyn M., René Dirven, Tom Ziemke, and Enrique Bernárdez (eds.) 2008 Body, Language, and Mind. Vol. II: Sociocultural Situatedness. [Cognitive Linguistic Research 35.2]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. FROWN. The Freiburg BROWN Corpus of English 1999 Compiled by Christian Mair et al. University of Freiburg, Germany. On ICAME collection of English language Corpora, 2nd edition. CD-ROM. The HIT Centre. University of Bergen, Norway. Fyle, Clifford N. and Eldred N. Jones 1980 A Krio-English dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press; Freetown: Sierra Leone University Press. Gadamer, Hans-Georg 1976a [1962]. On the problem of self-understanding. In: David E. Linge (ed. and transl.), Philosophical Hermeneutics, 44-58. Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of California Press. 1976b [1966]. Man and language. In: David E. Linge (ed. and transl.), Philosophical Hermeneutics, 59-81. Berkeley – Los Angeles: University of California Press.

240

References

1976c

1989

[1972]. Semantics and hermeneutics (transl. by P. Christopher Smith). In: David E. Linge (ed. and transl.), Philosophical Hermeneutics, 82-94. Berkeley – Los Angeles: University of California Press. [1960]. Truth and Method, 2nd rev. ed. Translation rev. by Joel Weinsheimer and Donald G. Marshall. New York: Continuum.

Gast, Volker 2006 Introduction. The Scope and Limits of Corpus Linguistics – Empiricism in the Description and Analysis of English. Special issue of Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik: A Quarterly of Language, Literature and Culture 54(2): 113-120. Gbadegesin, Segun 1991 African Philosophy. Traditional Yoruba Philosophy and Contemporary African Realities. New York: Peter Lang. Geeraerts, Dirk 1992 The return of hermeneutics to lexical semantics. In: Martin Pütz (ed.), Thirty Years of Linguistic Evolution. Studies in Honour of René Dirven on the Occasion of his 60th Birthday, 257-282. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 1997 Diachronic Prototpye Semantics. Oxford: Clarendon. 2003a Cultural models of linguistic standardization. In: René Dirven, Roslyn Frank and Martin Pütz (eds.), Cognitive Models in Language and Thought: Ideology, Metaphors and Meanings, 25-68. [Cognitive Linguistics Research 24]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 2003b ‘Usage-based’ implies ‘variational’: On the inevitability of cognitive sociolinguistics. Plenary lecture presented at the 8th International Cognitive Linguistics Conference: Cognitive Linguistics, Functionalism, Discourse Studies: Common Ground and New Directions. Logroño, July 20-25, 2003. 2005 Lectal variation and empirical data in Cognitive Linguistics. In: Francisco J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez and M. Sandra Peña Cervel (eds.), Cognitive Linguistics. Internal Dynamics and Interdisciplinary Interaction, 164-189. [Cognitive Linguistics Research 32]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Geeraerts, Dirk and Hubert Cuyckens (eds.) 2007 Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Geertz, Clifford 1973 The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books. 1975 Common sense as a cultural system. The Antioch Review 33(1): 5-26. [www.iwp.uni-linz.ac.at/lxe/sektktf/GG/GeertzTexts/Common_ Sense.htm access 02/03/05]. 1987 [1959-1977]. Dichte Beschreibung. Beiträge zum Verstehen kultureller Systeme. Frankfurt (Main): Suhrkamp. Geertz, Hildred and Clifford Geertz 1975 Kinship in Bali. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

References

241

Gergen, Kenneth J. 1994a Towards Transformation in Social Knowledge. 2nd ed. London: Sage. 1994b Realities and Relationships: Soundings in Social Constructionism. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press. 2001 Social Construction in Context. Electronic resource. London – Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage. Geschiere, Peter 1995 Culture: Pandora’s box. Paper presented at the Conference “Good Governance for Africa: Whose Governance?”. Maastricht. University of Limburg and ECDPM. [www.oneworld.org/ecdpm/pubs/gevges.htm access 08/01/02]. 1996 Sorcellerie et politique : les pièges du rapport élite-village. Politique Africaine 63, 82-96. [www.politique-africaine.com/numeros/pdf/063082.pdf access 10/10/06]. 1997 The Modernity of Witchcraft: Politics and the Occult in Postcolonial Africa. First publ. 1995 by Editions Karthala. Transl. by the Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia. Charlottesville (VA): University Press of Virginia. Ghana Unofficial Dictionary 1999 [www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/dictionary.html access 01/05/05]. Gibbs, Raymond W. (Jr.) 1994 The Poetics of Mind. Figurative Thought, Language, and Understanding. Cambridge – New York: Cambridge University Press. 1999 Taking metaphor out of our heads and putting it into the cultural world. In: Raymond W. Gibbs (Jr.) and Gerard J. Steen (ed.), Metaphors in Cognitive Linguistics, 145-166. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Gibbs, Raymond W. (Jr.) and Gerard J. Steen (eds.) 1999 Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Giddens, Anthony 1993 [1976]. New Rules of Sociological Method: A Positive Critique of Interpretative Sociologies. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Polity Press. Glucksberg, Sam 2001 Understanding Figurative Language: From Metaphors to Idioms. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gnutzmann, Claus (ed.) 1999 Teaching and Learning English as a Global Language: Native and NonNative Perspectives. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. Goddard, Cliff 2006 Verbal explication and the place of NSM semantics in cognitive linguistics. In: June Luchjenbroers (ed.), Cognitive Linguistics Investigations: Across Languages, Fields, and Philosophical Boundaries, 189-218. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

242

References

Goddard, Cliff and Anna Wierzbicka 1994 Semantic and Lexical Universals: Theory and Empirical Findings. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Goodenough, Ward 1968 Componential Analysis. In: International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences 3, 186-192. New York: Macmillan and The Free Press. 2001 Conclusion: Muddles in Schneider’s Model. In: Richard Feinberg and Martin Ottenheimer (eds.), The Cultural Analysis of Kinship. The Legacy of David Schneider. Illinois: The University of Illinois Press. [www.press.uillinois.edu/epub/books/feinberg/concl.html access 10/09/06]. Goossens, Louis 1995 Metaphtonymy: The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in figurative expressions for linguistic action. In: Louis Goossens et al. (eds.), By Word of Mouth. Metaphor, Metonymy and Linguistic Action in a Cognitive Perspective, 159-174. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 2002 Metaphtonymy: The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in figurative expressions for linguistic action. In: René Dirven and Ralf Pörings (eds.), Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast, 347-377. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter Görlach, Manfred 1980 Editorial. English World-Wide: A Journal of Varieties of English 1(1): 3-7. 1999 Varieties of English and language teaching. In: Claus Gnutzmann (ed.), Teaching and Learning English as a Global Language: Native and NonNative Perspectives, 3-21. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. Graddol, David 1997 The Future of English? London: The British Council. n.d. The Future of English Next: Envisioning the future world of English language learning. [Available on www.britishcouncil.org/goingglobalsession-1-1100-thursday-elt-david-graddo-paper.pdf] Grady, Joseph 1999 A typology of motivation for conceptual metaphor. In: Raymond W. Gibbs (Jr.) and Gerard J. Steen (eds.), Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics, 79-100. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Grady, Joseph, Todd Oakley, and Seana Coulson 1999 Blending and metaphor. In: Raymond W. Gibbs (Jr.) and Gerard J. Steen (eds.), Metaphors in Cognitive Linguistics, 101-124. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Gramley, Stephan and Michael Pätzold 2004 A Survey of Modern English, 2nd ed. Electronic resource. New York: Taylor & Francis. Greenbaum, Sidney (ed.) 1996 Comparing English Worldwide: The International Corpus of English. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

References

243

Grice, Herbert P. 1996 [1975]. Logic and conversation. In: Heimir Geirsson and Michael Losonsky (eds.), Readings in Language and Mind, 121-133. Oxford – Cambridge (Mass.): Blackwell. Grill, Bartholomäus 2002 Ganz zauberhaft. Die Zeit 23, May 29: 52. Grondin, Jean 2002 Gadamer’s basic understanding of understanding. In: Robert J. Dostal (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to Gadamer, 36-51. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Grundy, Peter and Yan Jiang 2001 The bare past as an ideological construction in Hong Kong discourse. In: René Dirven, Roslyn M. Frank and Cornelia Ilie (eds.), Language and Ideology. Vol. 2: Descriptive Cognitive Approaches, 117-134. [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 205]. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Haase, Christoph 2004 Conceptualization specifics in East African English: Quantitative arguments from the ICE-East Africa corpus. World Englishes 23(2): 261-268. Hall, Edward T. 1981 [1976]. Beyond Culture. New York – London – Toronto – Sydney – Auckland: Anchor Books, Doubleday. Halliday, Michael A.K. 1978 Language as Social Semiotics. London: Edward Arnold. Hancock, Ian F. 1975 Some aspects of English in Liberia. In: Dillard Joey L. (ed.). Perspectives on Black English, 248-255. [Contributions to the Sociology of Language 4]. The Hague: Mouton. Hancock, Ian F. and Rachel Angogo 1982 English in East Africa. In: Richard Bailey and Manfred Görlach (eds.), English as a World Language, 306-323. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Hansen, Klaus 1987 Zum Begriff der Sprachsituation. In: Klaus Hansen (ed.), Studien zur Sprachvariation (unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Englischen), 649. Berlin: Humboldt Universität. 1993 Zum Englischen in Westafrika. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 41: 305–317. Hansen, Klaus, Uwe Carls, and Peter Lucko 1996 Die Differenzierung des Englischen in nationale Varianten: Eine Einführung. Berlin: Erich Schmidt. Harder, Peter 2007 Cognitive Linguistics and philosophy. In: Dirk Geeraerts and Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, 1241-1265. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

244

References

Harkins, Jean 1990 Shame and shyness in the Aboriginal classroom: A case for practical semantics. Australian Journal of Linguistics 10: 293-306. 2000 Structure and meaning in Australian Aboriginal English. Asian Englishes 3(2): 60–81. Harmon, David 1996 Losing species, losing languages: Connections between biological and linguistic diversity. Southwest Journal of Linguistics 15: 89-108. 2001 On the meaning and moral imperative of diversity. In: Luisa Maffi (ed.), On Biocultural Diversity. Linking Language, Knowledge, and the Environment, 53-70. Washington – London: Smithsonian Institution Press. Harris, Roy 1990 On ‘folk’ and ‘scientific’ linguistic beliefs. In: Savas L. Tsohatzidis (ed.), Meanings and Prototypes: Studies in Linguistic Categorization, 449-464. London: Routledge. Haugen, Einar 1972 The ecology of language. In: Anwar S. Oil (ed.), The Ecology of Language. Essays by Einar Haugen, 215-236. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Hocking, Brian D. W. 1974 All What I Was Taught and Other Mistakes. A Handbook of Common Errors in English. Nairobi, Lusaka, Dar es Salaam, Ibadan: Oxford University Press. Hodge, Robert and Gunther Kress 1988 Social Semiotics. Cambridge: Polity Press. Hofstede, Geert 1980 Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values. Beverly Hills (CA): Sage. Holborow, Marnie 1999 The Politics of English: A Marxist View of Language. London: Sage. Holland, Dorothy and Naomi Quinn (eds.) 1987 Cultural Models in Language and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hollmann, Willem and Anna Siewierska 2006 Corpora and (the need for) other methods in a study of Lancashire dialect. In: Volker Gast (ed.), The Scope and Limits of Corpus Linguistics - Empiricism in the Description and Analysis of English. Special issue of Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik: A Quarterly of Language, Literature and Culture 54(2): 203-216. Honey, John 1997 Language is Power: The Story of Standard English and its Enemies. London: Faber and Faber.

References

245

House, Juliane 1999 Misunderstanding in intercultural communication. Interactions in English as lingua franca and the myth of mutual intelligibility. In: Klaus Gnutzmann (ed.), Teaching and Learning English as a Global Language. Native and Non-Native Perspectives, 73-89. [ZAA Studies]. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. 2003 English as a lingua franca: A threat to multilingualism? Journal of Sociolinguistics 7(4): 556-678. Huber, Magnus 1999 Ghanaian Pidgin English in its West African Context: A Sociohistorical and Structural Analysis. [Varieties of English Around the World, General Series 24]. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 2004 Review of English in Cameroon (Contributions to the Sociology of Language 85), by Hans-Georg Wolf. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 19(1): 207-210. Hudson Ettle, Diana and Josef Schmied 1999 Manual to accompany the East African component of The International Corpus of English ICE-EA. Background information, coding conventions and lists of source texts. Chemnitz: REAL Centre. [www.tu-chemnitz.de/phil/english/chairs/linguist/real/independent/ eafrica/index.htm access 10/12/06]. Hui, Leng 2003 The influences of cultural schemas on intercultural communication between Chinese speakers of English and Anglo-Australians. TESOL Links 53: 6-11. 2004 Cultural knowledge and foreign language teaching and learning: A study of Chinese Family schemas in language, culture and intercultural communication. Hong Kong Journal of Applied Linguistics 9(2): 17-37. Hutton, Christopher 2001 Cultural and conceptual relativism, universalism and the politics of linguistics: Dilemmas of a would-be progressive linguistics. In: René Dirven, Bruce Hawkins and Esra Sandikcioglu (eds.), Language and Ideology. Volume I: Theoretical Cognitive Approaches, 277-296. [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 204]. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ICE. International Corpus of English 2002 Department of English Language and Literature, University College London. [www.ucl.ac.uk/english-usage/ice/ access 03/04/05]. 2007 Department of English Language and Literature, University College London. [www.ucl.ac.uk/english-usage/ice/icenige.htm access 25/08/08]. Igboanusi, Herbert 1998 Lexico-semantic innovation processes in Nigerian English. Research in African Languages and Linguistics (RALL) 4(2): 87-102.

246

References

2002 A Dictionary of Nigerian English Usage. Ibadan: Enicrownfit Publ. Igboanusi, Herbert and Lothar Peter 2005 Languages in Competition: The Struggle for Supremacy Among Nigeria’s Major Languages, English and Pidgin. Berlin – Frankfurt (Main): Peter Lang. ISE (International Society of Ethnobiology) 1998 Code of ethics. Preamble. [guallart.anthro.uga.edu/ISE/soceth.html access 10/01/05]. Jäkel, Olaf 1997 Metaphern in Abstrakten Diskursdomänen. [Duisburger Arbeiten zur Sprach- und Kulturwissenschaft 30]. Berlin – Frankfurt/Main: Peter Lang. 1999 Kant, Blumenberg, Weinrich: Some forgotten contributions to the cognitive theory of metaphor. In: Raymond W. Gibbs (Jr.) and Gerard J. Steen (eds.), Metaphors in Cognitive Linguistics, 9-28. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Jenkins, Jennifer 2003 World Englishes: A Resource Book for Students. London – New York: Routledge. Johansson, Stig (ed.) 1982 Computer Corpora in English Language Research. Bergen: Norwegian Computer Centre for the Humanities. Johansson, Stig, Geoffrey N. Leech, and Helen Goodluck 1978 LOB Corpus Manual. Manual of information to accompany The Lancaster-Oslo/Bergen Corpus of British English. Oslo: University of Oslo. [On ICAME disk]. Johnson, Mark 1992 The Body in the Mind. Chicago – London: University of Chicago Press. Johnson, Mark (ed.) 1981 Philosophical Perspectives on Metaphor. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Johnson, Mark and George Lakoff 2002 Why cognitive linguistics requires embodied realism. Cognitive Linguistics 13(3): 245–263. Johnson, Robert K. 1990 International English: Towards an acceptable, teachable target variety. World Englishes 9(3): 301-315. Jones, Frederick C.V. 1983 English-derived words in Sierra Leone Krio. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Leeds. Jowitt, David 1991 Nigerian English Usage: An Introduction. Lagos: Longmann Ikeja. Jowitt, David and Silas Nnamonu 1998 [1985]. Common Errors in English, 9th impr. Harlow: Longman.

References

247

Kachru, Braj B. 1983a Introduction: The other side of English. In: Braj B. Kachru (ed.), The Other Tongue: English Across Cultures, 1-12. Oxford: Pergamon. 1985 Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in the outer circle. In: Randolph Quirk and Henry G. Widdowson (eds.), English in the World: Teaching and Learning the Languages and Literatures, 11-30. Cambridge: University Press/The British Council. 1986 The Alchemy of English: The Spread, Functions and Models of NonNative Englishes. Oxford: Pergamon Press. 1994 The speaking tree: a medium of plural canons. In: James E. Alatis (ed.), Educational Linguistics, Crosscultural Communication, and Global Interdependence, 6-22. [Georgetown University Round Table on Language and Linguistics 45]. Georgetown: Georgetown University Press. Kachru, Braj B. (ed.) 1983 The Other Tongue: English Across Cultures. Oxford: Pergamon. Kachru, Yamuna and Cecil L. Nelson 2006 World Englishes in Asian Contexts: A Resource Book. [Asian Englishes Today]. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. Kalu, Ogbu U. 1993 Gods as policemen: Religion and social control in Igboland. In: Jacob K. Olupona and Sulayman S. Nyang (eds.), Religious Plurality in Africa: Essays in Honor of John S. Mbiti, 111–131. [Religion and Society 32]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Kang, Agnes 2003 Negotiating conflict within constraints of social hierarchies in Korean American discourse. Journal of Sociolinguistics 7(3): 299-320. Keesing, Roger M. 1976 Kin Groups and Social Structure. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. 1987 Models, “folk” and “cultural”: Paradigms regained? In: Dorothy Holland and Naomi Quinn (eds.), Cultural Models in Language and Thought, 369-393. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1992 Anthropology and linguistics. In: Martin Pütz (ed.), Thirty Years of Linguistic Evolution, 593-609. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 1994 Radical cultural difference: Anthropology’s myth? In: Martin Pütz (ed.), Language Contact and Language Conflict, 3-23. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Kemmer, Suzanne and Michael Barlow 2000 Introduction: A usage-based conception of language. In: Michael Barlow and Suzanne Kemmer (eds.), Usage-Based Models of Language, viixxviii. Stanford (CA.): CSLI Publications. Khabirov, Valerie 2004 Language shift as the result of change in language loyalty in CongoBrazzaville. LAUD Paper N° 615. Essen: LAUD.

248

References

Kippenberg, Hans G. 1995 Einleitung: Zur Kontroverse über das Verstehen fremden Denkens. In: Hans G. Kippenberg and Brigitte Luchesi (eds.), Magie. Die sozialwissenschaftliche Kontroverse über das Verstehen fremden Denkens, 951. [UTB 674]. Frankfurt (Main): Suhrkamp. Kippenberg, Hans G. and Brigitte Luchesi (eds.) 1995 Magie. Die sozialwissenschaftliche Kontroverse über das Verstehen fremden Denkens. [UTB 674]. Frankfurt (Main): Suhrkamp. Knöbl, Wolfgang 2002 Modernization theory and African modernities: An outsider’s view. In: Jan-Georg Deutsch, Peter Probst and Heike Schmidt (eds.), African Modernities: Entangled Meanings in Current Debate, 158-178. Oxford: James Currey. Koenig, Edna L., Emmanuel Chia, and John Povey (eds.) 1983 A Sociolinguistic Profile of Urban Centers in Cameroon. Los Angeles: Crossroads. Kortmann, Bernd 2001 In the Year 2525… Reflections on the future shape of English. Anglistik 12: 97-114. Kortmann, Bernd and Edgar W. Schneider (eds.) 2004 A Handbook of Varieties of English, Vol. 1, 2. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Kortmann, Bernd (ed.) 2004 Dialectology meets Typology. Dialect Grammar from a Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Kouega, Jean-Paul 2006 Aspects of Cameroon English Usage. A Lexical Appraisal. Munich: Lincom. 2007 A Dictionary of Cameroon English Usage. Oxford: Peter Lang. Kourouma, Ahamdou 2000 Allah n’Est Pas Obligé. Paris: Éditions du Seuil. Kövecses, Zoltán 1986 Metaphors of Anger, Pride, and Love: A Lexical Approach to the Study of Concepts. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 1995a Anger: Its language, conceptualizations, and physiology in the light of cross-cultural evidence. In: John R. Taylor and Robert E. MacLaury (eds.), Language and the Cognitive Construal of the World, 181-197. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 1995b American friendship and the scope of metaphor. Cognitive Linguistics 6(4): 315-346. 1999 Metaphor: Does it constitute or reflect cultural models? In: Raymond W. Gibbs (Jr.) and Gerard J. Steen (eds.), Metaphors in Cognitive Linguistics, 167–188. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

References 2001

249

A cognitive linguistic view of learning idioms in an FLT context. In: Martin Pütz, Susanne Niemeier and René Dirven (eds.), Applied Cognitive Linguistics II: Language Pedagogy, 87-115. [Cognitive Linguistic Research 19.2]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 2002 Metaphor. A Practical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2003 Language, figurative thought, and cross-cultural comparison. Metaphor and Symbol 18(4): 311-320. 2005 Metaphor in Culture. Universality and Variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kövecses, Zoltán and Gary B. Palmer 1999 Language and emotion concepts: What experientialists and social constructionists have in common. In: Gary B. Palmer and Debora J. Occhi (eds.), Languages of Sentiment: Cultural Constructions of Emotional Substrates, 237-262. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Krings, Matthias 1999 On history and language of the ‘European’ Bori spirits – Kano Nigeria. In: Heike Behrend and Ute Luig (eds.), Spirit Possession. Modernity and Power in Africa, 53-67. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Kristiansen, Gitte 2003 How to do things with allophones: Linguistic stereotypes as cognitive reference points in social cognition. In: René Dirven, Roslyn Frank and Martin Pütz (eds.), Cognitive Models in Language and Thought. Ideology, Metaphors and Meanings, 69-120. [Cognitive Linguistic Research 24]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 2008fc Style-shifting and shifting styles: A socio-cognitive approach to lectal variation. In: Gitte Kristiansen and René Dirven (eds.), Cognitive Sociolinguistics: Language Variation, Cultural Models, Social Systems. [Cognitive Linguistics Research]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Kristiansen, Gitte and René Dirven (eds.) 2008fc Cognitive Sociolinguistics: Language Variation, Cultural Models, Social Systems. [Cognitive Linguistics Research]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Kuhn, Thomas S. 1962 The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1993 Metaphor in science. In: Andrew Ortony (ed.), Metaphor and Thought, 533-542. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kuiper, Koenraad and Daphne Tan Gek Lin 1989 Cultural congruence and conflict in the acquisition of formulae in a second language. In: Ofelia García and Ricardo Otheguy (eds.), English Across Cultures, Cultures Across English: A Reader in Cross-Cultural Communication, 281-304. [Contributions to the Sociology of Language 53]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

250

References

Kujore, Obafemi 1985 English Usage: Some Notable Nigerian Variations. Ibadan: Evans Brothers (Nigeria Publishers). Labov, William 1966 The Social Stratification of English in New York City. Washington (D.C.): Center for Applied Linguistics. 1972 Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Laity, Paul 2006 The Way to Win: Juju on the Field. National Geographic. [www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0606/feature1/#ivory access 12/10/06]. Lakoff, George 1987 Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago – London: University of Chicago Press. 1993a How metaphor structures dreams: The theory of conceptual metaphor applied to dream analysis. University of California at Berkeley. [www.ac.wwu.edu/~market/semiotic/lkof_drm.html access 19/03/04]. 1993b The contemporary view of metaphor. In: Anthony Ortony (ed.), Metaphor and Thought, 202–251. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson 1980 Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: Chicago University Press. 1981 Conceptual metaphor in everyday language. In: Mark Johnson (ed.), Philosophical Perspectives on Metaphor, 286-325. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. 2003 Metaphors We Live By, 2nd ed. Chicago: Chicago University Press. 1999 Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought. New York: Basic Books. Lakoff, George and Mark Turner 1989 More Than Cool Reason. A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Lakoff, George and Zoltán Kövecses 1987 The cognitive model of anger inherent in American English. In: Dorothy Holland and Naomi Quinn (eds.), Cultural Models in Language and Thought, 95-221. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Langacker, Ronald W. 1987 Foundation of Cognitive Grammar. Vol I.: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford (CA): Stanford University Press. 1991 Foundation of Cognitive Grammar. Vol II.: Descriptive Application. Stanford (CA): Stanford University Press. 1994 Culture, cognition, and grammar. In: Martin Pütz (ed.), Language Contact and Language Conflict, 25-53. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 2002 Concept, Image, and Symbol: The Cognitive Basis of Grammar. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

References

251

Le Français en Afrique 2000 Revue du Réseau des Observatoires du Français Contemporain en Afrique 14. [ancilla.unice.fr/~brunet/pub/lexique.html access 20/08/2003]. Lee, Penny 1996 The Whorf Theory Complex: A Critical Reconstruction. [Amsterdam Studies in Theory and History of Linguistic Science 81]. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 1998 The operation of linguistic relativity in the cognitive domain. LAUD Paper N° 433. Essen: LAUD Leech, Geoffrey and Roger Fallon 1992 Computer corpora – what do they tell us about culture? ICAME Journal (Computers in English Linguistics) 16: 29-50. Leezenberg, Michiel 2001 Contexts of Metaphor. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Leitner, Gerhard (ed.) 1992 New Directions in English Language Corpora: Methodology, Results, Software Developments. [Topics in English Linguistics 9]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter . Lettinga, Neil 2000 Christianity in Africa South of the Sahara. AICs. Aladura. [www.bethel.edu/~letnie/AfricanChristianity/SSAAladura.html access 20/12/2006]. Lévi-Strauss, Claude 1968 [1958]. Structural Anthropology. London: Allen Lane. [Extracts: www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/ levistra.htm access 11/06/04]. 1969 [1949]. The Elementary Structures of Kinship. Boston: Beacon. Lim, Shirley Geok-lin 2002 Cultural imagination and English in Hong Kong. In: Kingsley Bolton (ed.), Hong Kong English: Autonomy and Creativity, 265-280. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. Linguist List 2003 Origin of ‘un système où tout se tient.’ 14.1954. [linguistlist.org/issues/14/14-1954.html. access 24/11/2004]. Liu, Dilin 2002 Metaphor, Culture, and Worldview: The Case of American English and the Chinese Language. Lanham – New York – Oxford: University Press of America. Lovgren, Stefan 2006 World Cup Witchcraft: Africa Teams Turn to Magic for Aid. Part I/II. National Geographic. [news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/06/060630-soccer-magic.html – 060630-soccer-magic_2.html access 10/10/06]. Luangala, John 1991 The Chosen Bud. Lusaka: Kenneth Kaunda Foundation.

252

References

Lucko, Peter 2003 Is English a killer language? In: Peter Lucko, Lothar Peter, and HansGeorg Wolf (eds.), Studies in African Varieties of English, 151-165. Berlin – Frankfurt (Main): Peter Lang. 2004 Die Konzeption der Bank of English und anderer englischer Textkorpora. In: Jürgen Scharnhorst (ed.), Sprachkultur und Lexikographie. Von der Forschung zur Nutzung von Wörterbüchern, 73-96. Berlin – Frankfurt (Main): Peter Lang. Lucko, Peter, Lothar Peter, and Hans-Georg Wolf (eds.) 2003 Studies in African Varieties of English. Berlin – Frankfurt (Main): Peter Lang. Maffi, Luisa (ed.) 2001 On Biocultural Diversity. Linking Language, Knowledge, and the Environment. Washington – London: Smithsonian Institution Press. Mair, Christian 2002 The continuing spread of English: Anglo-American conspiracy or global grassroots movement? In: David J. Allerton, Paul Skandera, and Cornelia Tschichold (eds.), Perspectives on English as a World Language, 159-169. Basel: Schwabe & Co. Mair, Christian (ed.) 2003 The Politics of English as a World Language. New Horizons in Postcolonial Cultural Studies. Amsterdam – New York: Rodopi. Makuchi 1999 Your Madness, not Mine. Stories of Cameroon. [Monographs in International Studies. Africa Series 70]. Athens, OH: Ohio University Center for International Studies. Malcolm, Ian and Judith Rochecouste 2000 Event and story schemas in Australian Aboriginal English discourse. English World-Wide 21(2): 261-289. Malpas, Jeff 2005 Hans-Georg Gadamer. In: Edward N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2005 Edition). [plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2005/entries/gadamer/ access 08/08/06]. Markus, Hazel R. and Shinobu Kitayama 1991 Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review 98: 224-253. Maryns, Katrijn 2000 English in Sierra Leone: A Sociolinguistic Investigation. [Studia Germanica Gandensia 52]. Gent: Vakgroep Duits – Taalkunde, Ghent University. Masamba ma Mpolo, Jean 1994 Spirituality and counseling for healing and liberation. In: Emmanuel Lartey, Daisy Nwachuku and Kasonga Wa Kasonga (eds.), The Church and Healing: Echoes from Africa, 10-33. New York: Peter Lang.

References

253

Masquelier, Adeline 1993 Narratives of power, images of wealth: The ritual economy of Bori in the market. In: Jean Comaroff and John Comaroff (eds.), Modernity and Its Malcontents: Ritual and Power in Postcolonial Africa, 3-33. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Matory, J. Lorand 1993 Government by seduction. History and the tropes of ‘mounting’ in OyoYoruba religion. In: Jean Comaroff and John Comaroff (eds.), Modernity and Its Malcontents: Ritual and Power in Postcolonial Africa, 58-85. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Matsebula, Bhekie 2001 Profile: Troubled King Mswati. BBC online, 04/12/01. [news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/africa/newsid_1692000/1692217.stm access 12/01/02]. Mazrui, Alamin M. 1975 The Political Sociology of the English Language: An African Perspective. [Contributions to the Sociology of Language 7]. The Hague: Mouton. 2004 English in Africa: After the Cold War. Electronic resource. Buffalo: Multilingual Matters. Mazrui, Ali A. 1986 Cultural synthesis in Africa. World & I Vol. 1:1986 online. [www.worldandi.com/public/1986/february/cl3.cfm access 31/03/03]. Mazrui, Ali A. and Alamin M. Mazrui 1993 Dominant languages in a plural society: English and Kiswahili in postcolonial East Africa. International Political Science Review / Revue Internationale de Science Politique (The Emergent World Language System. Le système linguistique mondial en formation) 14(3): 275-292. 1998 The Power of Babel: Language and Governance in the African Experience. Oxford: James Currey; Chicago: The University of Chicago Press; Nairobi: East African Educational Publishers; Kampala: Fountain Publishers; Cape Town: David Philip Publishers. Mbangwana, Paul N. 1989 Flexibility in lexical usage in Cameroon English. In: Ofelia García and Ricardo Otheguy (eds.), English Across Cultures, Cultures Across English: A Reader in Cross-Cultural Communication, 319-333. [Contributions to the Sociology of Language 53]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 1992 Some grammatical sign-posts in Cameroon Standard English. In: Josef J. Schmied (ed.), English in East and Central Africa II, 93-102. [Bayreuth African Studies 24]. Bayreuth: Bayreuth University. Mbassi-Manga, Francis 1973 English in Cameroon: A study in historical contacts patterns of usage and current trends. Unpubl. PhD thesis, University of Leeds.

254

References

Mbiti, John 1990 African Religions and Philosophy. 2nd ed. Florence: Heinemann. McCrum, Robert, William Cran, and Robert MacNeil 1986 The Story of English. London: Faber & Faber, BBC publications. McEnery, Tony, Richard Xiao, and Yukio Tono 2006 Corpus-Based Language Studies: An Advanced Resource Book. London – New York: Routledge. MED 2002 Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners. Oxford: Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 2007 Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners. 2nd ed. Oxford: Macmillan Publishers Ltd. Medubi, Oyinkan 2003 Language and ideology in Nigerian cartoons. In: René Dirven, Roslyn Frank and Martin Pütz (eds.), Cognitive Models in Language and Thought. Ideology, Metaphors and Meanings, 159-197. [Cognitive Linguistic Research 24]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Meijs, Willem (ed.) 1987 Corpus Linguistics and Beyond. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Melchers, Gunnel and Philip Shaw 2003 World Englishes. An Introduction. London: Hodder & Stoughton. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice 2002 [1945]. Phenomenology of Perception. London – New York: Routledge. Mesthrie, Rajend (ed.) 2002 Language in South Africa. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Meyer, Birgit 1999 Translating the Devil: Religion and Modernity Among the Ewe in Ghana. Trenton (NJ) – Asmara: Africa World Press. Moore, Henrietta L. and Todd Sanders 2001a Magical interpretations and material realities. An introduction. In: Henrietta L. Moore and Todd Sanders (eds.), Magical Interpretations, Material Reality: Modernity, Witchcraft and the Occult in Postcolonial Africa, 1-27. London: Routledge. Moore, Henrietta L. and Todd Sanders (eds.) 2001 Magical Interpretations, Material Reality: Modernity, Witchcraft and the Occult in Postcolonial Africa. London: Routledge. Mufwene, Salikoko S. 1992 West African English. In: Tom McArthur (ed.), The Oxford Companion to the English Language, 1111. Oxford – New York: Oxford University Press. 1997 The legitimate and illegitimate offspring of English. In: Larry E. Smith and Michael L. Forman (eds.), World Englishes 2000, 182-203. Honolulu: University of Hawaii & East-West Center.

References 2001

255

The Ecology of Language Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2002 Colonisation, globalisation, and the future of languages in the twentyfirst century. International Journal on Multicultural Societies 4(2). Protecting Endangered Minority Languages: Sociolinguistic Perspectives. Ed. by Matthias Koenig. UNESCO. [www.unesco.org/most/vl4n2mufwene.pdf access 10/02/04]. Mühlhäusler, Peter 1995 The interdependence of linguistic and biological diversity. In: David Myers (ed.), The Politics of Multiculturalism in the Asia / Pacific, 154161. Darwin (Australia): Northern Territory University Press. 1996a Linguistic Ecology. Language Change and Linguistic Imperialism in the Pacific Region. London: Routledge. 1996b Linguistic adaptation to changed environmental conditions: Some lessons from the past. In: Alwin Fill (ed.), Sprachökologie und Ökolinguistik, 105-130. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. 2000 Humboldt, Whorf and the roots of ecolinguistics. In: Martin Pütz and Marjolijn H. Verspoor (eds.), Explorations in Linguistic Relativity, 8999. [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 199]. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 2001 Ecolinguistics, linguistic diversity, ecological diversity. In: Luisa Maffi (ed.), On Biocultural Diversity. Linking Language, Knowledge, and the Environment, 133-144. Washington – London: Smithsonian Institution Press. 2003 English as an exotic language. In: Christian Mair (ed.), The Politics of English as a World Language. New Horizons in Postcolonial Cultural Studies, 67-86. Amsterdam – New York: Rodopi. Musopole, Augustine C. 1994 Being Human in Africa: Toward an African Christian Anthropology. New York: Peter Lang. Ndam Njoya, Adamou 1976 Le Cameroun dans les Relations Internationales. Paris: Librairie Générale de Droit et de Jurisprudence. Nelson, Gary 2004 Introduction. World Englishes 23(2): 256-226. Nerlich, Brigitte and David D. Clarke 2002 Blending the past and the present: Conceptual and linguistic integration, 1800-2000. In: René Dirven and Ralf Pörings (eds.), Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast, 555-593. [Cognitive Linguistic Research 20]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Nerlich, Brigitte, David D. Clarke, and Zazie Todd 1999 ‘Mummy, I like being a sandwich’: Metonymy in language acquisition. In: Klaus-Uwe Panther and Günter Radden (eds.), Metonymy in Language and Thought, 361-384. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

256

References

Nettle, Daniel 1999 Linguistic Diversity. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Nettle, Daniel and Suzanne Romaine 2000 Vanishing Voices: The Extinction of the World’s Languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ngugi wa Thiong’o 1986a Decolonising the Mind: The Politics of Language in African Literature. London: James Currey. 1986b Petals of Blood. Oxford: Heinemann. 1993 Moving the Centre: The Struggle for Cultural Freedoms. London: James Currey. 2005 Europhone or African memory: The challenge of the pan-Africanist intellectual in the era of globalization. In: Thandika Mkandawire (ed.), African Intellectuals: Rethinking Politics, Language, Gender and Development, 155-164. Dakar: CODESRIA Books (in association with Zed Books, London – New York). Niehaus, Isak 2001a Witchcraft, Power and Politics: Exploring the Occult in South African Lowveld. London – Sterling: Pluto Press. 2001b Witchcraft and the new South Africa. From colonial superstition to postcolonial reality? In: Henrietta L. Moore and Todd Sanders (eds.), Magical Interpretations, Material Reality: Modernity, Witchcraft and the Occult in Postcolonial Africa, 184-205. London: Routledge. Niemeier, Susanne and René Dirven (eds.) 2000 Evidence for Linguistic Relativity. [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 198]. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Njeuma, Bernadette J. 1995 Structural similarities between Sierra Leone Krio and two West African anglophone pidgins: A case for common origin. Unpubl. PhD thesis, University of South Carolina. Nsubuga, Moses and Chris Kiwawuloa 2004 Demons Attack Kiboga Pupils. New Vision (Uganda) / All Africa Global Media via COMTEX. In Factiva (electronic database). Ntoi, Kay J. 1998 North Westerners caused Achidi Achu to lose his post. The Herald (Cameroon), March 4-5: 8. Nyati-Ramahobo, Lydia 2006 Language policy, cultural rights and the law in Botswana. In: Martin Pütz, Joshua Fishman, and JoAnne Neff-van Aertselaer (eds.), Along the Routes to Power: Explorations of the Empowerment through Language, 285-303. [Contributions to the Sociology of Language 92]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. O’Grady, William, John Archibald, Mark Aronoff, and Janie Rees-Miller (eds.) 2004 Contemporary Linguistics. An Introduction. 5th ed. Boston – New York: Bedford – St. Martin.

References

257

Oakes, Michael P. 1998 Statistics for Corpus Linguistics. [Edinburgh Textbooks in Empirical Linguistics]. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Olivier de Sardan, Jean-Pierre 1999 A moral economy of corruption in Africa? Journal of Modern African Studies 37(1): 25-52. Onyejekwe, Umebe N. 2003 Witchcraft: A myth of a curious institution. [www.nigerdeltacongress.com/warticles/witchcraft_myth_of_a_ curious_ins.htm access 10/04/03]. Opoku, Kofi Asare 1993 African traditional religion: An enduring heritage. In: Jacob K. Olupona and Sulayman S. Nyang (eds.), Religious Plurality in Africa: Essays in Honor of John S. Mbiti, 67–82. [Religion and Society 32]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Ortony, Andrew (ed.) 1993 Metaphor and Thought. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Osthus, Dietmar 2000 Metaphern im Sprachenvergleich: Eine kontrastive Studie zur Nahrungsmetaphorik im Französischen und Deutschen. [Bonner Romanistische Arbeiten 70]. Frankfurt (Main) – Berlin: Peter Lang. Ouane, Adama 2003a Introduction: The view from inside the linguistic jail. In: Adama Ouane (ed.), Towards a Multilingual Culture of Education, 1-13. Hamburg: UNESCO Institute of Education. 2003b The discourse on mother tongues and national languages. In: Adama Ouane (ed.), Towards a Multilingual Culture of Education, 35-49. Hamburg: UNESCO Institute of Education. 2003c The impossible debate about the use of mother tongues in education. In: Adama Ouane (ed.), Towards a Multilingual Culture of Education, 5186. Hamburg: UNESCO Institute of Education. Ouane, Adama (ed.) 2003 Towards a Multilingual Culture of Education. Hamburg: UNESCO Institute of Education. Palmer, Gary B. 1996 Toward a Theory of Cultural Linguistics. Austin: University of Texas Press. 2006 When does cognitive linguistics become cultural? Case studies in Tagalog voice and Shona noun classifiers. In: June Luchjenbroers (ed.), Cognitive Linguistics Investigations: Across Languages, Fields, and Philosophical Boundaries, 13-45. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 2007 Anthropological Linguistics. In: Dirk Geeraerts and Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

258

References

Palmer, Gary B. and Debora J. Occhi (eds.) 1999 Languages of Sentiment: Cultural Constructions of Emotional Substrates. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Palmer, Gary B. and Dorothea Neal Arin 1999 The domain of ancestral spirits in Bantu noun classification. In: Masako Hiraga, Chris Sinha, and Sherman Wilcox (eds.), Cultural, Typological and Psycholinguistic Issues, 25-45. Selected Papers of the Bi-annual ICLA Meeting in Alburquerque, July, 1995. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Panther, Klaus-Uwe and Günter Radden (eds.) 1999 Metonymy in Language and Thought. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Parkin, Robert 1997 Kinship: An Introduction to Basic Concepts. Oxford: Blackwell. Parkin, Robert and Linda Stone (eds.) 2003 Kinship and Family: An Anthropological Reader. Oxford: Blackwell. Pattanayak, Debi Prasanna 2003a Mother tongues: The problem of definition and the educational challenge. In: Adama Ouane (ed.), Towards a Multilingual Culture of Education, 23-28. Hamburg: UNESCO Institute of Education. 2003b Multicultural contexts and their ethos. In: Adama Ouane (ed.), Towards a Multilingual Culture of Education, 29-34. Hamburg: UNESCO Institute of Education. Peeters, Bert 2004 Tall poppies and egalitarianism in Australian discourse: From key word to cultural value. English World-Wide 25(1): 1-25. Pemagbi, Joe 1989 Still a deficient language? A description and glossary of the ‘New English’ of Sierra Leone. English Today 17: 20-24. Pennycook, Alastair 1994 The Cultural Politics of English as an International Language. London: Longman. 1998 English and the Discourse of Colonialism. London: Routledge. 2001 Critical Applied Linguistics: A Critical Introduction. Mahwah (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 2003a Beyond homogeny and heterogeny: English as a global and worldly language. In: Christian Mair (ed.), The Politics of English as a World Language. New Horizons in Postcolonial Cultural Studies, 3-18. Amsterdam – New York: Rodopi. 2003b Global English, Rip Slyme, and performativity. Journal of Sociolinguistics 7(4): 513-533. Peter, Lothar 2003 English in Sudan. In: Peter Lucko, Lothar Peter, and Hans-Georg Wolf (eds.), Studies in African Varieties of English, 129-149. Berlin – Frankfurt (Main): Peter Lang.

References

259

Peter, Lothar and Hans-Georg Wolf 2003 Aku in The Gambia: Terminological problems, functional distribution and popular attitude. In: Peter Lucko, Lothar Peter, and Hans-Georg Wolf (eds.), Studies in African Varieties of English, 119-127. Berlin – Frankfurt (Main): Peter Lang. 2007 A comparison of the varieties of West African Pidgin English. World Englishes 26(1): 3-21. 2008 Compiling an exclusive dictionary of West African English: A report on work in progress. In: Augustin Simo Bobda (ed.), Explorations into Language Use in Africa, 221-234. [Duisburger Arbeiten zur Linguistik 70]. Berlin – Frankfurt (Main): Peter Lang. Peter, Lothar, Hans-Georg Wolf, and Augustin Simo Bobda 2003 An account of distinctive phonetic and lexical features of Gambian English. English World-Wide 24(1): 43-61. Phillipson, Robert 1992 Linguistic Imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1996 Linguistic imperialism. African perspectives. ELT Journal 50(2): 160-167. 2003 English for the globe, or only for globe-trotters? In: Christian Mair (ed.), The Politics of English as a World Language. New Horizons in Postcolonial Cultural Studies, 19-30. Amsterdam – New York: Rodopi. Phillipson, Robert and Tove Skutnabb-Kangas 1999 Englishisation: One dimension of globalisation. In: David Graddol and Ulrike H. Meinhof (eds.), English in a Changing World – L’Anglais Dans un Monde Changeant (AILA Review 13), 19-36. Phillipson, Robert (ed.) 2000 Rights to Language. Equity, Power, and Education: Celebrating the 60th Birthday of Tove Skutnabb-Kangas. London: Lawrence Erlbaum. Platt, John, Heidi Weber, and Mian L. Ho 1984 The New Englishes. London: Routledge. Polzenhagen, Frank 2007 Cultural Conceptualisations in West African English: A CognitiveLinguistic Approach. [Duisburg Papers on Research in Language and Culture 69]. Frankfurt (Main) – Berlin: Peter Lang. Polzenhagen, Frank and Hans-Georg Wolf 2007 Culture-specific conceptualisations of corruption in African English: Linguistic analyses and pragmatic applications. In: Farzad Sharifian and Gary Palmer (eds.), Applied Cultural Linguistics: Implications for Second Language Learning and Intercultural Communication, 125168. [Converging Evidence in Communication and Language Research 7]. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Polzenhagen, Frank and René Dirven 2008fc Rationalist or romantic model in globalisation? In: Gitte Kristiansen and René Dirven (eds.), Cognitive Sociolinguistics: Language Variation, Cultural Models, Social Systems. [Cognitive Linguistics Research]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

260

References

Pride, John B. (ed.) 1982 New Englishes. Rowley (MA): Newbury House. Pütz, Martin and Marjolijn H. Verspoor (eds.) 2000 Explorations in Linguistic Relativity. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Pütz, Martin, Joshua Fishman, and JoAnne Neff-van Aertselaer (eds.) 2006 Along the Routes to Power: Explorations of the Empowerment through Language. [Contributions to the Sociology of Language 92]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Pütz, Martin, Susanne Niemeier, and René Dirven (eds.) 2001a Applied Cognitive Linguistics I: Theory, Acquisition and Language Pedagogy. [Cognitive Linguistic Research 19.1]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 2001b Applied Cognitive Linguistics II: Language Pedagogy. [Cognitive Linguistic Research 19.2]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Quinn, Naomi 1987 Convergent evidence for a cultural model of American marriage. In: Dorothy Holland and Naomi Quinn (eds.), Cultural Models in Language and Thought, 173-192. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1991 The cultural basis of metaphor. In: James W. Fernandez (ed.), Beyond Metaphor: The Theory of Tropes in Anthropology, 56-93. Stanford: Stanford University Press. 1997 Research on shared task solutions. In: Claudia Strauss and Naomi Quinn (eds.), A Cognitive Theory of Cultural Meaning, 137-188. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Quinn, Naomi and Dorothy Holland 1987 Culture and cognition. In: Dorothy Holland and Naomi Quinn (eds.), Cultural Models in Language and Thought, 3-40. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Quirk, Randolph 1981 International communication and the concept of nuclear English. In: Larry E. Smith (ed.), English for Cross-Cultural Communication, 151165. London: Macmillan. Quirk, Randolph and Henry G. Widdowson (eds.) 1985 English in the World: Teaching and Learning the Languages and Literatures, 11-30. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press – The British Council. Radford, Andrew 1997 Syntactic Theory and the Structure of English. A Minimalist Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ratzinger, Joseph 2003 Glaube – Wahrheit – Toleranz: Das Christentum und die Weltreligionen. Freiburg – Basel – Wien: Herder.

References

261

Reddy, Michael 1993 [1979]. The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language. In: Andrew Ortony (ed.), Metaphor and Thought, 164201. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Republic of Zambia. Central Statistical Office 2004 Zambia “Sexual Behaviour Survey” 2003. Ministry of Health. [synergyaids.org/documents/ZambiaSexBehaviourSurvey.pdf access 02/05/06]. Research Center for World Englishes n.d. Ed. by Edgar Schneider. University of Regensburg. [www-englishes.uni-regensburg.de/ access 02/12/06] Richards, Ivor A. 1936 The Philosophy of Rhetoric. London: Oxford University Press. 1981 [1936]. Extracts from: The philosophy of rhetoric. In: Mark Johnson (ed.), Philosophical Perspectives on Metaphor, 48-62. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Rigotto, Eddo and Andrea Rocci 2005 From argument analysis to cultural keywords (and back again). In: Frans H. van Eemeren and Peter Houtlosser (eds.), Argumentation in Practice, 125-142. Electr. resource. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Rissanen, Matti 2004 Computerized corpora and the study of the history of English. Proceedings. 2004 International Conference in Commemoration of the 50th Anniversary. English Studies in an Era of Globalization. June 1518, 2004. The Academy of Korean Studies. The English Language and Literature Association of Korea. Romaine, Suzanne 1997 World Englishes: Standards and the new world order. In: Larry E. Smith and Michael L. Forman (eds.), World Englishes 2000, ix-xvi. Honolulu: University of Hawaii & East-West Center. 2000 Communicating Gender. Electronic resource. Boulder (CO): netLibrary. 2002 The impact of language policy on endangered languages. International Journal on Multicultural Societies 4(2). Protecting Endangered Minority Languages: Sociolinguistic Perspectives. Ed. by Matthias Koenig. UNESCO. [www.unesco.org/most/vl4n2romaine.pdf access 10/02/04]. Rosch, Eleanor 1973a On the internal structure of perceptual and semantic categories. In: Timothy E. Moore (ed.), Cognitive Development and the Acquisition of Language, 111-144. New York: Academic Press. 1973b Natural categories. Cognitive Psychology 4: 328-350. 1975 Cognitive reference points. Cognitive Psychology 7: 532-547. 1978 Principles of categorization. In: Eleanor Rosch and Barbara B. Lloyd (eds.), Cognition and Categorization, 27-48. Hillsdale (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum. 1999 Reclaiming concepts. Journal of Consciousness Studies 6(11-12): 61-77.

262

References

Roy-Campbell, Zaline M. 2001 Empowerment Through Language: The African Experience – Tanzania and Beyond. Trenton (NJ): Africa World Press. RPWAE (Research Project on West African English) in progr. Linguistics Department of the Institute for English and American Studies, Humboldt University Berlin. [Description on www2.hu-berlin.de/angl/WAfr/wafr.html]. Saho, Bala 1994 The Road to My Village. Helsinki (Finland): Trittum Oy. Said, Edward 1978 Orientalism. New York: Random House. Salami, Oladipo L. 2006 Creating God in our own image: The attributes of God in the Yoruba socio-cultural environment. In: Tope Omoniyi and Joshua Fishman (eds.), Readings in the Sociology of Language and Religion, 42-59. [Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture 20]. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Sanders, Todd 2001 Save our skins: Structural adjustment, morality and the occult in Tanzania. In: Henrietta L. Moore and Todd Sanders (eds.), Magical Interpretations, Material Reality: Modernity, Witchcraft and the Occult in Postcolonial Africa, 160-183. London: Routledge. Sapir, Edward 1921 Language. An Introduction to the Study of Speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company. Schäfer, Thorsten, Lars Schäfer, Tina Hermann, and Robert W. Kranz 2002 Dictionary for Liberian English – the Original. [www.bong-town.com/Bong_Town/Links/Dictionary.html access 14/06/06]. Schatzberg, Michael G. 1986 The metaphors of father and family. In: Michael G. Schatzberg and William I. Zartman (eds.), The Political Economy of Cameroon, 1-19. New York: Praeger. 2001 Political Legitimacy in Middle Africa: Father, Family, Food. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Schmid, Hans-Joerg and Karina Kopatsch 2003 Conceptual structure of concrete nouns in Nigerian English. Paper presented at the 8th International Cognitive Linguistics Conference: Cognitive Linguistics, Functionalism, Discourse Studies: Common Ground and New Directions. Logroño, July 20-25, 2003. Schmid, Hans-Jörg 2003 Do women and men really live in different cultures? Evidence from the BNC. In: Andrew Wilson, Paul Rayson and Tony McEnery (eds.), Corpus Linguistics by the Lune. A Festschrift for Geoffrey Leech. [ŁódĨ Studies in Language 8]. Frankfurt (Main): Peter Lang.

References

263

Schmidt, Lawrence K. 2000 Participation and ritual: Dewy and Gadamer on language. In: Lawrence K. Schmidt (ed.), Language and Linguisticality in Gadamer’s Hermeneutics, 127-142. Lanham – Boulder – New York – Oxford: Lexington Books. Schmied, Josef 1990 Corpus linguistics and non-native varieties of English. World Englishes 9(3): 255-268. 1991 English in Africa: An Introduction. Burnt Mill: Longman. 2004 Cultural discourse in the Corpus of East African English and beyond: Possibilities and problems of lexical and collocational research in a one million-word corpus. World Englishes 23(2): 251-260. Schneider, David M. 1984 A Critique of the Study of Kinship. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Schneider, Edgar W. 1998 Editorial. English World-Wide: A Journal of Varieties of English 19(1): 1-5. 2003 The dynamics of new Englishes: From identity construction to dialect birth. Language 79(2): 233-281. 2005 Review of Gunnel Melchers and Philip Shaw “World Englishes. An Introduction”. English World-Wide 26(1): 97-99. Schröder, Anne 2003 Status, Functions, and Prospects of Pidgin English: An Empirical Approach to Language Dynamics in Cameroon. Tübingen: Narr. Schwab Zimmer, Monika n.d. “Seven Plus One”: Meinungen über Aids im anglophonen Kamerun. [pages.unibas.ch/afrika/papers/msz.sevenplusone.pdf access 02/06/05]. 2001 “Seven Plus One”: Meinungen und Vorstellungen über HIV/Aids im anglophonen Kamerun. Lizentiatsarbeit, Universität Bern. Scollon, Ron and Suzanne Wong Scollon 2001 Intercultural Communication: A Discourse Approach. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell. Scott, Mike 2001 Comparing corpora and identifying key words, collocations, frequency distributions through WordSmith Tools suite for computer programs. In: Mohsen Ghadessy, Alex Henry, and Robert L. Roseberry (eds.), Small Corpus Studies and ELT: Theory and Practice, 47-67. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Scott, Mike and Christopher Tribble 2006 Textual Patterns: Key Words and Corpus Analysis in Language Education. [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 22]. Electronic resource. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Scott, Mike and Oxford University Press 1998 WordSmith 3. CD-ROM. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

264

References

Seidlhofer, Barbara 2003 A concept of international English and related issues: From ‘real English’ to ‘realistic English.’ Language Policy Division. DG IV – Directorate of School, Out-of-School and Higher Education. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. [www.coe.int/T/E/Cultural_Co-operation/education/Languages/ Language_Policy/Policy_development_activities/Studies/Seidlhofer EN.pdf access 10/02/04]. Setiloane, Gabriel M. 1993 Civil authority – from the perspective of African theology. In: Jacob K. Olupona and Sulayman S. Nyang (eds.), Religious Plurality in Africa: Essays in Honor of John S. Mbiti, 145-164. [Religion and Society 32]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Shank, Roger C. and Robert P. Abelson 1977 Scripts, Plans, Goals and Understanding. Hillsdale (NJ): Erlbaum. Sharifian, Farzad 2001 Schema-based processing in Australian speakers of Aboriginal English. Language and Intercultural Communication 1(2): 120-134. 2003 On cultural conceptualisations. Journal of Cognition and Culture 3(3): 187-206. 2004 Cultural conceptualizations in Aboriginal English: Empowering Aboriginal children in the classroom. LAUD Papers No. 621. Essen: LAUD. 2006 A cultural-conceptual approach and world Englishes: The case of Aboriginal English. World Englishes 25(1): 11-22. SIL (Summer Institute of Linguistics) 2004 Ethnologue. [Country files: www.sil.org/ethnologue/countries/ access 04/04/05]. Silva, Penny [in collaboration with Wendy Dore et al.] 1996 A Dictionary of South African English on Historical Principles. Oxford: Oxford University Press [in association with the Dictionary Unit for South African English]. Simo Bobda, Augustin 1994a Aspects of Cameroon English Phonology. Bern: Peter Lang. 1994b Watch Your English!: A Collection of Remedial Lessons in English Usage. Yaounde: A.M.A. 1994c Lexical innovation processes in Cameroon English. World Englishes 13(2): 245-260. 1995 The phonologies of Nigerian English and Cameroon English. In: Bamgbose, Ayo, Ayo Banjo, and Andrew Thomas (eds.). New Englishes: A West African Perspective, 248-268. Ibadan: Mosuro; Trenton (NJ) (1997): Africa World Press. 1997 Sociocultural constraints in EFL teaching in Cameroon. In: Martin Pütz (ed.), The Cultural Context in Foreign Language Teaching, 221-240. Berlin – Frankfurt (Main): Peter Lang.

References 1998

265

On the Indigenization of English in Cameroon and New Englishisms. LAUD Papers N° 441. Essen: LAUD. 2000a Comparing some phonological features across African accents of English. English Studies 81(3): 249-266. 2000b English pronunciation in Sub-Saharan Africa as illustrated by the NURSE vowel. English Today 64 16(4): 41-48, 59. 2001 East and Southern African English accents. World Englishes 20(3): 269284. 2003 The formation of regional and national features in African English pronunciation: An exploration of some non-interference factors. English World-Wide 24(1), 17-42. 2004 Linguistic apartheid: English language policy in Africa. English Today 77 20(1): 19-26. 2007 Some segmental rules of Nigerian English phonology. English WorldWide 28(3): 279-310. Simo Bobda, Augustin and Beban Sammy Chumbow 1999 The trilateral process in Cameroon English phonology: Underlying representations and phonological processes in non-native Englishes. English World-Wide 20(1): 35-65. Simo Bobda, Augustin and Hans-Georg Wolf 2003 Pidgin English in Cameroon in the new millennium. In: Peter Lucko, Lothar Peter, and Hans-Georg Wolf (eds.), Studies in African Varieties of English, 101-117. Berlin – Frankfurt (Main): Peter Lang. Simo Bobda, Augustin, Hans-Georg Wolf, and Lothar Peter 1999 Identifying regional and national origin of English-speaking Africans seeking asylum in Germany. Forensic Linguistics 6(2): 300319. Sinclair, John M. 1994 Trust the text. In: Malcolm Coulthard (ed.), Advances in Written Text Analysis, 13-25. London: Routledge 2001 Preface. In: Mohsen Ghadessy, Alex Henry and Robert L. Roseberry (eds.), Small Corpus Studies and ELT: Theory and Practice, vii-xv. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Singer, Judson J. 1995 World Wide Wisdom. [www.gmi.edu/~jsinger/proverb.htm access 11/05/99] Singler, John V. 1987 Where did Liberian English na come from? English World-Wide 8(1): 69-95. 1990 The impact of decreolization upon T-M-A: Tenselessness, mood, and aspect in Kru Pidgin English. In: John V. Singler (ed.), Pidgin and Creole Tense-Mood-Aspect Systems, 203-230. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 1997 The configuration of Liberia’s Englishes. World Englishes 16(2): 205231.

266

References

Skandera, Paul 2003 Drawing a Map of Africa: Idiom in Kenyan English. [Language in Performance 26]. Tübingen: Gunter Narr. Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove 2000 Linguistic Genocide in Education: Or the Worldwide Diversity and Human Rights? Mahwah (NJ) – London: Erlbaum. 2003 Linguistic diversity and biodiversity: The threat from killer languages. In: Christian Mair (ed.), The Politics of English as a World Language. New Horizons in Postcolonial Cultural Studies, 31-52. [ASNEL Papers 7]. Amsterdam – New York: Rodopi. Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove and Robert Phillipson (eds.) 1994 Linguistic Human Rights. Overcoming Linguistic Discrimination. [Contributions to the Sociology of Language 67]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Skybina, Valentina 2004 Global language: What does it amount to? Paper presented at the International Conference in Commemoration of the 50th Anniversary. English Studies in an Era of Globalization. June 15-18, 2004. The Academy of Korean Studies. The English Language and Literature Association of Korea. SMA (Society of African missions) 2004 Gelede mask to protect man from witches. [www.smafathers.org/box-2.htm access on 12/04/05]. Smith, Larry E. and Michael L. Forman (eds.) 1997 World Englishes 2000. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press. Smith, Larry E. (ed.) 1981 English for Cross-Cultural Communication. London: Macmillan. Spencer, John (ed.) 1971 The English Language in West Africa. [English Language Series]. London: Longman. Sperber, Dan and Deirdre Wilson 1995 [1986]. Relevance. Communication and Cognition. 2nd. ed. Oxford – Cambridge (US): Blackwell. Stanlaw, James 2004 Japanese English: Language and Culture Contact. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. Steinmann, Horst and Andreas G. Scherer (eds.) 1998 Zwischen Universalismus und Relativismus. Philosophische Grundlagenprobleme des Interkulturellen Managements. Frankfurt (Main): Suhrkamp. Stern 2003 Der Kannibale. 31: 41-56. Strauss, Claudia and Naomi Quinn 1997 A Cognitive Theory of Cultural Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

References

267

Stubbs, Michael 1996 Text and Corpus Analysis: Computer-Assisted Studies of Language and Culture. Oxford: Blackwell. 2001 Words and Phrases: Corpus Studies of Lexical Semantics. Oxford: Blackwell. Szeftel, Morris 1998 Misunderstanding African politics: Corruption and the governance agenda. Review of African Political Economy 25(76): 221-240. 2000a Between governance and underdevelopment: Accumulation and Africa’s ‘catastrophic corruption’. Review of African Political Economy 27(84): 287-306. 2000b Clientelism, corruption and catastrophe. Review of African Political Economy 27(85): 427-441. Talla Sando Ouafeu, Yves 2006 Intonational Meaning in Cameroon English Discourse: A Sociolinguistic Perspective. Göttingen: Cuvillier. Tambiah, Stanley J. 1973 Form and meaning of magical arts: A point of view. In: Robin Horton and Ruth Finnegan (eds.), Modes of Thought. Essays on Thinking in Western and Non-Western Societies, 199-229. London: Faber & Faber. Tangri, Roger 1999 The Politics of Patronage in Africa. Parastatals, Privatization, and Private Enterprise. Oxford: James Currey. Taylor, John R. 1990 Schemas, prototypes, and models. In: Savas L. Tsohatzidis (ed.), Meanings and Prototypes: Studies in Linguistic Categorization, 521534. London: Routledge. 1993 Approaches to Word Meaning: The Network Model (Langacker) and the Two-Level Model (Bierwisch) in Comparison. In: René Dirven and Johan Vanparys (eds.), Current Approaches to the Lexicon, 3-26. Frankfurt (Main) – Berlin: Peter Lang. 1995 Linguistic Categorization. Prototypes in Linguistic Theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Tengan, Alexis B. 1994 European languages in African society and culture: A view on cultural authenticity. In: Martin. Pütz (ed.), Language Contact and Language Conflict, 125–138. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. The Cameroon Post (Cameroon) 1996a August 20: 1. [cit. on www.moretofollow.com/Africa.htm#ManShakesHand] 1996b August 27: Cover story. [cit. on www.moretofollow.com/Africa.htm#ManShakesHand] The Department of Linguistics, The University of Hong Kong 2005 Reach out for English. [www.hku.hk/reachout/ access 20/12/06].

268

References

The Grasslanda (Cameroon) 2001 001, June 15. The Guardian Post 2001 The ‘Graffi’ people: How they came. 002, September 10: 8. The Herald (Cameroon) 1996 “A force to reckon with!” August 26: 5. [cit. on www.moretofollow.com/Africa.htm#ManShakesHand] 1998 Nso gets new kingmaker. By Berinyuy Willie Shiyuntum. March 18-19: 5. The Herald Observer (Cameroon) 1998 March 5-11. The ICE East Africa Homepage n.d. Provided by the Chemnitz University of Technology. [www.tu-chemnitz.de/phil/english/chairs/linguist/real/independent/ICEEA/index.html access 20/12/06] The Jealous Witch-Wife. n.d. From: Robert Hamill Nassau (1904): Fetishism in West Africa. New York. [www.thesouk.com/words/read/africawitch.htm access 02/02/04]. The Mail (Cameroon) 2001 Cameroon immigration use Nigerians to grow fat – says Nigerian diplomat. By Harry Mac Yemti. 50, September 5: 1, 3. The Post (Cameroon) 2001 0306, September 10. Thumboo, Edwin (ed.) 2002 The Three Circles of English. Singapore: UniPress. TI (Transparency International) 2004 Corruption Perception Index 2003. [www.transparency.org/pressreleases_archive/2003/2003.10.07. cpi.en.html access 06/01/04]. Tickoo, Makhan L. (ed.) 1991 Languages and Standards: Issues, Attitudes, Case Studies. [Anthology Series 26]. Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre. Tiomajou, David 1995 The Cameroon English corpus project. In: Ayo Bamgbose, Ayo Banjo, and Andrew Thomas (eds.), New Englishes: A West African Perspective, 349-366. Ibadan: Mosuro [Trenton (NJ), 1997: Africa World Press]. Todd, Loreto 1982 The English language in West Africa. In: Richard Bailey and Manfred Görlach (eds.), English as a World Language, 281-305. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Tognini-Bonelli, Elena 2001 Corpus Linguistics at Work. [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 6]. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Trudgill, Peter and Jean Hannah 1986 International English. A Guide to Varieties of Standard English. London: Edward Arnold.

References

269

Tummers, Jose, Kris Heylen, and Dirk Geeraerts 2005 Usage-based approaches in Cognitive Linguistics: A technical state of the art. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 1(2): 225-261. Turner, Mark 1987 Death is the Mother of Beauty: Mind, Metaphor, Criticism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Turner, Mark and Gilles Fauconnier 1995 Conceptual integration and formal expression. [philosophy.uoregon.edu/metaphor/turner.htm access 29/05/02]. University of Durham n.d. Alcohol in East Africa, 1850-1999. [www.dur.ac.uk/History/web/drinkingit.htm#names access 22/02/06]. van Binsbergen, Wim 2000 Witchcraft in modern Africa as virtualised boundary conditions of the kinship order. [www.geocities.com/africanreligion/witchtxt.htm access 12/02/02]. van Dijk, Rijk 2001 Witchcraft and scepticism by proxy: Pentecostalism and laughter in urban Malawi. In: Henrietta L. Moore and Todd Sanders (eds.), Magical Interpretations, Material Reality: Modernity, Witchcraft and the Occult in Postcolonial Africa, 97-117. London: Routledge. Vasilache, Andreas 2003 Interkulturelles Verstehen nach Gadamer und Foucault. Frankfurt (Main) – New York: Campus Verlag. Verschueren, Jef 1999 Understanding Pragmatics. [Understanding Language Series]. London: Arnold. 2003 “Culture” between interaction and cognition: Bridge or gap? In: Carlos Inchaurralde and Celia Florén (eds.), Interaction and Cognition in Linguistics, 3-14. Berlin – Frankfurt (Main): Peter Lang. Verschueren, Jef, Jan-Ola Östman, and Jan Blommaert 1995 Preface. In: Jef Verschueren, Jan-Ola Östman and Jan Blommaert (eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics, ix-xiv. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Violi, Patrizia 2003 Embodiment at the crossroads between cognition and semiosis. Sémiotique cognitive – Cognitive Semiotics. Recherches en Communication 19: 199-217. Vygotsky [Wygotski], Lev S. 1977 [1934]. Denken und Sprechen. Frankfurt (Main): Fischer. Wachterhauser, Brice 2002 Getting it right: Relativism, realism and truth. In: Robert J. Dostal (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Gadamer, 52-78. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

270

References

Waliggo, John M. n.d. Corruption and bribery – An African problem? Nkozi: Uganda Martyrs University. [www.fiuc.org/iaup/esap/publications/umu/umusca/corruptionandbriber y.pdf access 10/04/03]. Wardhaugh, Ronald 1999 Proper English. Myths and Misunderstandings about Language. Oxford: Blackwell WCL 2005 Thematic Text Compilation of African English. Online Sources. Compiled by Frank Polzenhagen. Humboldt University, Berlin. Weekes-Vagliani, Winifred 1976 Family Life and Structure in Southern Cameroon. Paris: OECD. Weideman, Albert and Birgit Smieja 2006 Empowerment through Language and Education: Cases and Case Studies from North America, Europe, Africa and Japan. [Duisburg Papers on Research in Language and Culture 65]. Berlin – Frankfurt (Main): Peter Lang. Weinrich, Harald 1976 Sprache in Texten. Stuttgart: Klett. Whorf, Benjamin L. 1956 Language, Thought, and Reality. Ed. by John Carrol. Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press. Wierzbicka, Anna 1991 Cross-Cultural Pragmatics. The Semantics of Human Interaction. [Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs 53]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 1992 Semantics, Culture, and Cognition: Universal Human Concepts in Culture-Specific Configurations. New York – Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1995 Lexicon as a key to history, culture and society. In: René Dirven and Johan Vanparys (eds.), Current Approaches to the Lexicon, 103-155. Berlin – Frankfurt (Main): Peter Lang. 1996 Semantics: Primes and Universals. Oxford – New York: Oxford University Press. 1997 Understanding Cultures through Their Key Words: English, Russian, Polish, German, and Japanese. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1999 Emotions Accross Languages and Cultures: Diversity and Universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Williams, Gabriel I. E. 2002 Liberia – The Heart of Darkness: Accounts of Liberia’s Civil War and Its Destabilizing Effects in the West Africa. Victoria (BC): Trafford. Williams, Raymond 1985 [1976]. Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society. Rev. ed. New York: Oxford University Press.

References

271

Wladarsch, Evelyn 2004 Notions of time in Burkina Faso. In: Anne Schröder (ed.), Crossing Borders: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Africa, 117-132. [Afrikanische Studien 23]. Münster: LIT Verlag. Wolf, Angelika 1996 Essensmetaphern im Kontext von Aids und Hexerei in Malawi. In: Angelika Wolf and Michael Stürzer (eds.), Die gesellschaftliche Konstruktion von Befindlichkeit. Ein Sammelband zur Medizinethnologie, 205-221. [Beiträge zur Ethnomedizin 2]. Berlin: Verlag für Wissenschaft und Bildung. Wolf, Hans-Georg 1994 A Folk Model of the ‘Internal Self’ in Light of the Contemporary View of Metaphor – The Self as Subject and Object. Berlin – Frankfurt (Main): Peter Lang. 1999 From mother tongue to second language: The cultural model of ‘community’ in African English. La Langue Maternelle. Cahiers Charles V 27: 75-91. 2001 English in Cameroon. [Contributions to the Sociology of Language 85]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 2003 The contextualization of common core terms in West African English: Evidence from computer corpora. In: Peter Lucko, Lothar Peter, and Hans-Georg Wolf (eds.), Studies in African Varieties of English, 3-20. Berlin – Frankfurt (Main): Peter Lang. 2004 Cultural approaches to second language varieties of English: A call for new methodologies and a review of some findings on (West) African English. In: Anne Schröder (ed.), Crossing Borders: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Africa, 133-149. [Afrikanische Studien 23]. Münster: LIT Verlag. 2006 Religion and traditional belief in West African English: A linguistic analysis. In: Tope Omoniyi and Joshua Fishman (eds.), Readings in the Sociology of Language and Religion, 42-59. [Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture 20]. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 2008fc A cognitive linguistic approach to World Englishes: The emergence of a new paradigm. In: Gitte Kristiansen and René Dirven (eds.), Cognitive Sociolinguistics: Language Variation, Cultural Models, Social Systems. [Cognitive Linguistics Research]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Wolf, Hans-Georg and Augustin Simo Bobda 2001 The African cultural model of community in English language instruction in Cameroon: The need for more systematicity. In: Martin Pütz, Susanne Niemeier, and René Dirven (eds.), Applied Cognitive Linguistics: Theory, Acquisition and Language Pedagogy, 225-259. [Cognitive Linguistic Research 19.2.]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

272

References

Wolf, Hans-Georg and Frank Polzenhagen 2006 Intercultural communication in English – Arguments for a cognitivelyoriented approach to intercultural pragmatics. Intercultural Pragmatics 3(3): 285-322. 2007 Fixed expressions as manifestations of cultural conceptualizations: Examples from African varieties of English. In: Paul Skandera (ed.), Phraseology and Culture in English, 399-435. [Topics in English Linguistics 54]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Wolf, Hans-Georg and Herbert Igboanusi 2003 A comparison of lexical items in Nigerian English and Cameroon English. In: Peter Lucko, Lothar Peter, and Hans-Georg Wolf (eds.), Studies in African Varieties of English, 69-81. Berlin – Frankfurt (Main): Peter Lang. 2006 Empowerment through English – a realistic view of the educational promotion of English in postcolonial contexts: The case of Nigeria. In: Martin Pütz, Joshua Fishman, and JoAnne Neff-van Aertselaer (eds.), Along the Routes to Power: Explorations of the Empowerment through Language, 333-356. [Contributions to the Sociology of Language 92]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Wollock, Jeffrey 2001 Linguistic diversity and biodiversity: Some implications for the language sciences. In: Luisa Maffi (ed.), On Biocultural Diversity. Linking Language, Knowledge, and the Environment, 248-262. Washington – London: Smithsonian Institution Press. Wong, Jock Onn 2004 Cultural scripts, ways of speaking and perceptions of personal autonomy: Anglo English vs. Singapore English. Intercultural Pragmatics 1(2), 231-248. World Religions n.d. Confucian thought. [wrc.lingnet.org/confuc.htm access 24/11/04]. Yajun, Jiang 2002 Metaphors the English language lives by. English Today 18(3): 55-64. Yu, Ning 1998 The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor: A Perspective from Chinese. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Yule, George 1996 Pragmatics. [Oxford Introductions to Language Study]. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Zang Zang, Paul n.d. Emprunts et norme(s) en Français contemporain: Le cas de Cameroun. [www.unice.fr/ILF-CNRS/ofcaf/13/zang.html access 02/05/05]. Ziemke, Tom, Jordan Zlatev, and Roslyn M. Frank (eds.) 2007 Body, Language, and Mind. Vol. I: Embodiment. [Cognitive Linguistic Research 35.1]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

References

273

Zlatev, Jordan 1999 Situated Embodied Semantics and Connectionist Modeling. In: Jens Allwood and Peter Gärdenfors (eds.), Cognitive Semantics: Meaning and Cognition, 173-194. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 2007 Embodiment, language, and mimesis. In: Tom Ziemke, Jordan Zlatev, and Roslyn M. Frank (eds.), Body, Language, and Mind. Vol. I: Embodiment, 297-337. [Cognitive Linguistic Research 35.1]. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Zuengler, Jane E. 1983 Kenyan English. In: Braj B. Kachru (ed.), The Other Tongue: English Across Cultures, 112-124. Oxford: Pergamon.

Index

acculturation 26 African English xiii, 4-7, 9-10, 12, 33, 48, 50-51, 55-57, 68, 72, 77, 84, 92, 94, 110, 121, 146, 160-161, 164, 195, 204, 212 African French 95, 145 African politics 108, 121, 139, 159171, 174-175, 179, 213 Africanization 26 AIDS 130 Aku 8 Alienationism 23-24, 26, 145 American English 2, 12, 35, 49, 51-52, 82 ancestors 75, 79, 84-85, 101-107, 109, 111, 115-120, 170-171 ancestors, conceptualization of 66, 7576, 79, 85, 102-107, 111-120, 149, 170-171 anthropology 30-31, 74, 121-122, 178179 anthropology, cognitive 29, 31, 55, 64, 179 applied linguistics 10-11, 15-16 Arabic 21, 166 Australian Aboriginal English 18, 3032, 35 Australian English 26, 30-31, 33 Bakossi 107, 109, 125 Bildfeldmodell (image-field model) 57, 64 Blending Theory 34, 58 Botswana 7 British English 11-12, 39, 49, 51 British National Corpus ix, 49 Brown corpus 49, 52

Cameroon ix, 5-6, 8-10, 12, 14, 49-50, 54-55, 73, 75, 77-79, 81, 84-88, 91, 93-95, 98, 100, 103, 107, 109-111, 113, 115-121, 125-126, 128, 130136, 141-142, 146, 150, 154-156, 164, 190-193, 213, 215, 217 Cameroon English 5-6, 10, 12, 14, 50, 77, 94-95, 110-111, 146 Camfranglais 9, 95 cannibalism 126, 173-174 Chinese Australian English 31 Chinese culture 33-34, 37 Christian 80, 108-109, 113-114, 147 Christianity 108-109, 142, 209 circles of English 2-3, 7, 11 Cognitive Phonology 40 Cognitive Sociolinguistics ix, xi-xiii, 19, 27, 35, 48, 51, 96, 178-180, 188, 200, 207, 209 collectivist 81 collocation 37, 39, 48-51, 110-112, 114, 120, 146, 148-149, 153, 180181, 184, 200, 210 colonization 13, 21, 25-27, 46, 108109, 123, 145, 167 common sense 122-123, 130, 186 community (also see family) xi, xiii, 46-49, 56-57, 60, 64, 70, 72-126, 134-135, 140-141, 144, 154, 156162, 168, 171, 174-180, 187, 189191, 193, 198, 209-210, 213-219 comparative frequency analysis 52, 81, 97, 110, 112, 120 Congo-Brazzaville 21 contextualization 7, 145 conversational maxims 189

276

Index

corpus design 51, 53 corpus linguistic methods xi, 49, 52, 81, 97, 110, 112, 120 corpus linguistics xi, 4, 15, 39, 48-49, 52, 55, 187-188, 200, 209 corruption 54, 72, 94-101, 154-155, 166, 213-219 cosmology, African xiii, 101, 106, 109, 115, 122, 134, 169, 209 Cote d’Ivoire 174 Critical Discourse Analysis 43 cultural conceptualization xii, 24, 29, 31, 33, 35, 54, 58, 65, 93, 145, 178, 180, 183, 189-190, 193-195, 198, 201-202, 209-211 cultural keyword 17, 36-39, 48, 50, 101, 180, 210 Cultural Linguistics xi, 18, 28-29 cultural model xi, xiii, 29, 32-35, 44, 56-57, 60, 64-74, 77, 80-81, 99, 103106, 116, 119, 124, 158-159, 177180, 185-186, 191-193, 196-201, 206-207, 209 cultural schema 29, 31-32, 96 cultural script 32, 35 culture (see cultural conceptualization, cultural keyword, cultural model, cultural schema, cultural script) death 81, 98, 107, 109, 116, 126, 128131, 136, 149-151, 154-155 descriptivism 16-23, 26-27, 40, 179, 207 desire 70, 92, 140, 145, 164, 175 dictionary 9-10, 18, 37-38, 54, 145, 211 dictionary, variety 9, 211-212 disease (see illness) domain, theory of 36-38, 58-60, 180181, 211 Dutch 44, 198 Dyrbal 59 East Africa ix, 5-7, 9-10, 21, 50, 114, 136-137, 147, 210 East African English ix, 9-10, 12, 50

eating, as a source domain 38, 48, 54, 69-72, 78, 92-99, 106, 126-127, 130, 133, 141-145, 156-158, 162-166, 174-176, 210, 213-219 ecolinguistics 12-13, 15, 21, 24-25 ecology of language 12, 15 embodiment 27, 61-62 endonormative 11, 47 English English 11, 42, 52 English language, conceptualization of 44-46, 175, 189 Enlightenment 44, 121, 186 envy 128, 140-141, 154-155 Ewe 35, 92, 128-129, 141-142 exonormative 11 experience 28, 31, 33, 37, 59-63, 66, 77, 92, 103, 107, 121-123, 136, 159160, 185-187, 202-205 expert model 43, 47, 186-187 family, African model of 73 family, as a source domain 26, 30-34, 46, 48, 52, 61, 66-67, 73-74, 77-80, 83-93, 96-100, 103-107, 115-121, 126-130, 136-145, 150, 152, 159162, 167-168, 171, 175, 190-195, 198, 213-215, 217 family, Western model of 31, 67, 73, 75, 87-90 FLOB corpus 49-50, 52-53, 82, 147, 152 folk model 43, 47, 64, 74, 80, 125, 185-186 francophone Africa 93, 145 French 9, 93, 95, 103, 145 FROWN corpus 49, 51-53, 82, 147 functionalism xii-xiii, 183, 188-190, 197, 202-203, 207, 210 Gambia 6, 8-9, 21, 91 genealogy 66, 74-75, 103, 118, 190192 Ghana 8-9, 50, 76, 92, 109, 121, 128, 131, 134, 141-142, 170, 173-174, 216

Ghanaian English 9, 50, 134 Ghanaian Pidgin English 8, 17

Index gift-giving 95-96, 106, 213-214, 217, 219 globalization 1, 13, 20, 23, 45 greed 94, 127, 214, 218 habitus 64, 77, 124, 159, 189-190 Haussa 21, 216 healing 110, 124, 126, 149 health 79, 110, 123, 129-130, 140, 148-149, 154, 209, 216 hermeneutic xii, xiv, 55, 183-188, 194, 199-200, 202-203, 205-207, 210 hermeneutics xii, 184-186, 203, 207 Hindu 109 Hong Kong vii, 3, 10-11, 21, 33-34, 50, 54, 92 Hong Kong English 3, 11, 33-34, 50 hybridizationism 16, 22-24, 26-28, 47 ICE corpus ix, 4, 50-52, 84 ICM (see Idealized Cognitive Model) Idealized Cognitive Model ix, 64-66 identity 7, 20, 22, 39, 45, 75, 77-81, 91-92, 118, 193 Igbo 42, 79, 106, 129, 144, 165, 167 illness 104, 125-126, 128-130, 136, 140, 149-152 Indian English 2, 17 indigenization 23, 26 individualist 81 intercultural communication xiii-xiv, 19, 181, 183-184, 188-191, 193-207 intercultural pragmatics xi, xiii, 183, 186, 201, 207, 210 Islam 108, 113-114, 144, 209 jealousy 128, 143-144 Kenya 5, 9, 50, 79, 114, 127, 147, 174 Kenyan English 5, 9, 50 keyness 38-39, 51, 111 keyword, cultural xiii, 17-18, 36-39, 48, 50-51, 54, 83-86, 90, 97-101, 110-111, 114-115, 119, 149-151, 154-157, 180, 210-211 killer language 22-24, 193 kinship (see family) kinship terms, theory of 29-31, 67, 72, 77, 79-80, 91

277

kinship terms, use of 83-84, 88-91, 191-193, 201, 204 Kiswahili 7, 21, 94 Krio 8 leadership 53, 72, 108, 110, 162, 164165, 169-172, 175-177, 214, 217, 219 lexicography 5, 8-9, 15, 48, 211-212 Liberia 2, 8-9, 50, 75, 78, 107, 109, 126, 132, 138, 162, 168, 173-175, 213 Lingala 21 lingua franca, English as 19, 184, 201, 206 linguistic situation xiii, 4, 6-8, 12, 15, 20-21 LOB corpus 49, 52 Maka 126, 129, 142, 214 Malawi 109, 130, 141, 174 metaphor, conceptual 29, 46, 48-49, 57-59, 61, 68-71, 125, 163 metatheory, sociolinguistic 3, 43-45 metonymy, conceptual 17, 57-59, 6869, 125, 180 Munukutuba 21 Muslim 80, 114, 198 nativization 26, 28 Natural Semantic Metalanguage ix, 3536 networks, conceptual 55, 57, 70-72, 85, 92, 94, 100, 145, 163-164, 175-176, 180, 193, 209 neural structures 61-63 New Englishes 2, 19, 22-23, 26, 30, 42, 46, 211-212 Nigeria 2, 4-6, 8, 9-10, 12, 14, 33, 40, 50-51, 76, 79-80, 93-96, 109, 126128, 132-133, 137-138, 143-145, 160-161, 163, 165, 173-174, 179, 213, 217 Nigerian English 2, 4-6, 8-10, 12, 14, 33, 40, 50-51, 95, 143, 145, 161 Nigerian Pidgin English 8, 93 nurture 66-68, 75, 91-92, 97, 99-100, 154, 160, 162, 212

278

Index

obligation, mutual xiii, 30-31, 72, 9192, 96, 105-106, 134, 141, 158, 160, 168, 209 occult 76, 92, 108-110, 116, 118, 120121, 126-130, 134, 138-139, 141, 146, 152, 155, 169-177, 213-215, 218 Pacific region 13, 24 pidgins and creoles 8 post-colonial 26, 137 prejudice 185-188, 199-200, 204, 207 prototype 15, 29-30, 33, 40-41, 67, 73 rationalist model 44 relativism 23-24, 74, 202-204, 208, 210 relevance theory 191-192, 203 ritual murder 137-138, 173-175 romantic model 13, 22, 24, 44-45, 205 Shona 103 Sierra Leone 6, 8-9, 126, 171-172, 174 Singapore English 3, 35 South Africa 5, 7, 9, 21, 50-51, 79, 94, 121, 130, 133, 136, 140 South African English 5, 9, 50-51 speech acts 125, 189, 191 spirits 84, 101-116, 127, 152, 170-171 spirituality xiii, 48, 72, 101, 103, 108112, 146, 170, 209 sports 87, 121, 139, 210 stereotype 41-42, 198, 200, 202 story schema 18, 31 structuralism 17-19, 180, 209 success 75, 108, 123, 133-134, 139140, 143, 149-150, 154, 165, 213 Sudan 7, 166 Swahili (see Kiswahili) Tanzania 5, 10, 50, 114, 127, 136-137, 139, 147, 174 Tanzanian English 5, 50 tertium comparationis 92 thick description 19, 55 Uganda 127, 135 Urhobo 128 usage-based xi-xii, 28, 48-49, 52, 58, 178, 211-212

wealth 72, 75-76, 92-94, 97-98, 106, 110, 121, 131, 133-143, 153, 155, 166, 173, 179, 213-216, 218-219 West Africa ix, 4, 6, 8-10, 12, 18, 21, 35, 54, 92-94, 101, 106, 108, 110111, 115, 125, 128, 131, 137, 142, 144, 149, 210, 212 West African English ix, 4, 9-10, 18, 54, 93-94, 110-111, 210, 212 witchcraft xiii, 53-54, 72, 76, 98, 108110, 113, 115-118, 120-160, 173177, 210, 213-216, 218-219 witchcraft, theories of 122-125 Wolof 21 WordSmith 38, 51, 82 World English 3, 6, 46 Yoruba 91, 129, 143-144, 161 Zambia 130, 134, 160 Zande 122