'i'J

AND LANGUAGTS CULTURT STRUCTURI, the indo- Eur opean, An Essaycom par ing _B y J o h a n G a lt u n g a n d F u mik oNjs h imu ra h a f t s k o l I e q z u B e rl i n ln ji ssensc h J aIl o t s t ra l3 e 1 9 1 0 0 0 B e rl' in 3 3 Jenuai"l,' '!983

-t

i on I n t r o d u ct
Th e purpose of this paper is t o e x a min et h e rc le o f la n g u a g e s a s car r jers m ati c wjll of soc'ial cosm o lo g y . I n d o in g t h is n o t h ' in g p ro b ' le in con n e c t io n wit h t h e t e rm " la n g u a g e " : be assumed

w e a r e referring to natural la n g u a g e s , a s t h e y a re writ t e n a n d a s the y a re spoken, by men and w o me n a ro u n d t h e wo rld . T h e t . it le limit s the subject but at the samet ime in d ' ic a t e s t h a t it is f a irly br o a d : "lndo-E uropeanlanguag e s " s t a n d s f o r a ma jo r f a mily o r "cla n " of languagesout of w h ic h we a re p a rt ic u la rly t h in k in g o f the o n es we happento be familia r wit h : No rwe g ia na n d t h e S c a n d ' ia n d E n g ljs h a n d Du t c h ; F re n c h , n a via n languages in general; G e rma n ' la n g u a g e . s g re rd 1 iD Ital'ia n and S panish and the Ro ma n ; Ru s s ia n a n d som eo ther S lavonic languages . He n c e it is o n ly o u t o f t ra d it io n in l'in gu'istics that we use the t e rm " I n d o -E u ro p e a n " . S im' i1 a r1 y wri t i n g a n d the w ord "Chjnese" als0 stand s f o r a f a mily o f la n g u a g e swjt h c o mmo n ce r tain common characterist'ic s a lt h o u g h it is Ma n d a rjn Ch in e s e weh a v e ha d i n m in d, and "JapaneS e"S tand Sf o r s t a n d a rd iz e d (n O n -v e rn a c u la r) Ja p a n esewhich itself is a fa mily o f la n g u a g e s , d e f in e d b y s o c ia l r ela t'i ons betweensender and re c e ' iv e r o f v e rb a l c o mmu n ic a t io n . Th en there is the jdea of c o s mo lo n r(. ' )t tis t a k e n h e re t o me a n "de e p structure" and "deep cu lt u re " . ih e r e is the qualifier I n t h a t e x p lic a t io n o f t h e is g' in d . ic a t e d . F irs t , con ce pt somethingmore than l^ J e lt a n s c h a u u n "deep" - p o in t in g t o t h a t wh ic h is n o t o n th e su rface, that which is de e p e r d o wn , imp lic it , la t e n t , n o t talke d about 'in general , unq u e s t ' io n e d ,a s s u me d .T h e n t h e re is t h e j uxta- p osition of "structure" a n d " c u lt u re " , d ls o f o u n d jn t h e ti tle of this essay. They are h e re s e e n a s b e in g a t t h e s a me le v e l,

- 2n o n eo f th e mp re ce d i n gth e o ther in a tempor alor causal sense, t h e r e b y re j e cti n g b o th th e " mater ialist" pos' ition that str uctur e for m at' ion) should shapecultur e or i p a r t j c u l a rl y so cj o - e co n o m.ic t h e "' i d e a l i st" p o si ti o n th a t cultur e is pr imar y and is m ater ialized i n s t r u ctu re - p o si ti o n s h e l do r espectively, in cer tain types of 'libera'! position taken her e a n d i 4 a rxi st th i n ki n g , in the W est( .2) th. i s n o t ne ce ssa ri l ya g n o sti c i n the sensethat' Since we do not know fi rst w e sh o uld take no stand on the m atter ", but wh'ich o n e co me s t r e a t e d I i ke a ch i cke na n d e gg pr oblem. Rather , the positjon ' i s t h a t b o th stru ctu re a n d cultur e ar e appar it.ions of the same oe n re r efer r ed to as"cosm ology". d e e p e rl yi n g p h e n o me n h But that 'l yi n g " not p h e n o me n o n eeper i s'U in the senseof bejng located som ewher e b e h i n d , b e l o w , b e n e a th o r b e yond str uctur e and/or cultur e. Rather , i i i s d ee p e ri n th e se n seo f being in themboth, but only to the e x t e n t th a t th e stru ctu re a n d cultur e.in question ar e "of the sam e jfestat' ions of k . i n d ", "o f th e sa me fa mi l y" - in other wor dsar e m an t h e s a me co smo l o gMy y. ri g h t handand m y left handar e both par ts o f m e , s o a re my th o u g h tsa n d my m entalactivity - but one usually d o e s n o t se e a n yo n e o f th e se as be' ingthe causeor the effect of the o t h e r b ut ra th e r a s a sp e c6 of "m e". That "m e"can be concejved of jn a m a t e r i a l, o rg a n i c / g e n e ti c senseand/or in a non- mater ial m ental/ g e n e t i c se n se .On ed a y w e mi ght per hapsbe better than we ar e today the two. In socioa t s e e j n g re i a ti o n s a n d si mi lar ities betv*een c u l t u r a l ma tte rs, h o w e ve r, the assum ption her e is that we can alr eady between what iss e e s u ch si mi l a ri ti e s, fo ri n s tance as isomor phisms u s u a l l y re fe rre d to a s stru ctur eandas cultur e, and that ' is exactly (o r mo rep recisely social cosmology) is about. co smo l o g y what ca m ost usages H ow ca n 'l a n g u a g e s" b e rr ier s of' bocial cosmology?' ln o f t h e te rms l a n g u a g e s a re seenas par ts of the cultur e of that nation, or language A s su ch they should or might expr ess,whenlooked co mmu n 'i ty.
ei a lo ng particular dimension s , s o l' n e b a s ic a s s u mp t jo n so f t h a t cultur e , carrjed by the ver-v la n g u a g e it s e lf . B u t t h e s a mea p p iie s langu a g e s in d u c e s t ru c t u re s b e t we e ns e n d e rs l n d t h e y s t ru c t u re t h e re a lit y an d r eceivers of verbal comm u n ic a t ' io na to the term "structure": w hich they try to mirror in th e ir e x p re s s io n s b e c a u s ed n Y ia n g u a g e i syste m 'itsel f, i n i ts syntax , h a v es t ru c t u re s t h a t t h ro u g h s e ma n t c r ule s i nduce structures on tha t wh ic h is re f le c t e d . P e rh a p s it s h o u ld

-J-

do not conceiveof the wor ds "s t r u c tu re " a n d " cu l tu re " a s ver y separ able.0n the contr ar y, ther e i s s t r u ctu re i n cu l tu re , a n d ever y str uctur e has or is a cultur e. T h e r e a so nfo r th 'i s i s th a t the ter m "str uctur e" is in fact am biguous : 0 n t h e o n e h a n d i t o fte n re fer s to m ater ial ar r angements, such a s u r b an a rch 'i te ctu re ;o n th e other handit r efer s to any k' indof patt e r n w h 'i ch in a logical for m,jn ter m s of a set ca n b e e xp re ss ed is o f e l e me n ts these elements. M athem at' ics a n d a se t o f re l ations among ca rryi n g str uctur es ' in this pur e for m. a n a b s tra ct l a n g u a g e So , th e p o i n t i s th a t a language takes str uctur al and cultur al stands; a n d p a rt.l y i n o rd e r not to have to say whetherthese built- in O o s j t i on sa re i n h e re n tl y mor estr uctur e or inher ently m or ecultur e, w e u s ea te rm th a t ca rri e s th ese deepaspectsof either : cosm ology ( e x a c t l y w h 'i ch below) a sp e ctsw 'i l 'l be elabor ated . Howeverin , saying t h i s ' i t sh o u l d a l so b e p o i n ted out that both "stand" or "positjon" as e x p r e s si o n sre to o stro n g . Rather , one might talk about"biases" a posing the m embe6 i n c e r ta 'i n d i re cti o n s,p re d 'i s to of one language com m uni ty , ac t, t o t h i n kra n d p e rce i ve th e w or ld in cer tain dir ections r ather than o t h e r s . A fte r a l l l a n g u a g e s ar e to a lar ge extent m utually tr ans) atab1e, ar e not discontinuous with each w i th mo n e o r l e ss success.The.v o t h e r . A p e rso nd e e p l y ste e pedjn one language com m unity can sur face f r o m i t a n d g e t su ff i c'i e n t depth in anotherto ser ve as a I i v' ing br idge ' language, w e e nt h e tw o . H e i s n o t cu t off fr om any other in pr .inciple. for life and mores o the Bu t t h e n h e 'i s a l so ma rke d b y his language exner ience accountfor a This t^r ould comm unity. l o n g e r he h a s l i ve d i n a p a rticular language c e r t a i n bj a s. 0 r, to w e a ke n th e expr essionstill m or e: for cer tain c j l l g l f l 1 ] -l ffg s. B e j n ga p a rt of one' language com m unity is not1npr evalent in another language c o m p a t i bl e w i th th e typ e o f co sm olgy c o m m u n ity. B u t h a vi n g b e e ntra ined jn one is hjghly com patible with i t comes t h e c o r r esp o n d i n g easy, by itself, so as to be co smo l g y; considered n o rma la n d n a tu ra l . so as not to stand out r adiatinq inpredispo s -e s ,t h a t is a ll we a re t ry ' in g t o s a y ; com p a ti bility. Language jt do e s not determine jn any un a mb ig u o u s vvay.

b e p o i nte d o u tth a t i n sa yi n g this we

- 42 . C o : mo l o gd y i me n si o n s analysjs a n d l anguage N o atte mp t w i l l b e ma de her e to justify the six djm ensions u s e d i n th e p re se n ta n d re l ated essaysforanalysis of cosm ologies, v ' t z .:

5PALL

T I ME KNOI,ILIDGE P E RS O N-NA T URT E RS O N P E RS OP NPTRSON PIRSONAL -TRANS

The ge n eral assumption'is that t h e s e s ix d ime n s ' io n s a re if n o t suffic'ie nt, at least necessar y in o rd e r t o d e s c rib e a c u lt u re , a n d m cr r epa r ticularly a macro-cul t u re , a c iv il jz a t io n . E a c h c u lt u re is see n as having a stand, a pos jt io n o n t h e s e s ' ix d ime n s io n s , a n d t h e qu e sti on js to what extent lan g u a g e sa re c a rrie rs o f t h a t s t a n d o r po sit'!o n. Given the point of depart u re o f t h is e s s a y t h is me a n st h a t r i l esho u ld try to say somethinga b o u t h o w t h re e )a n g u a g e so r la n g u a g e gr o u p s r elate to six dimensio n s , in o t h e r wo rd s 1 8 c o mb jn a t ' io n s as'in th e follow'inq table: Ta b le 1 . a n a ly s is The frameworkfor c o s mo lo g y / la n g u a g e

ro pean Eu

Ch in e s e

:.l :n:noco

Knowl edge Pe r so n - Nature Fer son- Person

p e rso nIa Pe r s on T ra n s

- 5Ob vi o u sl y,a n e xp l o ra tor y task of th' is k.indcan be car r ied o u t v e rt'i ca l l y o r h o ri zo n taily. The ver tical appr oach would g i v e a p re se n ta ti o no f th e languages, r unning thr oughthe gamut of co smo l o ga y n a l ys'i s .The hor izontal appr oach,which i s t h e o n e th a t w i l l b e ch osenher e, would take one cosmological d i m e n si o n a fte r th e o th e r a nd com par e the languages on them , p r o c e e d i n g fro m th e E u ro p e an v' ia the chineseto the Japanese. T h e a d va n ta g e o f th i s a p p roach is that it com par es languages, keepi n g t h e co smo l o g i cad l 'i me ns"ion constant, r ather than the equally inter es tj nq b u t d i ffe re n t ta sk o f re ra ti ng cosm ological dimensions, keeping language g ro u pco n sta n t. si nce both appr oaches ar e significant h o w e ve r, w e sh a 'i l sta rt w i th the hor izontal appr oach and then s u m m ari ze u si n g th e ve rti ca 'l appr oach,in an effor t to say somet h i n g a b o u t th e l a n g u a g e g roupsas a whols.Thefactor s of this exer cis e a r e t h en re p e a te di n ta b l e 2 towar dsthe end; the r eader .is r efer r ed t o j t fo r a q u i ck su mma ry a t any tim e.

-b-

L:i ."e SPAC T

tanS ,r.geg.orp

Languages appear in two f o rms , writ t e n a n d o ra l; in s p a c e a n d i n timq respective'ly. we a re u s e d t o t h in k in g o f writ t e n la n g u a g e i n ter ms of two-dimensional s p a c e , t h e h a n d -writ t e n o r p rin t e d p a g e 'whereth'inking in three-d ime n s io n a l s p a c e mig h t b e e q u a lly r ele va nt: a book is c'learly t h re e -d ime n s io n a l. A n d we a re u s e d to thinking of speech as a st rin g o f s o u n d s , s t re t c h e d o u t in tim e , starting at one point jn t ime a n d e n d in g ip a n o t h e r. Actu a l1y, that string of soun d s c a n b e re c o rd e d o n t a p e o r in othe r ways, thereby projecting t ime o n s p a c e . B u t f o r t h e p r e se nt purposes the arrangeme n to f la n g u a g e in it s writ t e n fo r m i s seen as a key to how t h a t la n g u a g e c o mmu n it ys t ru c t u re s spa ce , and the arrangementof la n g u a g e ' in u s u a l o ra l f o rm is co r r e spondingly seen as a ke y t o h o wt jn e . iss t ru c t u re o . A book printed in a E ur o p e a nla n g u a g e is a h jg h ly s t a n d a rd iz e d a n d u n ambiguous arrangemento f o n e -d ime n s jo n a l s p a c e in t h re e d im e n s'ionalspace. The first p a g e is in f ro n t , t h e la s t p a g e in the back of the volume; to a v o id a n y c o n f u s io n t h e p a g e s dr se r ia'l'ly numbered and henc e a rra n g e d in a o n e -d ime n s io n a l fa sh 'io n. The reading of a sing le p a g e is f ro m le f t t o rig h t an d fr o m iop to bottom; anyon e o f t h e o t h e r t h re e p o s s ib ilit ie s w ou ld bring considerable d'is c o mf o rt t o t h e re a d e r u n le s s h e is d e l'iberate'ly in search of n o n -me a n in g .

N ot so w i th C h j n e se a n d Japanese.

For the latter

w e a r e thinkjng in terms of th e Ch in e s e c h a ra c t e rs , n o t t h e Ja p a n e seuse of the two sylla b le a lp h a b e t s (k a t a k a n a a n d h ir a g a na) and the Japaneseus e o f " Ro ma n " c h a ra c t e rs (jn ro ma -ji) A s op p o se dto the E uropeanrigidit y t h e re is c o n s jd e ra b le f le x ib iljt v . In th e S ino-Japaneselanguag ec o mmu n it y , b o o k s ma y s t a rt in fr o n t or jn back, and at leas t t h re e o f t h e f o u r wa y s o f re d u c in g th e two-d'imensjonalprinted o r writ t e n p a g e t o a o n e -d ime n s jo n a l str in g c an be found. Tho u g h . it ma y we ll b e t h a t t h e re is a t p re s e n t a te n d e n cy towards * reducti*:: r-; i ih is v a rie iy in mo d e so f Do o k ip a p e r p r o d u ction,variet_ysti I I there is _

Ho w e ve r, th e re i s mo reto say about Spatial ar r angement than can b e s a i d i n te rms o f th e o p osition between r ig' idity and flex' ibil' ity n o t i ng i n p a ssi n gth a t o nce the cho' icehas beenm ade a par ticular C h i n e se o r Ja p a n e se b o o k b ecom es as r igid as any Eur opean text. Ther e is n o t o n l y th e p o ssi b iljty of pr inting or wr iting in var ious w a y s; o n ce a ch o i ce h a s b eenm adeit m ayalso be possible to r ead r ead backwar ds, i n v a ri o u s w a ys. A E u ro p ean fr om r ight sentence m eaning, t o l e ft o n o n e l i n e rn a y g ive som e but usually be so syntacti c al l y ' i n c orre ctth a t i t w i l l b e rejected by any language- sensit' ive m ' ind. A Eu ro p e a p n ri n te d p a g ere ad ver tically, for jnstanceby r eading t h e f irst o r th e l a st w o rdson each line, fr om top to bottomor f r o m b o tto mu p w a rd s s to th e top w' i11pr obablyby mostm emberof that language co mmu n i ty b e r ejected even befor e the exper im ent h a s s ta rte d (th e re a d e r i s encour aged to tr y this page, for instance). ma ybe the case for Chinese and Japanese. 0 f co u rseth e sa me possibly with mor esuccess.Andwhat H o w eve r,'i tca bn ea tte mp t d,and i s t o th e p o i n t: th e co mp oser of the pr inted pdg,the author and/ o r t h e p ri n te r,ma ya rra n g ethe char actenin sucha way that additjonal r eadingor der s. In fact, meaning rn s ay co me o u t o f n on- convent' ional in ar r iving at t h e r e a re e xa mp l e s o f h i g h- 1evelach' ievem ents diagonalr eadingas a s e v e ra l me a n i n g s th 'i s w a y, evencombinir r g p o s si b i l i ty, e ve n o ff-d i a g onal r eading' ."0fcour se, in the !,Jest this ' i s k no w n a s g a me s, i mmo rtaljzed thr oughthe cr osswor d- puzz1es. Bu t i n S i n o -Ja p a n e se sp a ceit m ayalso pointto ad' iffer ent way of in a less unam bigr r ofi c o n c e j vi n gsp a ce , re p l e te with m eaning, can be found.' ' ' a n d l i n e a r fa sh i o n . E ve ncir cular ar r anqem ents Ho w e ve r, th e re i s mo reto it than that. The sumtota' l of meaning s backwar ds and for war ds, a r r i v e d a t b y re a d i n ga ro lv or a column page, ffidy ser ve as d o w n w a rd o r doing this for the who' le os r u p w a rd s, p o i n te rs to a me ta -me a n ing. the sumof oneIf well composed pl a d ' i m e n si o n a , rti a l me a n ' ings m aybe mor ethan the set of the par ts, m aybe accom panied by to m eta- meaning a n d t h e ste p fro m me a n 'i n gs j u mp in consciousness. To the extent that this some ki n d o f q u a n tu m i s t h e ca se i t'i s o b v'i o u s that one page m aycar r y m or e "infor m ation" book. t h a n wo u l du su a l l v b e th e case in a Eur opean

-B And yet, there is still mo re t o it t h a n t h ' is . A . p rin t e d p a g e

i n Ch .inese or Japanese,with c h a ra c t e rs a n ra n g e d , u s u a lly v e ry jn ne a tl y, rows and columns c a n b e c o mp a re dt o a c o mjc s t rip wh e re pictur es are arranged in row s a n d c o lu mn s , u s u a lly wit h c h ild re n as r e ceivers in E uropeancoln t rie s . A s f o r t h e c a rt o o n s t h e re c e iv e r ca n gr asp what is happeningo rc $ n mu n ic a t e da t a me re g la n c e . O n e seccn d sr two spent sn a Don a ld Du c k c a rt o o n will t e ll t h e re a d e r ( or on looker) what it is abou t ; a f t e r t h a t h o lis t ic p e rc e p t io n , he or s he may then proceed to t h e d e t a ils in a mo re re g u la r, f in e a r fa sh io n. S omething of the sameis t h e c a s e wit h Ch in e s e a n d J a p a n e s e a q u ic k s a mp lin g o f scr ip t: since the characters a re id e o g ra ms i de o g r ams,jn a more or less ra n d o mf a s h io n , b u t we ll-d is t rib u t e d pa g e ,wiil give a good not'ion o f t h e c o n t e n t s b e f o re m o r e sy stematjc readjng is'in it ja t e d . i s th e possibllity th a n is o f th e totality B u t t h ls me a n st h a t t h e re f ro m a g ra s p of proceed in g in a mo re h e rme n e u t ' ic a l nner ma f ro m t h e re t o t o t a . lit y c o u rs e , s o me o f t h e s a me s a mp lin g o v e r t he

writ jn q s , usually the case wit h re s p e c t t o E u ro p e a n to concernw it h d e t a il,

a n d ba ck to deta'il again,and s o o n . 0 f

sam ecffect eouldbe obtained u s in g E u ro p e a ns c rjp t ,

a wo r d here and there - but t h e s e wo rd s a re u s u a lly le s s e v o c a t iv e tha n a Chinesecharacter, one re a s o n b e in g t h a t s o ma n ywo rd s ar e n o t - like nouns, verbs, a d je c t iv e s , a d v e rb s - c a rrie rs o f mu c hme a n ' i n g bu t a r e connectives, f ill inq-'in wo rd s w' it h p a rt ic u la r fu n ct'i ons, and so on, S uch w o rd s a re s y n t a c t ic a ls o f o u n d in Ch in e s ea n d

Ja p a n ese, but the eye cf the re a d e r wil" l mo re e a s ily b e a t tr a cted to the characters mo re s a t u ra t e d wit h me a n in q . He nce, the messages about o rg a n iz a t io n o f s p a c e a re a c t u a liy q u ite different when one comp a re sE u ro p e a nla n g u a g e so n t h e o n e h a n d with Chjnese and Japane s eo n t h e o t h e r. T h e re is t h e d is t in c t io n in t h e p ro je c t io n f ro m t h re e d im e n sional to one-dimensona ls p a c e . T h e re js t h e u s e o f f le x ib ' il' it y 'i n o r d er to arrive at more va rje t y . T h e re is t h e p o s s ' ib ilit y o f b e tw een rigidity and flexibilit y m e ta- meanings as the sum of p a rt ia l is th e potentia'l forholistic me a n in g s g le a n e d f ro m a n y o n e t h e re w ay o f proceedingin printed o r writ t e n s p a c e . A n d f in a lly

{ rd h e rme n e u t ic a l re la t io n s t o spa ce , engenderedby the org a n iz a t io n o f Ch in e s e a n d J a p a n e s e w r i tten language. In short, E u ro p e a nla n g u a g e ss t a n d o u t a s

' 9mor ecompiex s i m p li sti c i n th e 'i r sp a cestr uctur e r elative to the much u s e o f sp a cema d e b y C h i n e se and Japanese.
TIM E S omethn ' ig o f t h e s a mema y b e s ai d a b o u t the organization of tjm e , a lt h o u g h le s s c le a rly s o . Th e o bjection to any explora t jo n o f t h is is jmme d ' ia t e :T h e re ' is som e thingabsolute about tim e , it f lo ws a n d f le e t s b u t o n ly in o n e d ir e ction,whereas space can b e lo o k e d a t a n d h a n d le d in s o ma n y w ays, turned upside down,ands o o n . However,even if we do n o t s e e mt o b e v e ry q o o d a t ma s t e rin g c h ro no l o g i c a l t'i m e we can always do somet h in ga b o u t t h e s t rin g s o f s o u n d s , a n d the strings of words. The ap p ro p ria t e q u e s t io n t o a s k s e e mst o b e : Give n a set of words,can they b e o rg a n ' iz e d jn o n ly o n e wa y wh ic h i s th e correct word order, o r is t h e re a c e rt a in f le x ib ilit y so th a t more than one permutat io n is ' le g it ima t e ? A n d if t h e la t b e r js th e case could jt then be, o n c e mo re , t h a t t h e re ' is a c h a n g e in m e a n ing, if only a subtle cha n g e , wit h t h e p e rmu t a t io n ,a n d t h a t th e set of al1 legitimatepermu t a t io n s , lin rit e d b y the set of all possible permutations, mig h t c a rry a h id d e n me s s a g e ,a me t a m ea n ing?In other words: To wh a t e x t e n t is a la n g u a q e so rigid that it permits o n ly o n e wo rd o rd e r: o r s o f ' le x ' ib le t h a t p o s s ib le o n e s ? it pe rmits several word orders o u t o f t h e ma t h e ma t ic a lly And th en, beyond that: not on ly wh e t h e r la n g u a g e is f le x ib le , b u t a ls o w h e t h e r alter n atjve word orders can b e u s e d a n d d o in f a c t c a rry me a n in g s , eve n meaningsthat complem e n t h e s t a n d a rd me a n in gc o n v e y e d b y the in jtial word order. P o e tjc p o t e n t ' ia l ' is o b v io u s if t h is is t h e c a s e . Off hand one might perha p s s u rmis e t h a t a la n g u a g e lik e G e rma n wo u ld be extremely rig'id wh e re a sa la n g u a g e lik e Ch ' in e s e mig h t b e ve r y flexjble. l'le have not c o mea c ro s s e f f o rt s r e se a rch done in this field. t o c o n f irm o r disco nfjrm such hypothesis, a lt h o u g h t h e re mu s t h a v e b e e nmu c h T h e G e rma n wo rd o rd e r wit h n o t o n ly o n e verb but often several v e rb a l f o rms mo s t l_ y a c c u mu la t in c la t t h e e n d o f th e se ntence does not seemto s t a n d mu c h re a rra n g e me n t wit h o u t tr a n sgressing the borderline s o f t h e le g it ima t e . 0 n t h e o t h e r ha n d , simjlar rjgidities le s s p re v a le n t in Ch in e s e . see mt o b e mu c h

4n

tu

i t sh ou'ld be emphasjzed tha t t h e me a n in g , o f c o u rs e , c h a n g e swit h th e permutation, as it also , in g e n e ra 1 , wi1 1d o wh e n t h e re a d jn g rs d o n e 'in a d'ifferent d'irectio n , a s me n t io n e da b o v e . I t s h o u ld b e n o ted ,however, that the poin t ma d eh e re a b o u t p e rmu t a t io n s g o e s m u chfurther than what was d js c u s s e d a b o v e u n d e r t h e h e a d in g o f so a ce : It is now a question o f a ll p e rmu t a t io n s , n o t o n ly f o rwa rd a n d b ackward, upwards or dow n wa rd s . Imagine that somestatis t ic a ' l s t u d y h a C p s g n u n d e rt a k e n , o r

cou ld be undertaken, and prov e d t h e h y p o t h e s js b l, a n d la rg e t o b e co r r e ct. what would be the imp lic a t io n s o f t h a t ? T h a t t h e re js a t le a st a potential flexjbiljty. wh e t h e r it is re a lly ma d eu s e o f is a n other matter. B ut in ma n y E u ro p e a nla n g u a g e s t h e re ma y n o t b e t h a t and hence much le s s o p p o rt u n it y t o p la y wit h wo rd o rd e r, an d th ereby also with time. po ten tial

KNOt^JL EDGE

|^Ie shal1 tr y to di scuss th.is subject

un d e r thnee headings: predica t iv e v s . re la t io n a l; a b s t ra c . t v s _ r_ co n cr e te and precise vs. vagu e . B y a n d la rg e t h e id e a wo u ld b e tha t Indo-E uropean languages t e n d t o p ic k u p t h e f o rme r h o rn o f t h e s e t h r e e d'ich o tomous'ly expressed dilem ma s , Ch in e s e a n d J a p a n e s et h e la t t e r. the predicative aspect of turo p e a n la n g u a g e s is a lre a d y s e e n in the ty pical sentence structu re : t h e re js (u s u a lly )a s u b je c t , a n d so m e thjng is predicated of th a t s u b je c t - a q u a lif ie r (a d je c t iv e ) a n d /or a verb, with or witho u t q u a lif ie r (a n a d v e rb ). I n o t h e r wo r d s: something is atribute d t o s o me t h in g , p re d ic a t e d o f s o me thjs structu re is s o d e e p ' ly in g ra in e d . in me mb e rs o f th e se'language communit-l x a t it js p ro p a b ly s e e n a s t h e n o rma l th w ay i n which humanthought c a n b e e x p re s s e d , t h e re b e in q n o alter n ative. ch'ineseand Japanese, ho we v e r, a re . e x a mpe i s o f a l t e rn a t i v e s , Th e Chinese philosopher Chan gT u n g -S u r{ 3 d e e s la t ' io n a l p re s e n t a t io n re as m uchmore important, even t o t h e p o in t o f b e in g t y p ic a l o f ch'in e se language structure. He q u o t e s Me n c ' iu s :, ' h u ma n n a t u re t o wa ro s the go od as water downlvariis " , a f a ' irly * p t imis t jc v je r+ o f h u ma n n a tur e ' but clearly relationa l. T h e g e n e ra l s t ru c t u re wo u ld b e a q u a rt e t , A:B = X:Y , which'is a muchmo re c o mp le x t h o u g h t s t ru c t u re t h a n p r e d icating somethingof a s u b je c t , p (s ). wt ra t it s a y s . is t h a t t h e re ar e two realms of Ciscourse, o n e o r t h e m re la t in g t o h u ma n b e in q s thin g . In fact,

' 11 a n d t h e o th e r o n e to p h ys'i c a1 natur e. Twoelem ents ar e picked o u t o f e i th e r, th e y a re re l ated to each other within both t y p e s of d i sco u rse ,a n d th e n the r elations ar e r elated so as t o a r r i ve a t a q u a te rn a ryrelat' ionship. The impor tantthing a b o u t th 'i s re l a t'i o n i s th a t it pr edicatesnothing in any pr ecise s e n s eof a n y o fth e te rms; i t only says that the four ter ms pr edicative a r e r e la te d to e a ch o th e r i n a cer tain way. W her eas l a n g u ag e w o u l d te n d to b e mor estatic, attr ibuting something t o s o me th i n g keeps fo r e ve r (" I a ma boy") ,r elatjonal language t h e a b so l u te p ro p e rtj e s o r pr edicatesope6' , and puts the elem ent o f j n v ari a n cea t a h i g h e r l e vel of abstr actjon. It is ga' lilean.r ather 14 \ In thi s s ens e, t h a n a r i sto te l i a n ; F u n ktj o n sbegr iffr ather than Substanzbegr iffY' h e n c e ,C h i n e se mo r eabstr act language h a sa mu ch str uctur e t h a n E u ro p e a n languages - a nd since this par ticular char acter jst' icof Chinese i s ta ke n o ve r b v J a p a n e s eit will a ls o b e a p p l jc a b le t o t h e l a tte r. A n d th e q u a r tet is a ver y fr equent tor r .( 7) A n i n te re sti n g a sp e ct o f this has to do with the differ ence between th e co n n e cti veth a t js used to pr edicate something, like ,,1 am a b o y ",' i n ( be, :ein,6tr e, and so on) and l a n g u ages E u ro p e a n and ar u ) or " in lupu*t. ( g!s:U these in Eur opean languages' ; ). W her eas a" 7 a ndh b per haps c o n n e cti ve s in a re a symme tri c , Chinese and Japanese, p a r t i c ul a rl y th e fo rme r, It ' is th e y ar e seenas m uch m or esym m etr ic. I w h o p o sse ss a s expr essed b o yi sh n e ss, in the sentence above; i t ' i s n o t " b o y" w h i ch p o ssesses I- ishness. In Ch' inese and ' is J a p a n e seh , o w e ve r, m uchless str ict. Both th 'i s d 'i stjnction c o n s t r uct'i o n s w o u l d b e va l j d i per m utations in the sensem ade a b o v eare p o ssi b l e . C o n n o tatjons m aybe differ ent, the m etam e a n i n g ma s yb e i mp o rta n t. In shor t,a or edicative pr opos' itjon m a yb e la l i d b o th w a ysa n d h encebecom es r elat' ional al though i n t h i s ca se b i n a n y, n o t q u a ter nur y.( B) T h ' i sg e n e ra l e mp h a si s mayolace o n r elational expr essions J a p a n e se cl o se r to dialectic r eason' ing than' is thecasefor Eu popean a n d C h i n e se l a n g u ag e s. P re d i ca tj vee xp ress' ions tend to becom m e or estatic, m o r e "u n a ry" , h e n cel e ss ma lleable,lessfluid. At the fir st g'lance to b e exactlY the oppositeof the next th i s ma yse e m jn Indo- Eur opean p o i n t , th e p re d i l e cti o n fo r abstr act expr ess' ion in Chjnese and languages to co n cr eteexpr essions a s o p p o se d J a p a n eseb ; u t th a t j s o n l y at the fir st glance. (sh i h L i n C h ' i n e se

t2-

I t i s o fte n p o i n te d o u t that both Chinese and Japanese ar e v e r y c on cre tel a n g u a g e s s those language a n d that m emberof c o m m u n i ti e as re d i ssa ti sfi e d with any thing but highly concr ete d e s c r i p ti o n s, fo r i n sta n ce i n the for m of pr ecise examples.The i d e o g r a ms, th e ch a ra cte rs them selves, havever y concr eteor igins a l t h o u g hso me o f th a t ma yh avebeenlost thr oughthe m illennia. B u t t h en th e re i s a n o th ep r o 'i nt which has not beenlost: ther e a r e n o a rti cl e s j n C h i n e se ,as also' in Japanese, and the Chinese ' l a n g u ag efro , m th e E u ro p e a point n of view,has an alm ost incr edible l a c k o f j n fl e cti cn 'i n q e n d er ,case or tense, and with r egar d t o s i n g u l a r vs. p l u ra l .0 f cour sethis in no way m eans that such d i s t i n ct'i o n s ca n n o t b e e xp r essed, only that they ar e not bujlt i n t o s in g l e w o n d s w i th a p p ropr iatepr efixes and suffixes or sim' iI ar nrean the context. But ' it doesm ean that , sb u t a re d e ri ve df ror n t h e d t ' s t'i n cti o nb e tw e e n q ,,.Ti, the tr ee and iust sim ply ' tr ee' d o e s n o to ccu ra u to ma t'i ca 1 1y' .trA ee is any tr ee,"the tr ee"is that ' is p a r t i c ul a r tre e ,w h e re a s tr ee- ishness- an abstr act pr oper ty 'tre e' o f a t r ee , l i ke b o yi sh n e ss; an univer sal aspect of tr ees, pf^.fing f o r t h e l a sti n g co n tro ve rsybetween nom inalism and r ealism.\' ' l T h is b e co memu s ch mo re'inter estingwheninstead of tr ees one l o o k s a s su ch co n ce p ts and "equa1ity". In manyEur opean a s " fr eedom " languages with ar ticles, but in gener al th e se w o rd sca n b e equipped a p p e a rw 'i th o u t, d e n o ti n ga b str act concepts.Theystand for essences, f o r s o me th i n g e sse n ti a l th a t m ayor m aynot be said to exist or b e p r e se n t j n , fo r i n sta n ce , countr ies. As such they ar e the tools som ething o f a b s tra ct re a so n 'i n gth , e y c an be usedas subjects,and c a n b e p re d i ca te do f th e m, the pr edicatescan be com par ed,and' long per haps Eur opeans, c h a ' i n so f d e d u cti vere a so n i ng can be establ.ished. p a r t i c ul a rl y th e Ge rma na can , go on for a consider able sn d the Fr encl"r ity" l e n g t h o f ti me d i scu ssi n gth e r elation between"fr eedom"and"equal and llot so jn Chinese w i t h o u t e ve r h a v'i n g to u se a single example. e i l l for ce a cer tain concr eteness on the J a p a n eseT : h e 'l a n g u a gw language u se rs o r a t l e a st tend to bendthem' in that d' ir ection. Ij ke i n - - -? " w ouldbe the typical questionasked "Yo ume a n whenthe abstr act speaker to a n In do- Eur opean b y a S i n o -Ja p a n e se tim e and tur ned' into utter m eaningd ' i s c o urse h a s g o n eo n fo r some ( 11 I e s s n ess fro m th e p o in t o f v i ew of concr eten.r r . )

- i3 In r e sp ect of these two aspect s o f t h e e y p is t e rn o lo g ic a l d ime n s io n o f la n g u a g e the g r o und has already been nre p a re d jn lin g u is t jc d e v e lo p me n tf o r t h e e m e r g e n c e of ba sic c haracterist'ics of occ id e n t a l in t e lle c t u a l

(.1 tu o -t.u ti a n d deductive', ons per mi ve expr essi t detact' ,ment or

s t y le : a t o n rjs t jc

o n e subject from another in o rd e r t o a s s ig n a t t rib u t e s ; e s s e n t ia lis m pe r m its deductivism as a logic a l o p e ra t io n , u n e n c u mb e reb dy a n y Relat io n a l e x p re s s io n s a re mu c h le s s p e rm' is s iv e nisp l aced concreteness. of atomismunless one should t a ' lk a b o u t mo le c u la ris m, t h e d e t a c h me n t of a more complex unjtfromthe re s t r e la ti onal en ti ty tetrad. To attribu t e will o f t h e u n iv e rs e , lik e in a q u a rt e t , a s o me t h in g c o n c e rn in g t h is mu c hmo re c o m p l e x in a d d ' it io n

be more problema t ic , h o we v e r. A n d if

esse n tialism is less develope d d e d u c t iv e re a s o n in q wo u ' ldb e imp e d e d . At th'is po'int the third asp e c t e n t e rs wit h f u l I f o rc e . E u ro p e a n la n g u agesare constructed jn s u c h a wa y t h a t t h e y a t le a s t g iv e the im pression that peop'le in s u c h la n g u a g e c o mmu n jt ie sc a n a rriv e d t v e r y p re ci se co n cl u si o n sthat ar e o p e n t o f a l s jf ic a t ' io n ; if th e y cannot be "confi rmed" the y c a n a t I e a s t b e ' Ui s c o n fi rme d ' jT h e would tend t o b e a p re d jc a t iv e s t a t e me n t , a p r o p o sition,and as such subje c t t o a d e c is io n , a ju d g e me n t in t e rms of"tr u e vs. false" (or the w e a k e r f o rm o f t h a t d ic h o t o my ,c o n f jrme d w co n clu sion itself f i r m ed.,] Not so in Chinese/J a p a n e s e T . h e v a g u e n e so s f t h e a 1 ' lu s iv e , Ij te r a r y sty1e, often referred t o b y l^ le s t e rn e rs a s " p o e t ic ' h i as been th e co nstant themeofcommen t u rJ l' i), a ls o s h o ws u p wh e n J a p a n e s e le a r n foreign languages: exp re s s ' io n ss u c h a s " ma y -b e " , " v ie . l1 e ' ic h t " , |p e u t- 6tre" pop up very often in o rd e r t o re f le c f t h e v a g u e n e s so f d o e s t h e t ra in le a v e ? " Ja p a n esedjscourse. A questi o n lik e " Wh e n by a Norwegianhusbandis l'ik e ' ly t o t h e a n s we r " t h e t ra in l ea ve s, may be, around noon" - wh e n t h e t ra in jn f a c t (f ro m a e l. ic jt

discon-

l ,Je sternpoint of view!) leave s a t 1 2 . 0 0 , s h a rp . I n t h is , it sh o u ld be noted, 'is not only a c e rt a in v a g u e n e s s o f t h e la n g u a g e b u t a lso in the self-present a t io n o f t h e s p e a k e r: t o is s u e a p r e cise, absolute statement js t o p re s e n t o n e s e lf a s a ru le r o f the un iverse, or at least as a d ire c t o r g e n e ra ' l o f J a p a n Na t io n a l Ra 'ilr o ad (JNR). Neither is c o n s id e re d a p p ro p ria t e t o p u t it mi1 d " ly . Deductivi sm presuppcsesp re c i s e n s ; s ' if n o t t h e wh c . lep u rp * s e cf de d uctivisi* is la:i" A nd t h e ri; rp o s e is t h is : f ro m c 1 e a r, p re c is e p r e m isses via the'iron laws of d e d u c t iv e lo g ic t o c le a r, p re c is e con clu sions. It seemsthat bo t h t h e Ch jn e s e a n d J a p a n e s ela n g u a g e s

AA tc +

w o u l d b e ve ry 'i mp e rfe ct ve hicles for such thought figur es,by people i n t h e We stse e na s n e ce ssar y conditions for science jn the W ester n s e n s e .T h e u n i ts o nw h i ch p roposjtionsar e bu' ilt ar e no longer s i m p l e su b j e cts T h e b a si c figur es of thought ar e r elational r ather wher e . h e re j s I ittle or nothing of essences t h a n p re d 'i ca t'i veT t h e l og i ca l n a tu re o f th e 'i r inter connection can be explor ed, and b o t h be g i n n i n g ,th e mj d d l e and the end of an ar gum entative chajn w o u l db e va g u e ra th e r th a n pr ecise. [.lh' ich, of cour se, only points mor eholistic, mor edia.lectic; t o o t h e r typ e s o f i n te l l e ctual sty' les, and the Japanese a l l t h e tj me ke e p i n gi n mj nd that both the Chinese l a n g u a g e sa re scientific ca p a b l eo f se rving as car r ier s of t,/ester n t h o u gh ! o n l y th a t 'i t co me s less easjly since that type of thinking str uctur e. h a s n o t d e ve l o p e d to g e th e r with the language PERSON Ther e is muchless to say about th' is - NATURE d i m e n si o n .0 n of the Chinese char acter sar e th e o n e h a n ds o many c o n c r e teta , ke n fro m n a tu ra l objects thatwer e depicted jn ear ljer today v e r s j o n s o f th e ch a ra cte rs. It is even found jn family names paddy", meaning"centr al i n J a p a n e sefo , r i n sta n ce : Tanaka lgSlgti of clear d' istinctions between m e a ni n g th e " mo u th o fa b o a r".The absence ter m makes of the sam e or aspects, a b s t r a ct a n d co n cre tep ro p er tjes, a l l t h i n g s mo ree q u a l . T h er eis less of a wor ld of the concr ete bodywoulda' lso belong, a n d t o u ch a b l e , " n a tu re " to whjch the hum an o n t h e o re h a n d a n d o n th e other handa wor ld of the abstr act, that and even souls,the essence wh'ich ca n n o t b e to u ch e d ,of essences o f h u ma n b e i n g s.B o th a re concr ete, both ar e the sam e. token, ther e is also a cer tain per s oni fj c at'i on b y the sam e languages I n E u ro p e a n other than neuter in o f n a tu re th ro u g hth e u se of gender s to n a tu re (l a n atur e, djg Natur ) and par ts of natur e, r e f e r e n ce s it is clear that s u c ha s a n yth i n g i n th e b i ospher e.Never theless, beinqs and things e s s e nce s a n d a b stra ctj o n sar e attr ibuted to hum an pl ant and m iner al "ki ngdom . "s s re th a n b theanir na' l c r e a t e d b y h u ma nmo beings I t i s typ i ca l th a t " fo xi n ess" is an attr ibute of cer tain hum an be jnclined to say that r a t h e r th a n o f a fo x. S o b y and lar ge\' r ewould fam il' ies w' ill point jn the th e language t h e d iffe re n ce s b e tw e e n beings djffer ent fr om natur e in the d i r e cti o n o f ma ki n gh u ma n jnese and Japanese. The step mo resim ilar in Ch l a n g u a g e s, Eu r o p e a n f r o m e sse n ce(a b stra cti o n ) to soul is but a shor t one, and this is

t3

w ha t is already bu'i'lt'into the la n g u a g e smo rp h o ' lo g ic a l' ly PER SON - P E RS ON

! ^^i^

T h is a g a in js a f a irly

c o mp re h e n s iv e

LUprLt

imp o rt a n c e t o s o c ia l s c ' ie n t js t s and of course of imme n s e s'in ce this is where social re la t io n s a re b e in g imp lic it ly d e f jn e d '

orbiases a lre a d y b u jlt in t o t h e la n g u a g e s . b y ce r tain tendencies jn g e n e ra ' l sha l'l try to discuss this imp o rt a n t a s p e c t o f c o s mo lo g y Llb a n dsocial cosmologyin partic u la r, u n d e r t h re e h e a d jn g s : g o lle c t iv is t a n d in s id e v s . o u t s id e y!. i ndjv'idugl_jst, vertical v s . h o riz g n t a l i he g e n eral thesis being thatJ a p a n e s ewill t e n d t o p ic k u p t h e f o rme r t h e la t t e r' h e a d o f these three dilemmasa n d E u ro p e a nla n g u a g e s jo n . r .vith Ch'inesebeinq morein{et we e nb u t t e n d in g in t h e J a p a n e s ed ire c t

L e t us start w'ith the colle c t iv is t

v s . in d iv ' id u a lis t d ime n s ' io n

v ' ie w u s e f u l wa y o f metaphoric a i b u t in o u r a n d w i th a somewhat ap p r o aching the problem. lma g in e o n e c o me sa s a t o t a l f o re ig n e r to a communitywhere E ngliS h, o r Ch in e s e , o r J a p a n e s eis s p o k e n . ig n o ra n t o f t h e la n g u a c e , u n d e rs t a n d ' in gn o t h i n g is comp'lete.ly The ne wcomer It co mesas a flow of soundS , u n d if f e re n t ' ia t e d , mo re o r le s s lik e a w aterfall, I jke t.he chirpin g o f b ird s , t h e g ru n t ' in g o f a n ima ls . ld o u ld there jn all of thjs b e o n e s o u n d t h a t s t a n d s o u t , o n e t h a t -a f t er ee wc o meWo r u ' ldre c o g n iz e a n d t h e n listen ing to the phenomenon -t hn r e r e co gnize to the point of u s in g it a s t h e f irs t s o u n d h e mig h t r e p e a t,with a questioning ex p re s s io n in h is f a c e , t ry in g t o e lic it scm e type of interP retat.ion? H ere three candidates are s u g g e s t e d : t h e " I " in t h e t n g lis h jp1the Ch in e s e la n g u a g e , a n d t h e " h a i" jn ia n g u age, the "WU-6sn" jt the Japaneselanguage. The fjrs t o f t h e s e js s imp ly ' in t e rp re t e d : 'i s the assertjve first person S in g u la r p ro n o u n , t h e s y mb o l 0 f i nd ivjdual ism and S elfassertio n , e v e n c a p it a l' iz e d in writ in g (" I " ) o f in d iv ' id u a lis m t o a n y so th a t it stands out, shoutin g it s me s s a g e n a p a g e f il le d w' it h E n g lis h eye trained on this phenome n oin pr in t. The second one iS als o a s s e rt iv e , it js t h e f jrs t p e rs o n plu r a l pronoun, "we". The in d iv jd u a l s p e a k e r p re s e n t s h ims e lf ( o r h e rself, but then Chinese d o e s n o t re f lA c t g e n d e r) a s

' 16 a p a r t, e ve n a p a rt'i cl e i n a gr oup, the collective l^Ie. This we i s a su b j e ct, a p o te n ti a l o r even actua' l actor . And this differ s f r o m t h e u b i q u i to u s " h a i " found in Japanese discour se, sometimes ( i n c o r re ctl y) tra n sl a te d i n to the Engl ish "yes' j and its equivalents i n o t h e r l a n g u a g e s. On ei n ter pr etation of th' is "hai", which accor ding t o t h e to n e i n w h 'i ch 'i t j s utter ed also m aycome close to "no", w o u l dbe so me th 'i nfi gke th i s: "l am tunedr onyou, I am r eceiving t h e s i gn a 'l syo u e mi t, I a m switchedon"t.' - 1t m ay, however , also h a v ea co n n o ta ti o no f su b ser vjence as it' is the under dog r ather t h a n t h e to p d o gw h oh a s to confir m that he is tuned in, that the s w i t c h re ma j n so n . Wh e n question,or a semith e topdogutter s q u e s t io n ,th i s ma yre l e a se a cascade of "hai" among under dog listener s, a n d t h e q u e sti o n i s o fte n for m ulatedin such a way that the r r ha' i" c a n b e g i ve n i n a ffi rma ti ve inter pr etation. In shor t, "hai" stands f o r s o me ki n d o fw e -n e ss o n l y that it is r elatjonal between the sender a n d t h e re ce j ve r, a symb o lthat they at least for the time be' ing a r elatjon, not only a gr oupof people . c o n s t itu te a l a n g u a g e co mmunity, T h i s ca n th e n b e co n tra stedwith the well- known Japanese par ticular ly in the sjngula r , r e l u c t an ceto u se th e fi rst per sonpr onoun, b u t a l so to so me e xte n t i n the plur al.One mayeventalk about an a n t j - i n d i vi d u a l i sm b u i l t j n to the linguistic habits. Im per sonal to e x p r e ssi o n s ca n b e u se d : In steadof saying"I am qo' ing YO k o h a ma to mg rrq w " -a - to go to Yokoham o n e might Say "tqm gr r ow t h e r e is a p 1 a n " )'R 6 fl e x'i ve ver bs maybe used ' im per sonalizing t h e a c tj o n ,0 r a t l e a st p u tting the act' ion awayfr om the speaker . jn other languages,for instance 0 f co u rse , th i s j s n o t unknown i n Sp an i sh .A ma n a g eo r f a j am factor y in Chile once had the pr oblem in the jam ( wh' ich t h a t a w o rke r h a d l o st a th er mometer had to be It was an impor tantact, t r e a t e d a t ve ry d e fi n i te te mper atur es) . m' ight disintegr ate into the e v e n a g ra ve o n e a s th e th e rmometer j a m . T h e w o rke r, mu ch to th e jr r jtation of the manager out to distr ibut e g u i l t , e xp re sse d not by saying "Yo per di e1 ter w h a t h a d h appened m o m e tro b"u t b y sa yi n g " e 1 ter mometr o se per did" - "the ther mometer th 'i s could be inter pr eted as an exculpator y f o r m u la ti o n , a n d a s su ch ve ry usefu' l in a situation loadedwlth like Nor wegian t e n s ' i on . It sh o u l d b e p o i n ted out that in a language l o s t i t se l f" .0 b vi o u sl y wouldbe a wr onglyfor mulated t h e c o rre sp o n d i n g re fl e xi ve sentence difficult. In English s e n t e nce ,ma k'i n g th i s typ e of deper sonal' ization

ll

"t h e th e rmo me te g ro t l o st" does not expr essthe same:the ther m omet er b e i n g a su b j e ct ca p a b l eo f losinq itself.
another way in wh jc h t h is s u p p re s s io n o r d e n ig ra t io n o f the individual expresses ' it s e lf in J a p a n e s ewo u ld b e t h ro u g h se lf- effacing comments.If re f e re n c e h a s t o b e ma d et o o n e s e lf the n they shou.ldat least be n e g a t iv e ; t h e o p p o s jt e b e in g un b e arably self-assertive. An d t h a t b rin g s o u t h o w |, ' le s t e rn e rs i n the'ir speech comeacross t o J a p a n e s e : a s e g o c e n t ric a n d s e lf la u d a tory, and also as self-a s s e rt iv e , p re s e n t in g t h e ms e lv e sa s alwa ys in command of the sjtu a t io n (I a mg o jn g t o y o k o h a ma to m o r row),and with thenrsel v e sjn t h e c e n t e r o f t h e s c e n e . Then there is the other s id e o f t h e c o l le c t iv ' is t -in d iv id u a l' is t d im e n sion: not oniy avoiding in d iv id u a lis t use o f collect'ivist for m of the first e x p re s s io n s , b u t ma k in g f u i l express io n s . I t d o e s n o t n e c e s s a rily t a k e t h e person p1 u ra 1 p ro n o u n , b u t o f s o me ' id e n t if je d c o llec t i v i t y Still

na m e d,to whjch one belongs . A l, rle s t e rn e mig r h t p re s e n t h ' ims e lf a s "Jo h a n Ga'ltung from the Univ e rs it y o f 0 s lo " , s t a rt in g f ro m t h e 'in sid e with the personal attrib u t e , t h e f irs t n a me , t h e n t h e fam ily nameand then institutio n a l b e lo n g in g n e s s . A J a p a n e s ewo u ld d o ju st the opposite: "Un'iv e rs ' it y o f O s lo ' s G a lt u n g J o h a n " . F i rs t co m e sthe collectivity definin g o n e s p o s it io n in s o c ie t y , t h e p la c e o f w ork, then a gen'itive P os s e s s iv e c o n n e c t iv e , t h e J a p a n e s e "n0 ") , then the fanri1y namet o s y mb oiz i e b io lo g ic a l b e lo n g ' in g n e s s , an d at the end what to the W e s t e rn e rwo u ld b e " mv s e if " . Wherewould a Chinese be lo c a t e d o n t h is d ime n s io n ? P ro b a b ly som e where in-between, capable o f u s in g f irs t p e rs o n p ro n o u n s , bo th jn singular and plural, b u t wjt h a c e rt a in p re d ile c t io n f o r th e l atter. B ut they would a ls o b e p e rf e c t ly c a p a b le , lin g u ' is t ic a 1 ly , t h e m b e ' imp lie d b y t h e c o n t e x t . A n d of no t using them, letting

th is brings out an aspect of Ch in e s e a lre a d y h in t e d a t S e v e ra lt ime s . eh'in e se is a languagewhich c a n e a s i] y b e s t re t c h e d b o t h ' in t h e We sternand in the Japanesed jre c t io n , a la n g u a g e in t h e mid d le , stands. a r ea l:nE nS _Gn (middle lan g u a g e ) a s o n e mig h t e x p e c t f ro m a zho n g grd 1*iddle kingdom). I t t a k e s le s s d e f in jt e

'

t6

L e t u s th e n l o o k a i : th e next aspect, ver tical vs. hor izontal. No language i s i n se n si ti ve to ver tical socja' l distance ( "class differ enc e" , a l t h o u ghth i s i s a so me w h at linr itjng ter m ) and hor izontal socjal d ' i s t a nce ,th e d i sta n ce to fo r e' igner sof var ious kinds, the differ ence j n si d e a n d o u tsi d e (the language b e t w e en com m un.ity) , be d.iscussed to b e l o w . E a chso c'i a l l a ye r h a s its way of using the language,its p a r t i c ul a r vo ca b u l a ry,i ts o wngr am m at.ic par adigm s, idiomatic exp r e s s i on s, p e rh a p s syn ta x, e ven semantics,its intonation. The s o c j a l g ro u pa t th e b o p i s L r suallyable to define the way it speaks the language a s th e " co rre ct" usage,the other s beingdeviations Also, the social gr ouo in a n d a b e rra ti o n s, e ve n i n co rrect, even"vtr ' lgal' . .is t"thethet' it or not the social t h e c e n tre o f th e l a n g u a g e com m un' ity, g r o u pa 'l th e to p , j s u su ally able to define its usageof the language and other usages ar e defined a s " n a tj o n a l " , " standar cl", evennlor ethe case for wor ld a s "v e rn a cu l a r" . A n d th i s b ecor nes languages su ch a s E n g l i sh . Nationally other gr oupsthan those a' b the ly, for eqLr al t o p a n d /o r j n th e ce n tr'ema yf ight, even successful But inter nationally r i g h t s wi th i n th e to ta l l a n guage comm unity. has i t s e e ms to b e ta ke n fo r g rantedthat the countr y of or igin, suchasEng l and, th e ri g h t to d e fi n e c or r ect usageand other countr iesnone, all is a "wor ld language".For that r eas on r e g a r d l e sso f h o wmu ch th e IangLr age
En q li sh could be seen as b e lo n g in g t o t h e wo rld , ju s t a s a

"n a t i o na l l a n q u a g e "i s mo reand mor eseenas being a par t of a ni g b y that a' ll par ts of the natjon , not only the n a t ' i o n a lh e ri ta g e , me a n 6 l i t e . A l l u se rs co u l d b e seenas having mor eequal r ' ights in defining the language. S t a n d a rd Oxb ri d g e the o r " K 'i ng' s"fngl ish; Hannover Ger m an, F r e n c hof th e T o u ra i n e ,th e Italian of Toscana/Umbr ia, the Span' ish - al I of o f S a l an ra n ca th , e C h 'i n e se o f Beijing, Tokyo Japanese thr usting wedt h e s e a re e xa mp l e s o f th e p a tter n just m entioned, g e s b e tw e e n "dialect". In doing so " sta n d a rd "a n d " ver nacu1ar ", is geograph y equipped w i th a ver tical gr adient, classifying distr icts a s w e l l a s i n d i vi d u a l s. T h e re is m or eover the ' inter active aspect differ s accor dingto o f t h i s ,d l so fo u n d i n a l l l a nguages: speech way to the For eign s o c i a l r e l a ti o rrs, o n e d o e s n ot talk jn the sam e M j n i s t er a n d to h i s d ri ve r. And it is not only a questionof which p e r s o n a lp ro n o u n i s u se d (j n English the differ ent' iationcanhnadebyneans m ight use o f l a s t n a me respectively, wher ea Ger m an o r fi rst n a me S i e o r d L t a F re n chvq u so r tu_; it is^a1soa questionof tone of sentence spoken upwar ds bev o j c e , an clth e ch o i ce o f vccabular y) ' ' ff c o m e ls o n g e r', o rn a te ; th e sa m e downwar ds m ay content expr essed

-tY-

b e c o me sh o rte r, mo red i re ct. Hor izonta.l language, to equals, m aybe l o c a te d so me w h e re i n b e tween. But that does not necessar ilydefine jt a s t h e n a ti o n a l l a n g u a g e.It m aybe veny r ocar . The s1ang,jar gono a r g o t, o f e q u a l sma yva ry between classes and fr om place to ptu*.( 17) T h i s, h o w e ve r,i s a u n' iver salphenom enon a' lthough it differ s i n d e g re efro m o n e l a n g u a ge comm un' ity to the other . Thus, in N o r we g i a th n e re i s ce rta i n ly not m uchleft of this kind of differ e n t i a ti o n p a rti cu l a rl y a fter the second per sona'pr l onoun singular "d u " is n o wa l mo st u n 'i ve rsal; "De" havingalm ost disappear ed. Bu t Ja p a n e se a s a l a n g uage goes far beyond this, even to the p o i n t th a t o n e n 'i g h t ta l k about four differ ent languages: a downw a r d l a n g u a g ea , n u p w a rd l a nguag, d ver y much upwar d language, a n d a h o ri zo n ta l l a n g u a g e . The syntax will djffer ,and so will the c o n c re tew o rd su se d ,e ve n to conveymor eor less the same m eaning. c o n s e q u e n t'l y, th e Ja p a nese havetoknow wher ethey stand in r elation t o e a cho th e r b e fo re co rre ct ver bal com m un' icatjon can star t. Thepr ove r bi al a c t o f i n tro d u ctj o n to e a ch other , with two Japanese gentlem en,both of them d r e s se d 'i n b l a ck, a p p ro a ching each other , gr adually bowingdown w i t h stra i g h t'l e g s a n d stra ight backs, Xper iment' ing with the r e l a t i ve a n o l e a t th e h i p s ti11 they,by utter ing sounds of belongingn es s a n d n ame s,h a ve fo u n d o u t w hat will be the cor r ect r elative anqle; u n d e rp i n n i n g th e mu tu a l p resentationby fishing out of the br east p o c k et o f th e j a cke t a vj si ting car d ( cener ally of the same s i z e ) b e co meme s a n i n g fu l .It is a pr econditionfor talk. Bu tca nth e y n o t si mp ]y make use cf hor izontal language? That js the language o f ma ssco mm unication, of newspaper s, r adio and TV, t o b e use d i n i mp e rso n are l lations wher ethe sender sdo not know w h ot h e re ce i ve rs a re , o n l y that they will be scatter ed ar oundj.n J a p a n e se so ci e ty i n su cha way that noneof the thr ee ver tical l a n g u ag e s ca n b e u se d . 0 f cour sethis wouldhavebeenthe answerif J a p a n e se h a d b e e na We ste rn language;it would havem oved in the sam e d i r e c t i o n , l i ke N o rw e g i a h n as at a m or esuper ficial level. But the 'l a n g u a g e s o t h e r Ja p a n e se a re ther e, cr ying to be used, defining s o c i a l re l a t'i o n s o f su p e ro rdinance and subor dinance. Oneday they m a yb e g i ve n u p , h o ri zo n ta l Japanese m ayspr eadat the expense 61 the v er ti c al v e r s i on s o f Ja p a n e se B rrt that day is pr obab.ly still far away.

-7 Q Thi s , hoivever, does not me a nt h a t h o ri z o n -uia l a n g u a g ej s n o t use d i n personal relatjons, o n ly t h a t jt is f ra g me n t e d . O n e g ro u p m a y use this type of horizont a l la n g u a g e , a n o t h e r o n e t h a t t y p e de p e n d'ing on gender, dgeo oc c u p a t ' io n a l c a t e g o ry , g e o g ra p h ic a l l oca ti on (and probably also o t h e r f a c t o rs ). Rg a in t h js me a n st h a t 'l an g u age becomes a symbo'lof s o c ia l a t t rib u t jo n , o f b e lo n g in g n e s s a s w ell as relationship in a mo re v e rt jc a l l i ng u jstic s e n s e . A lmo s t e v e ry me a n in gt h a t act defines attribu t e s a n d re la t io n s ,

the sp oken and written langua g e is n o t o n ly a s o c ja l a c t in t h e r r su a l sense of being interact iv e , b u t in t h e s e n s e o f p o ' in t in g ou t, underl ining, even reenf o rc in g s o c ia l d iv is io n s a n d re la t io n s . Th e y function like a map of t h e u n d e rly in g s o c ia l t e rrit o ry ; th a t map territorial locat'i o n a n d re la t io n wjll wit h o u t get 1ost, and the

i nd ividual Japanesewould fee l a t a lo s s . T h is , in c id e n t a l 1 y , jn c o n t e x 6 wh e will a lso be a reason why Ja p a n e s eo f t e n k e e p q u ie t r e Westernerswould not: the s ' it u a t io n ma y n o t b e c le a r e n o u g ht o d e fi ne the adequate languag e . A n d t h e p ro b le m is n o t s o lv e d b y l oa d in g one's languagew'ith h o n o rif ic s t o b e o n t h e s a f e s jd e : t o talk too muchupwardsmay be a s in s u lt in g t o t h e o t h e r p e rs o n ( a n d thereby also to oneself ) a s t h e o p p o s it e mis t a k e . I ^ J h e jn n do u b t, keep quiet, wajt and s e e , wa it a n d I is t e n , t il1 s o me b o d y el se defi nes the s i tuati on . of this is mo re t h a n rn e re ly a n a n a lv t ic e x e rc is e . Th e r e is a concreb appl jcat io n o f t h e p rin c ip le o f b u ilt - in ver ti cality, morphologicall y t h a t js , ' in t h e J a p a n e s ela n g u a g e However,all tha t c oul,l be mentioned. I s a s t u d e n t re v o lu t io n , o r a n y re v o lu t io n p o ssjb le jn that society at a ll, wit h o u t a ls o c h a n g in g t h e la n g u a g e ? O ne ba s'ic aspect of revolution is t o b u ild d o wns o me ver tj cality, f o rms o f
1S 'ln

dv e r me a n so f for instance re la t jn g t o c o mma no

ovel me a n so f re p ro d u c t io n - wh e t h e r t h e la t t e r p r o d u ction, or command the bjological sphere,linked t o a ris t o c ra c y , o r in t h e s p h e re of social reproduction in ge n e ra l, lin k e d t o me rit o c ra c y . T h e . |9 6 0 s c a n b e t a k e n a s a n e x a mp le . stu d e nt revolut'ion of the lat e Th e 'Student revolutiorf is a c h a in o f e v e n t s , wh ' ic ha c t u a lly s t a rt e d in La t'i n' A merica in the early 1 9 6 0 s 0 t h e n a p p e a re do n t h e l^ le s tc o a s t o f th e United S tates jn the f o rm o f t h e " f re e s p e e c h " mo v e me n t , an d th en exploded'in China d u rjn g t h e Cu lt u ra l Re v o lu t io n 1 9 6 6 -6 9 , l ater on to aopeat'i;'r iiJes t e rn[ u ro p e a n d [ a s ie rn Un it e d S t a t e s

/l

a n d t h e n fi n a l l y i n E a ste rnEur ope( but nevento apoearin any for m , i t s e e ms,i n th e so vi e t u n i on and in Isr ael) . pr ofessor swer e built d o w n ,o th e r me mb e rs o f th e univer sity wer e to som e extent built up, possibly as a hoped fo r co nsequence s of building pr ofessor down. O n ew a y o f d o i n g th i s w a s b y changing speech habjt, addr essing tnem w i t h f e w e r h o n o n i fi cs, w j th less r espect, evenwith djsr espect. In some l an g u a g e s th i s co u l d b eaquestion of changing fr om "sje" to "d u ' l b u t w i th o u t a t th e sa me tjme changing fr om fam jr y nam e to fir st name s j n ce th e l a tte r mi g h t br ing the class enem y uncomfor tably close. Bu t i n Ja p a nn o su ch a tom istic change could be done.Not o n l y l an g u a g e mo l e cu l e s, b u t the whole language wouldhave to be 'l a n g u age, changed. H o ri zo n ta l indicating a belongingness to the same g r o u p ,b o rd e ri n g o n i n ti ma cy,was out. Hence,the only alter natjve t o v e rti ca l u p -l a n g u a g w e o uld be ver t' ical down- language. For the I ^ l e s t ern mi n d i t mi g h t b e d i fficult fully to compr ehend what this means si n ce i t g o e sso fa r beyond a m er echange in per sonal p r o n o u n .T h e rea re sto ri e s of Japanese pr ofessor shavingcom m itted s u ' i c i de a fte r h a vi n g b e e ne xposed to an exper ience of that type. js no t As a c o n se q u e n ce o n e mj g h t dr aw the conclusjonthat thjs appr oach o n l y t oo d ra ma ti c, b u t a l so non- r evolutionar y or evenanti- r evolutiona r y , u n l e s s o n e a ssu me th s e d j ctator ship of the pr oletar iat ( "student' iat"? ) a s t h e g o a l o f a re vo l u ti o n ar y pr ocess.A nat' ionwide hor izontar s o c ' i e tyw o u l dn o t a t p re se nt f ind its l' inguistic expr ession within 'i t J a p a n ese thjs constitutes a m ajor impedim ent l a n g u a g e ,a s i s known,and t o a n y su ch ch a n g e .Wh a te ver change does take place language will 'i n j c o m m an d n sc'i o u sn e ss th e speaker co of who s hr ' ghand who i s I ow. A n dw h e na l l d i me n sj o n s o f h' ier ar chy havebeeneliminated som e newonesw oul d h a v et o ta ke th e 'i r p 1 a ce .T his had actually happened once, after t h e f l e i j i re vo l u ti o n , p l a ci ng those wr ' th higher educationfpep elite i n s t ' i t uti o n s a t th e to p a nd other s belowat var jous levels in a "d e g re e o cra cy'l a ssu cce ssor or der to the pr eceding ar ir to.r u.y!18) H e n c e ,i t co u l d ve ry e a si l y happen again, if for no other r eason, then f o r p u re l y 1i n g u j sti c re a sons: ver tical ity r epr oduced by 1ingu' istic nec es s i ty . I n a se n seth e i n si d e -o utsided' istinct' ionalso po' ints to a p e cu 'l 'i ar ity:a shar p bor der line between v e r y b a s'i cJa p a n e se Japan a n d t h e re st o f th e w o rl d , between nihon ( the Or igin of the sun)

tt-

' is the way a n d g g 1_ -_ !g (o !e u tsi d e co u n tr _4 "abr oad") . M ost ' impor tant j n w h i ch fcre 'i g *e rs a re i a l ked about and addr essed. Theyar e talked a b o u t , to a l a rg e e xte n t, a s non- per sons constr uct' ions that cou l d al s o o us"ing a ni mals and com m odi ttes( .191r the for ei qner be ap prooriate for
ta 1 ks Japanesea problem ar js e s : wh e re d o e s s / h e f it in t o t h e Jap a n esehiearchy? W hat kind o f la n g u a g e s h o u ld b e u s e d ? I f t h e re j s n o answer to these import a n t q u e s t io n s t h e n t wo p o s s ib ilit ' ie s still rema'in: to use a foreig n la n g u a g e ( o f wh ic h t h e J a p a n e s e ar e i ncreasingly capable), or t o u s e n o la n g u a g e a t a ll, k e e p q u ie t . A no n - commi ttal smiI e m'iqht b e o n e s o ' lu t ' io ni n t h a t k i n d o f si tu a ti on . Addedto this comesa bas ' ic c h a ra c t e ris t ic o f J a p a n e s ea n d

C hin e se from the point of view o f E u ro p e a nla n g u a g e s : t h e ir in a cce ssability. Not only E uro p e a n s ,a ls o t h e J a p a n e s ea n d Ch in e s et h e mdu ra t jo n o f e le me n t a ry s c h o o l in o rd e r to acq u'ire adequate nastery o f t h e jr o wn la n g u a g e , ' in o rd e r t o b e selve s would need the full of cours e is a wro n q e x p re s s io n s in c e t h e re a re ch a r a c t e r s "alp h a bet'ized",wh'ich an d no alphabet ('bharacterize d " ? ). A s f o r mo s t la n g u a g e le a rn in g th e diffjculties increase wi t h in c re a s in q a g e o f t h e s t u d e n t . of those Give n this it follows that o n e a lmo s t h a s t o b e a me mb e r me mb e rs o f t h e la n g u a g e c o mmu n ' it ie-s socie ti es in order to become no t q u ite,.but alm,:st. A nd fro m e le me n t a ry k n o wle d g e(e . g . o f t h e r2nt f a n o r .rs iB 50'E haracters prescri b e d b y t h e J a p a n e s eMin i s t ry o f Ed u ca t'ionas the basic must f o r a n y J a p a n e s e )t h e re is a v e ry lo n g , see m ingly endless ladder to c ljmb t o wa rd s h jg h e r le v e ls o r ma s t e ry , p e r fection. e ve r Most Japanesea n d Ch in e s e t h e ms e lv e swill never be a b le to comevery h"igh on tho s e la d d e rs , t h e re b y re in f o rc ' in g wh a t rank djfferentjals the re ma y b e wit h in t h o s e s o c ie t ie s .

Th is actually meansthat t h e in s id e -o u t s jd e rn e t a p h o ris o n ly ccr r e ct up to a certain poin t . T h e re is a s t e e p d jc h o t o my b e t we e n spe a kers and non-speakersof t h o s e la n g u a g e s ' in c lu d in g t h e wa y th e y are addressedand talked a b o u t . B u t o n c e t h a t b o rd e rljn e h a s be e n passed there are eV en co n s ' id e ra b le d is t a n c e s b e t we e np e rip h e ry a n d centre of I ingu'istic comp e t e n c e .

- 23I n E u ro p e a n languages ther e is har dly any par ticular djstjnction 'i n si d e rs b e t w ee n how a n d o uts' ider sar e addr essed and tal ked about. M o r e o ve r, th e re a ct'i o nto for eigner s aquir ing Eur opean languages m a yd i ffe r fro m th e re a ctj onsfound jn Chinaand Japan.par tjcular ly i n J a p a na fo re i g n e r ca p a bleofspeaking adequate Japanese m aybe, or e v e n sh o u l d b e , co n si d e re d with a cer ta' in tacit uneasin.r r ( .2lil. o,^ s h e w 'i l l b ri n g d 'i ff i cu l tj e s jnto jntennar social ar r angements, i n e v i ta b l y. Mo re o ve r, h e or she penetr atesinto a cor pus m y s t icu m, a so c'i e tyre se rv edfo.insider s. Linguistic competence is not enough to a cq u i re member ship; ver y complete soc.ial b e l o ng 'i n g n e ss i n cl u d i n g p osition in a Japanese or ganization, p r o b ab l ya l so Ja p a n e se e d u c ationwouldbe r equir ed. And even if t h e s e me mb e rsh cri i p te rj a l ar e fullfilled the r acial distinctjons m ight m i g h t sti l l sta n d o u t, E a s t- andsoutheastAs.ians r o some extent e x c e pte d .A l l o f th i s a ctu ally only under linesthe m uch m or esocial c h a r a cte r o f th e Ja p a n e se l anguage, ver y sim ple ( for Eur opeans) in tinqui s t.i c j n soc.ial qr amm ar . g r a m ma n , ry co mp l e x ve F or th e ch i n e seso me thing of the sam e mayapply althoughtne s o c i a l g ra mmaa r sp e ct o f ch ineseis mor ecom panable to Eur opean l a n g u a g e s. A ci vi l i za tj o n se tting itseif apar t, dr awinglines b e t w ee n th e C h i n e se o n th e one handand the bar bar ians( Nor yr , East, So u t han d We st)o n th e o th er is not a civil' ization that wouldeasily adm i t f o r e ' i g n e rsi 'd n dl i n g u i sti c obstaclescan be used to keepfor eiqner s o u t . I n a se n seo n e mi g h t e ven tur n this ar oundfor Eur opean 'languages a n d sa y th a t th e relative easewith which at least som e o f t h e mca n b e a q u i re d (su ch as Span' ish, to som e extent also ' let En g l i sh ) se rve s for eigner s in, to becom a a s a me a n s to e par t of t h e c o mmu n i ti y a t l a rg e . T h er eis even consider able satjsfaction w h e na fo re i g n e r a tta i n s 1i nguistjc competence: some k.indof c o n f i r ma tj o n o f th e u n j ve rsal validity of the language, and mor e s o t h e mo n e e xo t'i c th e fo re j gner . Fr anceis per haps the extr eme e x a m pl e o f th j s, w i th th e F renchseem ingly r egar dingtheir language a s l a l an g u eu n 'i ve rse l l e .A n Afr jcan talking Fr enchper fectly is o n e m oreco n fj rma t'i o , n wa1 j t.ion. ki ng on two f eet, of that pr opos P r e c i se l y th e o p p o si tema ya pply to chineseand Japanese. Not only d o t h e y n o t re g a rd th e 'i r I a nguages as un' iver salI anguages; they m a yn o te ve nw a n t th e mto b e unjver sal,but to be par ticular , languages f o r t h e mse l ve s, n o t n e ce ssar iiyfor other s. Theselanquages ar e ideal fo r s e t t i n g th e me mb e rs o f th e l a nguage com m unity apar t to defendthejr identi ty . (22) T h e ya r e l e ss a d e q u a te a s o ffensive l' inguistic instr umentsto conquen the w or l d.

- L +-

- TRA NS P E RS CIIA L PER SON

Ca n o n e s a y t h a t t h e s e la n g u a g e st a k e

a s t a nd o n th e tra n sp e rso na' ? In a sense , leven the tr anscendental y e s , b u t p e rh a p s o n l y i n d i rectly so. Look' ing at Japanese, for instanc e, t h e c on cre te n e ss o f th e l a n guage,the r elatjve absence of essentialism , m i g h t ma ke th e l a n g u a ge anything less capableof imbu' ing w i t h so u l -l i ke ch a ra cte ri s tics, be that non- animate or anim ate n a t u r e, a n d fo r th e l a tte r non- hum an Because or human. of this w i th e ve ryth i n g em er ging lingujstically without an s y m me try, i n n e r l ^ Je se n ,oma n e yo f co u rsechoosee' ither inter pr etation: that h u m a na s re w i th o u t so u l , o r that ever ythingelse is with soul; js J a n p a n e se languages so d i ffe re nt fr om Eur opean because of the de j o n p e r s on i fj ca t s par ticu' lai"lyof onesel o f p e rso n e f , that th' is cannorDe w i t h o u t i mp fi ca ti o n s. A t th e sa me t'i me th e Japanese language has a special var iety But that language is not for ta.lking f o r t al ki n g " vb ry mu ch "u p war ds. w i t h Go d , b u t fo r ta 'l ki n g or thinking about, for instance, the [ m p e r o r. In o th e r w o rd s, o ne m ight say that exactly because the l a n g ua g e i s so ste e p l y ve rtical,andnonetheless usedon eanth,the one. That does not v e r t j ca l p yra mi d re ma i n sa non- tr anscendental mean t h a t th e E mp e rojrs a per son, he' is pr obablya tr ans- per son,orw as But he is still of this wor 1d, e m b o d yi nJa g p a na n d th e Ja panese. non- tr anscendental. And th' is m eans th a t Go dh a s b e co me meaninq
that Japaneseas such is e n t jre ly c o mp a t ib le w' it h t wo b a s . ic ch a r a cterjstics of the buddh js t b e l ie f - s y s t e n : n o n -s o u l a n d n o n - God,meaningno personal g o d . All E uropeanlanguagesre n d e r t h e ms e lv e se a s ily t o t h e a t t rib u t ' io n ' la n g u a g f e or tal ki ng b o f so ul -l i ke characteri st'ics . T h e re i s a . ls o a s p e c ia 1 ( som emight say with) God: qu a in t p a t t e rn s o f v e ry p o lit e a d d re s s , also used for kings, like th e [ n g lis h f o rms t h o u a rt , g _ q ! --! g : ! . that Sut thjs is certainl-v also av a ila b le in J a p a n e s e ,me a n ' in g jn so mefuture, when E mpero rwo rs h ip h a s c o mp le t e ly d is a p o e a re d the n the lingu'istic forms mig h t b e re s u rre c t e d a n d f jlle d wit h a m on o theistic content. This js n o p re d ic t io n t h a t J a p a n in t h e 2 1 st century wi'11 becomeCh ris t ia no r Mu s lin , o n ly a n in d jc a t ' io n tha t the languagewould not s t a n d ' in t h e wa y wh e re v e rt ' ic a lit y is co n ce rned. Jhere is enough v e rt jc a lit y a s it stands today social c+ lle c t iv is ir t o s e rv e a ls o t h is p u ro o s e . B ut a n d n o n -t ra n s c e n d e n t a -l v e rt ic a l i t y

v a rie t y . A n d t h a t c o l a r e e mlnently compatible wit h b u d d h is mo f a ma h a y a n a le cti v'ism or anti-individua l is m, wo u id s t a n d in t h e wa y o f O c c ' id e n t a lr e l j g j o n s p a r ti cularly of indiv'idual iz in g P ro t e s t a n t Ch ris t ia n it y . (? 3 )

- 25-

4 . C o n cl u si o n n o wti me fo r a n attempt to pu11all of this together and the jn Table 2, which js nothjng other f i r s t ste p i s th e su mma ry p r esented t h a n Ta b l e 1 w i th th e co n clusjons of the analysis in section 3 in highl y c o n c e n tra te d , e p i g ra mma ti for c m. In contr ast w' ith the explor ator y h o r i z o n ta l a p p ro a ch u se d i n the pr eceding section, let us nowtr y to r e a d T a b l e 2 ve rti ca l l y to see what this tells us about the lanquaqes a s c a r ri e rs o f co smo l o g y. th e E u .o p " a tta tguages:Both spaceand time ar e enA s r e ga p d 5 dowed w i th re l a ti ve l y ri g i d and r ather simple str uctur es. Ther e i s a p o i n t o f d e p a rtu rea nd a point of ar r ival, what is' in- between ' i s I i n e a r a n d re l a ti ve l y ri g' id, unam b' iguous . The knowl edgestr uctur e comes o u t a s p re d i ca ti ve (attr "ibutive) , and at the same t' im eabstr act a n d pre ci se . In sh o rt, th e r ight type of language for both atom' istic , d i c h oto mo ua sn d d e d u cti ver easoninq. As concer ns the oer son- natur e
d 'im ens i on the lan g u a g e sa t le a s t p e rmit c o n c e ' iv in g o f

It'i s

n a t u r e a n d h u ma na s s d i ffe rent ( althoughnot ver y clear ly so) , and jve of Godand l m akeit poss' ib' le i f w e n o wma ke a j u mp -aso to conce h u m a na s s d i ffe re n t, th e l atter equipped with a soul,possibly r e l a t j n g to a p o ss'i b l eGo d. In shor t, ther e' is a hier ar chywith G o don to p , th e n h u ma n b e ings, then natur e; Godbeing abstr act, e s s e n ti a l i st a l th o u g he q uipped with hum an featur es. At the inter p e r s o n a ll e ve l th e l a n g u a ges ar e flexible: ther e is a pr edilection for ver tjcal as w el l openings f o r i nd i vi d u a l i sm b u t th e n ther e ar e never theless a s h o rj zo n ta l re l a t'i o n s i ngr oups , and no shar p d' ist j ncti or sbetween a n d o u tg ro u p s. On ema yco n cl u d ei n saying that these ar e languages that ar e c o m pa ti b l e w i th E u ro p e a u n niver sal ism , incor por atingthe r est of t h e wo rld , i n so ci a l for m ationsthat althouqhindiv' idual ist ar e a c c o m mo d a ti to n g b o th ver t' ical and hor izontal ar r anqements. T h i s fl e x'i b 'i 1 i ty 'i s l o st whenone looks at the or ganizationof s p a c e ,ti me a n d kn o w l e d g e: all of themr igid, linear , centr alist. , e re i n a sensewe find exactly the opposjtepatter n. A s r e q a rd sJa p a n e seh T h e r e i s co n sj d e ra b l e fl e xibility wher ethe or gan' ization of space, ' in l inguistic patter ns, ar e concer ne d. t ' i m ean d kn o w l e d g e ,ae sxp ressed

_26_

Ta b le 2.

L a n g u a g ea ss C a rr jer s of Cosm ology: A Summ ar l

E u ro p e a n
Spa ce

Ch i nese

I i near ri g i d giu ous u n a mb

I inear rigid

.lexi flexible f bl e guous guous ambi ambi m eta- mean' ings m eta - mean' i ngs
fl exi bl e f le x ib . le me t a -me a n in g s me t a -me a n in g s

Ti m e

Kno wl edge

predi cat'iv e abstract preci se nature and d'if f e rhumans

ani

re I a t i o n aI c o n cre t e v ag u e n a t u re a n d h u ma n s s a me

re la t io n a l re t e conc g u va e

P e r s o-N n a tu re

natur e and hum ans same

Pe rson - P e rs on

individual is t

collectivist I and ver t' ica hor izontal ingr ouponlY

ve rti ca -i and hori zontaTa nd i n g ro u p p o u tg ro u symb o l :I

c o lle c t iv is t a n t ' i-in d iv id u a l is t v e rt ' ic a l ma ' in ly h o rjz o n t a l p o o rly i n g ro u p o n ' lY

l hai sym bol,w6- mens y mb o :

n 0 sou I P e r s o n -T ra n s- so u l vs. body personald i ch o to my Go dvs. h um ans N O God d i ch o to my

I sou God

-2 7 N either space, nor time, nor k n o wle d g eis e q u . ip p e d w. it h a c le a r cen tr e, the latter becauset h e la n g u a g e js n o t a d e q u a t e f o r t h e o rie s w i t h c l e a r de d u ctive reasonjnq imply'ino t h a t a ll p ro p o s jt jo n s t h a t c a n b e cor r e ctly formulated are tr u e o r f a ls e a n d c o n t ra d jc it io n s w' ill n o t ap p e ar. Then the transperson a l, p e rs o n a ) a n d n a t u re s p a c e s a re m o r e placed at the same lev e l, a t le a s t lin g u is t ic a lly . T h e re is n o t that tremendous gap betwe e na p e rs o n a l y e t t ra n s c e n d e n t a lG o d , v ia h u m a n b e in g sto an inanimate nutu.. (. 2 Q e rt ic a 1 it y , h o we v e r, is c le a rly e x o re s s e d in so c'ial organization, and js we ll re f le c t e d . in o n e o f t h e wo rld ' s mor e e x t r e m e l an g u ages in this regard. A n d t h a t la n g u a g e a ls o d ra ws a s h a rp 'lin e betweeningroup and out g ro u p , ma k in g J a p a n e s ea n y t h in g b u t a can didate for. a pos'it'ion a s u n . iv e rs a l la n q u a q e .

As regards Chinese,nnybe t h js wo u ld b e t h e c a n d id a t e f o ru n iv e rs a lit y , b e ca use it is the language s p o k e n b y t h e la rg e s t f ra c t io n o f

/^F \ | / ^l

not only

h u m a n k'i n d ? ''It i s fl e x'i b l e both wer e space, time and knowledge is conc er ned, a n d a l so i n te rms o f relations to natur g to other human beings a n d t o th e tra n sp e rso n a l . It stands out as the r jchest l a n g ua g e fa m'i l y a mo n g th e thr ee com par ed, not taking such c l e a r sta n d s,l e a vi n g o ptions open. In a sense' it is to social cosm ol ooy w h a t t heR u ss'i a n language But thene is one r ather i s to phonetj65. b a s i c sh o rtco mi n gth : e i n a c cessibil ity - Chinese tends to r em ain a n i n g ro u p l a n g u a g e fo r th a t r eason. Howeverwhat , about the vaguenes s a n d a mb 'i g u i ty?T h i s i s n o t necessar :i1y an objectjon.One m iqht ar gue, as o fte n te n d to d o , that C h i n e se r eality is ambiguous and hence i n a d e q u a te l y mirro re d i n o ver - pr ecisestatem ents. C o n c l usi o n : languages a re car r ier s of cosmology, alongside r e l i q i o n . te ch n o l o g y,sp or t, and ar t, the or ganizationof soaceand ti m e, - (te\
th e y d o not determine thought . T h e y in d u c e a n d c o n d jt io n s t ru c t u re s ; the y do not determine them. A n d c u lt u re / s t ru c t u re c o n d it io rs la n q u a g e s ;w e a v i ng a ll of this together, n o t s e a mle s s ly , b u t t o a f a m. ily , a s c h e me of th ings. A nd that js what c o s mo lo g yis a ll a b o u r.

a n d so on.-"[anguages conditi o n t h o u g h t i n t h e ' la n g u a g e c o mmu n ty i;

NOTES A fi rst ve rsi o n o f th i s paper , "Language Str uctur e and Social S t r u c t u re : th e C a seo f Ja p a n"waswr itten in 1972and since that tim e b o t h o f u s h a veb e e nd i scu ss' ing these topics' in lectur es and sem inar s, p a r t i c ui a rl y a t th e In te r-U n.iver sityCentr e, Dubr ovnik;Univer s' it' i S a j n s Ma l a ysi a(1 9 7 9 ) , eie Univer sitdt, ; 0 st-AsiatischesSem ' inarFr B e r l i n (1 9 8 3 ). Wea re i n d e b tedto discussants all places, and par tic u l a r l y to E i n a r F l yd a l a n d Y[j, Cheung- Lieh. ( 1 ) T h e co smo l o gp y e rsp e ctivehas beendeveloped in a pr e' l' im inar y f o r m i n Jo h a nGa 'l tu n g w , i th Tor e Heiestadand Er ik Rudeng, "0n the L a s t 2 5 0 0Y e a rs'i n We ste rn Histor y, And Som e Rem ar ks on the Com ' ing 5 0 0 ", i n T h e N e w C a mb ri d gModer H' istor y, Com pan' ion e n Vglum e, Cam br idge, C a m b r i d gU e n i ve rsi ty P re ss, 1979,pp. 318- 362. position o f a n e ffor t to give a m or esym m etr ic { ? ) As a n e xa mp l e t o m a t e ri a l /stru ctu ra l a n d n on- mater jal/str uctur alfactor s, see Johan G a ' l t u ng o " S tru ctu re , C u l tu re and IntelIectual Style: An EssayCompar i ng S a x o n i c,T e u to n i c, Ga l l j c a nd NipponicAppr oaches", in Social Scjence , ondon I n f o r m a ti o n (S A GEL a nd Bever ly H' ills) 20, 6, 1981 , pp. 817- 55. M a "v bte he b a si c p o i n t i s th e r elative absence of tensq in Chinese/ J a p a n ese ma ki n gth e e xp re ss ions less tim e- bound than ' in past- pr esentf u t u r e co n sci o u sIn d o -E u ro pean. M Uller , in "Spr ache W er ner und Natur a u f f a s su n g b e i d e n S i o u x" , i n Unter demPflaster : Iiegt der Str and, H . P . D ue rr, d ., K ra me r V e rl ag, Ber lin,19B1 points out that Bibr i i n C o staR 'i cacl a ssi fi e s th i ngs as r ound, and in that categor yar e n o t o n l y fru i ts a n d o ra n g e s,but also year s, saying m uch about how that language co n ce i ve s o f that par ticular unit of tim e. The basjc text ' i n jty, M IT Pr es s Thought t h i s f i e l d re ma i n sB .L . !,l h or,f Language, and Real , Canbridge, ( 3 ) A co n d i ti o n fo r th i s, of cour se,' is the high ievel of flex' ibility i n t h e C h i n e se l a n g u a g e ." B roadlyit m aybe said that any wor d m ay d o d u t y fo r a n y p a rt o f sp e ech w' ithjn the lim its set by its' intr ins' ic meaninga ; n d , p a rti cu l a rl y, that what seem at fir st sight to be adof casescapableof use as nouns i e c t ' i v e s a re i n a ve ry l a rg e num ber
a n d ve rbs, and almost univers a lly u s e d a s a d v e rb s . " VIn a discussion of "That A wf u l G e rma n " ,b y B ra d le y G ra h a m,I n t e rn a t io n a l

H l r r a l dT ri b u n e9 Ja n u a ry1 9 80( p.1a) jt is pointed out howlong Ger man by even to b e , and that "these wor ds, accompanied w o r d sh a ve a te n d e n cy ' i o n g e rmo dfy'i to come befor e the ver b, which, seem i n g cl a u se s , a 'lways at the end, whenone finally lear ns a p pear s se n te n ce s Ge rn n n i n m a ny

- ?l 'l eca nnot r esist including his r efer enceto Mar k w h a t j s h a p p e n i n g ." T w a in :" I h e a rd l a te 1 y o f a wor n and sor ely tr ied Amenican student who u s e d to f1 y to a ce rta i n Ger m an wor d for r elief whenhe could bear u p u nd e rh i s a g g ra va ti o n s no longer - the only soundwas sweetand p r e c 'i o u s to h i s e a r a n d h ealing to his lacer ated spir it. This was the w o r d d a mi t. It w a s o n l y th e soundthat helpedhim , not the meaning ( i t me a n s me re l y h e re w i th ) ; And so, at last, whenhe lear ned that the e m p ha si s w a s n o t o n th e fi rst sy' lab1e, his only stay and suppor twas g o n e, a n d h e fa d e d a w a ya n d d' ied." R . A . D .F o rre st i n T h e ch i n eseLanguage, Faberand Faber , London1973 . ( 4 ) S e eN a ka mu ra , a j i me ,l^lays H of Thinkingof Easter npeoples: I n d i a -ch i n a -T i b e t-Ja p a n , ono1u1u, H The univer sity pr ess of Hawa.ii, 1 9 6 4 ' p . 1 8 4 . S u chp a tte rn s, however wer , e also found in ancjent Gnee k . I n g en e ra,l th e cyc'l i ca 1n atur e of Gr eektim e per spectiveis com patib'l e w i t h th i s typ e o f w ri ti n g , as' it is for ch' inese - not meanjng by that c y c ' l i c a 1a s to ta l l y e xcl u sive of linear per spectives.For a gener al d j s c u ssi o no f th i s se e Jo seph Needham, Timeand Easter nMan,London, R o y a lA n th ro p o l o g i ca lIn s'i tjtute, 1965, par t' icur ar r ychapter vIII, "T i m ea n d H i sto ry i n C h i n aand the W est' ,,FF. 4S- SZ. ( 5 ) ch a n gT u n g -S u n g",A chinesephilosopher ' sTheor yof Knowledge" Y e n c h'i nJo g u rn a l o f S o ci a l Studjes, vol . I, no. 2, Beijing, 1939,p. 2 5. w e h a vema d e u se o f a tn a n slat' ion' into Nor wegian, ( "Kinesisk og vest1 i g t e n kn i n g " , V i n d u e t,0 slo,1971, no. 1, pp. 18- 28, in tur n based o n a t ra n sl a ti o n i n to F re n c h,publishedin Tel Quel, no. 38/1969) . ( 6 ) Th e sete rms a re u se dher e to point out an essential differ ence i n h o wto co n ce j veo f re a l 'ity, essent' iallyas stat' ic, or essential' ly a s d y na mi c. A cco rd i n g to th e for m er per spectivebodjes, or things, a t r e st, o r w i th p e rma n e nt c har acten' istics wer e mor er ea1, the tr ans i e n t b e j n g e p h e me ra lA . ccor ding to the latter per spectivebodies, or t h ' i n g sca n b e se e na s re a l also whennot at r est because thejr m ovement i s a c co rd i n gto ce rta i n i n var iances( such as the galilean law of m otio n) . A p r e d j ca te d e fj n e s a su b j ect' in an invar iant way; a r elation places t h e i n va ri a n cea t a h i q h e r level. J e a n - Fra n E o iB s i 1 1 e te r, i n "Ding, den Koch,zer legt ein Rind' ,, As j a t j sch e S tu d i e n /E tu d eA s s' iatiques,36( 2) jgg?, quotes paul Va16r y, C a h i e rs, B i b l i o th 6 q u ed e l a Pl6jade, Ca' lljmar d,par is, 1973- 74 on t h e r e l a ti o n b e tw e e n th o u g ht and speech:"Les 3/4 de la m6taphysique c o n s t 'i tu e n tu n si mp l e ch a p itr e de l' histoir e du ver be Etr e". Va16r y

- 3-

po in ts out how the very circu ms t a n c e t h a t a c o rre c t s e n t e rrc ein a n In d o - E uropean language has a n o u n a n d v e rb ' imp o s e s a c a u s a l o rd e r, "N otr e phrase occidentale cr6 e d e la c a u s a lit 6 " { p . B B ).

whenthe ver bs ar e tr ansiT h i s b e co mep s a rti cu l ar ly ' impor tant and t i v e . Th u s, i t co u l d b e a rguedthat the ver bs "d- evelopper " "for m er " j n F r e n chsh o u l d b e i n tra n s' itive on1y, not tr ansitive. A constr uction pays pauvr es"shouldbe as s u c h a s " L e s p a ys ri ch e s d d veloppent' les to be in social r ealjty. The i m p o s si b l el 'i n g u i sti ca l l y as it seem s is valid both ' linguistically c o n s t ru ct'i o n u si n g re fl e xi ve for ms, however , a n d e m p i ri ca l y: " 'i l se d 6 veloppe","el le se for me". This constr uct' io n atrti fi cial in English, however . m i g h t s o u n dso me w h a ( 7 ) T w oe xa mp l e s o f typ i ca l quar tets: "no destr uctjon, no constr uction" , a n d "co n stru ct'i o n l 'i ve s i n destr uct' ion". It does not say that ther e i s o r s h o u l d b e d e stru cti o n or constr uction: what is pointed out i s o n l y h o wj n ti ma te l y th e two ar e r elated. ; p o s i t i ve a n d n e g a ti vee l e ments m aketao. ( Chang, op. cit. p.??) "0ne dj vj de s into two" and "Two uni t e jn t o o n e " a re q u a rt e t s a lo n q t h is I jn e .

A s f o r q u a rte ts so a l so fo r duets: "cr isis" becomes "danger /oppor tun'i ty " : ssp ear /shield"; "thing" becom es "East/W est": "c o n t r a d i cti o n " b e co me" b e co me " sti me /sp a ce". "Unity of opposites"is the gener al for m ul a. "c o s mo s"
( B) t h a t t h e re is n o s t ric t A gain, 'it should be emp h a s iz e d d ' iv id in g

la n g u a g e sa n d t h e s e O rie n t a l la n g u a g e s . l'in e between Indo-E uropean i n Ru ss'ian"I am a boy" is " ja ma l' c h ik " , b u t t h e in v e rs io n , " ma l' c h ik ja " m i ght comecloser to the s e c o n d in t e rp re t a t ' io n rn e n t io n e djn t h e
+^ .. +

( 9 ) T h e e xa mp l e 'i sta ke n from I. Elder s, "Les r appor ts de la langue j a p o n a i se s",Revue Philosophiqu_e, No. 156,1966, pp. e t d e 1 a p e n sd e m ater ial 3 9 1 - 4 0 6 .E l d e rs p o i n ts o u t that k' i stands for the wooden i n t h e tre e ra th e r th a n th e idea of the tr ee; henceone cannotsay t h a t a ki i s i n b l o sso m,th e flower s of the tr ee m aybe in blossom. language of the Japanese he A s a n o th e re xa mp l e o f th e concr eteness t a k e s th e w o rd tsu m'i , w h i ch stands both for "sin" and for the ' infr actio n

- 4-

o f a r eg u l a t'i o n ;j u st l i ke kim ochistands for m y "inner state" both i n t h e se n seo f " h e a l th " , a nd "m ood".To m ake clear what is m eantthe or r ely on the context. J a p a n e se w o u l d h a veto u se concr eteexamples, ( 1 0 ) Th i s d e b a te , th e n , a b out whether"essences" can be said to have p ri or to the things, ante r em , or only in the t x'i ste n ce a n i n d p e n d e ne withjn the context t h i n g s th e mse l ve s, i n re b u s, is m or em eaningful o f I n do -E u ro p e ath n a n th e se 0r jental languages. ( 1 1 ) El d e rs, o p .cj t., p .4 05, m akes the point that the examples ar e au sens str ict du m ot, c a r r y ' i n gth e b u rd e no f p ro o f: "La d6m onstr ation, e s t s o u ve n tp re sq u e a b se n te.Uneanalysedes concepts, une divis' ion par fois elles d u t h 6 mee t d e s d 6 fi n i ti o n s ne sont pas n6cessair es, qui 1e plus souvent C e sont 1es exemples s o n t m d me e mb a rra ssa n te s. E l d er s ' is pr obablynot himself awar eof his own e n t r a ' i n e n tl 'a d h 6 sj o n " . c u l t u r al l i mi ta t'i o n w h e nh e r efer s to what appear sto be deductive reasoning a s d e mo n stra ti o n "au sens str ict du m ot". ( 1 2 ) Bo th a to mi sm with Descar tes . can both be associated a n d d e d uctivism epistemology haveas Se e nf ro m th e o u tsi d e th e se pi' l1ar s of W ester n into sm aller units t h e i r co n se q u e n ce th a t e n ti ties ar e fr agmented t h a t a re th e n stu d i e d se p a rately, and r elinked to eachother deduct' iv e1y . T h e r e i s a p ri ma cyo f'l o g i cal over other ( "or ganic", "jnner m eaning") ' l i n k a g e s.A g a i n l Je ste rnl a n guages ' in this r egar d. ar e not the same A s A r t h u r K o e stl e r sa 'i d i n an inter view sent after hjs death ( in W est T V ,4 Ma rch1 9 8 3 ): " Youcannot say in English ' die' inner e G e r m an ' logic", L o g i k de r E re i g n 'i sse '- th e re is only one ( 1 3 ) Ja me s Cor gi 1979, pp. i n the best- seller Sayonar a, A . Mi ch e n e r language, of the am biguitiesof the Japanese e xa mp l es 1 6 4 - 6 5 ,g 'i ve sso me that' s what the I' m only guessing c o n c l ud i n g" j t i sn 't cl e a r, because hidden s t r a n ge r me a n t- Ou r l i fe i n Japanis one of im pljed meanings, s ' i g nf i ica n ce s. "

- 5rh e P o l i sh w o rd ta k ( "yes") maybe inter pr eted the sam e WdY h a v i n ga ve ry h i g h fre q u e ncyin por ish par r ance.In Nor wegian ' man/ ysy6q p e o p l eu se th e w o rd ri kti g ( ' ,cor r ect,' ) the same way, meaning n o t "I h e r^ e bce y rti fy th a t what you havesaid is cor r ect,,.
"go ontt,

(l+I

( 1 5 ) E l d e rs, o p . ci t., p .398. As Elder s adds: ,,poun la fem m e de c e t h o mme i l e st cl a i r q u e c' est son m ar i quj vjent par tjr en voyage,'. H o w eve r, E l d e rs a d d s th a t the youngergener ationand those whohave b e e nmo rei n co n ta ct w i th for eigner s ( meaning "wester ner s,' ) ' ,ut- il isent p l u s so u ve n tl e s p ro n o n s p er sonnels". I n g e n e ra l H i n d i se e ms to havemost char acter istics in com m on with I n d o - E u ro p e al n anguage i n genenal, as it should;butthen ther e ar e c h a r a cte ri sti cs th a t a re mor ein the dir ection of Chinese and Japanes e. T h u s , " H 'i n d isp e ,rki n g In d i a ns havea tendency to use the wor dsham, "w e " a n d h a ma ra ,',o u n s', w h er eDanes wouldsay I and mine. I think this i s d u e to th e ci rcu msta n ce that Indians havea tendency to see them s e l v e s a s a p a n ts o f a b i g g enun' it, wher ethe Daneis .inclined to out h i m s e l f i n th e ce n te r.', F r o m"No g 'l e B e tra g tn i n g e r o ver Spr ogets M edvjr ken ved Dannelsen at Ver dens bi l l edet" , D a n m arks L e re rh d j sko l e , C o penhagen, 1gBZ, by Finn Th' iesen, p. 199. ( 1 6 ) Th e fo l l o w i n g fo u r e xpr essions alI stand for "welcom home", e b u t a t fo u r d i ffe re n t l e ve l s of social r elations: o k a e r i - a so b a seo ; ka e ri -n a sajmase; okaer i- nasai; okaer i. 0f cour se, honor i fi c s , p o l j t e ne ss ma ya l so b e a te chn' ique to cr eate distance. Distanceand verti c a l i t y ma yg o to g e th e r a s i n the im polite politeness of bur eaucr ats. A n i s o 1 a te dvi l l a g e ma yd e fenditself against "jntr uder s" wjth excessi v e fun of people. \ p o l i t e n ess, w h i ch ma ya l so be a way of m aking in Chinese_, HongKongUniver s' ity and Symbol - B e r n h a rd K a rl g re n , i n S o u n d Pr e s s , H o n gK o n g1 9 6 2 , h a s thjs ir r esistible anecdote as an i' llustr ation p o l i te n e ss i m plies ( p. 94) : o f w h at C h i n e se A vi si to r ca ]1 e d , c'l a d in his best r obes, and awaitedthe ar r ival o f h i s h o st se a te d i n th e re c ept' ion r oom.A r at, which had beendisp o r t i n g i tse l f u p o nth e b e a ms above, insjnuating its nose into a jar o f o i l wh j ch w a s p u t th e re for safe keeping,fr ightened at the sudden 'intrus'ion o f th e ca l l e r, l " a naway,and' in so doing upset the oi1- jar , w h j c h f e l l d i re ctl y o n th e caller , str jking him a sever eb1ow,and r u i n i n g h i s e 'l e g a n tg a rme n ts with the satur ation of the o' il. Just as t h e f a c e o f th e g u e st w a s p ur ple with r age at thjs djsaster , the host after which the e n t e r e d , w h e nth e p ro p e r sa l utatjons wer e per for med, g u e s t p ro ce e d e d to e xp l a j n the situation. ' As I enter edyour honour able
---''+-^^+.nrl caarorl mvqplf rrnder voun honourable beam, I inadvertently

-o-

t e r r i f ie d ye u r h o n o u ra b l e rat, wh' ich fled and upset your honour able o i l - i a r u p o nmy me a n a n d i n sign' ificant clothing, which is the r eason o f m y co n te mp ti b l e a o p e a rance in your honour ab' le pr esence., to b e w h e r esoiio- t f ngulltiii enteii w- j- tr r pir ti { 1 7) T h is se e ms cular f o r c e n o t so mu ch e xp l o ri n g the socia' l s.ignificance of the differ ences b e t w ee n a s w i th i n l a n g u a g es. A bookwith the attr active title Language j n J a p a n e se _ l o ci e ty: !u rre n t Issues' in Sociolinguistics, F.C.C. Pe n g ,e d i to r, u n i ve rsi ty o f r okyo Pr ess, Tokyo, 1975contains nothing js also o f d i r e ct re ve re n ce to th e pr esent explor ation. D' iscontent f o r m u l a te db y s. T a kd i r A l i s jahbana, in his The Failur e of Moder n
Lin g u jstjcs in the Face of L in g ! rt t jc P ro b le mso f t h e T we n t je t h Ce n t u r y ,

Ku a l aL u mp u r, U n i ve rsi ty o f M alaya1965. He points out that,,while t h e o t h e r so cj a l sci e n ce s, like econom ics, politics - even sociology a n d a n th ro p o l o g y - a re i n te nsively inter ested' in national and inter nat i onal d e v e l op me n t, str" u ctu ra l l i n guistics and phonology havemor eand mor e . i s o l a te dth e mse l ve s fro m so cial and cultur al pr oblem s - - " ( p. B) and ' is not descr iptjve,but pr es c r i p"l , i h a tth e y/th e l e a d e rs o f d evelopingnations/need t i v e l ' i n g u i sti cs. It'i s th u s ver y r egr ettable that pr ecisely in these p r o c e s se s a n d p ro b l e ms th a t ar e cr ucial for the languages of developin g c o u n t ri e s, p ro ce sse s a n d p roblems wh' ich can be for mulatedsuccinctly in the terms :!qlaafg:E!:g! and modefni zation , modern 1inguistics , t h r o u ghi ts sta ti c, fo rma l and micr o appr oach,is least able to contr ib u t e " (p . 1 5 ). In o th e r w o r ds, linguistics becomes like botany. Howe v e r , A l i sj a h b a n ad o e s n o t discuss howlanguages m aycanr y developr ne ntal c o d e s ,w h 'i ch mj g h t b e a mo reim por tantaspect of the inter face between languages a n d d e ve l o p me n t than the linguistic engineer ing pr obiem s Al i s j a h b a n ah a s i n mi n d . o rd e r w as by and' lar ge by b' ir th, the shj- no- k5- sho i l B) Th e p re ce d i n g ( s a m u r a i -fa rme r-a rti sa n -mer chant) system:"degr eeocr acy" wouldbe by t h e m e ri t a ccu mu l a teth d ro u ghdegr ees,the point being not the r anking o f t h e p e rso na cco rd i n gto s ubject or gr ade, but of the univer s' ity accor di n g t o p re sti g e . S e eJo h a nGaltung, "Social Str uctur e, Education s t r u c t u re a n d L i fe -1 o n g E d u cation:The case of Japan", Essays in peace R e s e a rchV o i , III, tj l e rs, Copenhagen, 1976,chapter 11.

i t g ) T h u s. " P ro fe sso rGa l tungis giving lectur e ther e" wouldbe "G a ' l t u n g -se n se wa ia ch i ra d e ki r ::- shj:- eol"a=eftasu" if Galtungwer e a Japane s e: ko g i sh i teimasu" "G a l t u n gw a a so ko d e as he is not. The total lack of h o n o r i fi cs ma ke s th e e xp n e ssion simjlar to one that could also be used f o r d o gs. T h a t th i s cl e a r d emar cation of the nai- gai distinction m iqht be p a i n f u l fo r th e Ja p a n e se w i fe of a qa11in goeswithout saying.

-l

( 2 0 ) It sh o u l d b e p o i n te d out that this is a m inimum,and a' lthough i t a s s u re sso me it m ayalso ser ve to r einfor ce the class co mp e te n ce s t r u c t ure o f a so ci e ty ru n as a "degr eeocr acy", by defining a m inimum f o r t h e'l o w e r ra n ks s1 T h e social or der . SeeA Guideto Readjng & W r i t i n g Ja p a n e seT , h e 1 .8 5 0Basic Char acter s and the KanaSyllabar ies, T u t t l e , T o kyo , 1 9 7 5 .T h e 1 850char acter sinclude the "881 char acter s d e s i g na te d b y th e Mi n i stry of Education as the basic r equir ement ( p.7) . f o r t h e si x Y e a rso f e l e me ntar y school" D e r k Bodde, Ch'ina's Cultural T ra d it io n , Dry d e n P re s s Hin s d a le , I llin o js 1957h a s th e fo l l o w i n g to say about class differ ences in Chinese( p. t3 ) : eve na n a ti ve C h i n e se r equir es year s of study to masterthe wr itten (a l so rto fl mo rl y yet language kn o wn as l' iter ar y on classical Ch' inese)And . s o g r e a t w a s th e p re sti g e o f the liter ar y language that until r ecent' ly a l m o s t e ve ryth i n gw a s w ri tte n' in it, aside fr om fiction and dr ama( whi c h f o r t h e ve ry re a so nth a t th ey followed the colloquial idjom , wer e looked down o n i n tra d 'i ti o n a l C h i n a) .
il ---

( 2 1 ) Th i s p a rti cu l a r th e mejs elabonated at som e length by RoyA. M ille r i n J a p an 'sMo d e rn Myth , T h e Language and Beyond, W eather hill, Newyor k & T ok y o, 1 9 8 2c , h .8 ,p .1 5 7A . fo re 'i g n e n phr asesin Japanese c apableof som e is ver y much a pp re ci a te d a fo re i g n er capableof r eally talking Japanese is n o t . B u t th i s d o e s n o t o n l y apply to language but also to insight in m a t t e r s Ja p a n e se i n g e n e ra l. A for eigner whohas under stood a l' ittle star ts getting deep o f J a p a ni s co mp 'l i me n tew d; henthe under stand' ing pr oduces h e i s f e a re d . We ste rn u n 'i ver salism for ejgner s w' ith a ver y h' igh l e v e l o f i n si g h t i n th e We s t; they ar e welcomed and pr aised although ( and Ch' inese) posit' ions. Japanese par t' i u s u a l l y a cco rd e d o n l y se co ndar y c u l a r i sm p ro d u ce s a stro n g i nsjde- outside, nai- gai divide: for eigner s a r e t o b e ke p t a t a d j sta n ce. All of ch. 8 jn M ' iller ' s bookdeals with t hi s . ( Z Z 1 0 f co u rse , d n y l a n g u age is also the car r ier of a cer tain cultur al c o d ea n d h e n cen o t u n i ve rsal insofar as the adoptionof that language w o u l db e a tth e e xp e n se o f o ther cultur al codes. But Ch' inese and Japane s e to lear n for an a r e a l so d i ffi cu l t, i n th e s enseof tim e- consum ing, of the language. Howeveras , a sem i- secr et a d u l t w i th n o p ri o r kn o w l e dge l a n g u ag e th e y a re ve ry a d e q uate: a networ kof Chinese( or Japanese) b e l o n g i ngto the sam e clan, or Japanese belonging a b r o a d,e g C h i n e se t o t h e sa me w 'i 1 1to som e extent be shjelded off fr om peeping co mp a n y, T h e Ja p a nese Western e ye s. could colonjze Taiwan( 1894- 1945) and Ko r e a( 1 9 1 0 /1 1 -1 9 4 5 char acter sas a)l so l i nguistical' ly, us' ingChinese a b a s j s; b u t'i t j s d o u b tfu l whetherthey could havedoneso in countr ie s w i t h o th e n syste ms o f w ri ti n g.

- B-

An i n t e re stj n g stu d y a b o u t Chinese mar x' istter m s has beenmade by W olf gang L i p p e r t, E n tste h u n g u n d F u nktioneiniger Chinesischer mar xistischerTer m i ni F r a n z S te i n e r ve rl a g , l ,Ji e sbaden, 1979.The basjc point js that mar xjst t e n m sca mej n to C h i n e se vi a Japanese and under went consider able change o n t h e w a y: " E j n e R e i h ema r xistischerTer mini, die aus demjapanischen i n s c h in e si sch e i i b e rn o mmen wur den,er hier ten in der Folge eine ver i i n d e r ich l e sp ra ch l 'i ch e Ge stalt,' ( f r om the pr eface) . The bookm ayser ve a s o n e co n ti n o u sw a rn i n ga g ainst believing that Chinese m ar xist ter "m ino'logy ca n b e d i re ctl y u n d er stood the sam e way as it is in the west. ( 2 3 ) El d e rs, o p . ci t., p .p . 403 f.' , - - on vo- it com bjen la str ucutr e du language e st p n o ch e p ens6e de la buddhiste,ou-tout de vient un flottem ent s u b j e c ti f" . N a k a mu ra o,p . ci t. p . 5 7 5 char acter izesthe Japanese attitude in this peoplehave seldom c o n n e cti o n a s fo l l o w s: " T h us, the Japanese confr ont ej ! o b i e c ti ve re a l i ty a s sh a rp l y distinsuishedfr om knowing subjects. This a t t i t u d e ma yb e ca l l e d th e i r comm on way of th' inking. It is often said t h a t t he y a re p ra ct'i ca l a n d adept in techniques of action, but that t h e y a re ra th e r w e a kj n stu dying the objective basis of their pr act' ical a c t i o n b e ca u se th e y a re to o anxiousto accomplish the action. It ' is p a r t i a l l y o w i n gto th i s ch a racter istjc that they havebeeninclined, f o r c e n tu ri e s, to fo l l o w fo reign ideas with an uncr itjcal m ind". T h i s j u d g e me n t, o f co u rse , pr esupposes, that W ester n thought js som eh o ws u pe rj o r a n d d o e s n o t e x plain howNakam urwas a ever able to wr ite js h j s s u pe rbb o o k - i n Ja p a n ese. Never theless it c' lear that a languag e 1i k e E n gilsh , fo r j n sta n ce , has gr eat capacity for pr oducing abstr actjons , s i m p l y b y me a n s o f q e ru n d s,adding- inq to ver bs, or addinq- ty to many n o u n so r a d j e ct'i ve . s so clear ly expr essed nowher e th i s g a p i s per haps t 2 4 ) In th e l ,Je st ' in w om en' m ana bov e a s i n th e ve ry fi rst p a g e sof the Old Testam ent, Genesis,w' ith ' in Span' ishcomr ade' Genosse can be I t i s i n te re sti n g to n o te that But this com pafr er a. a n d fem in' ine:com pafr er o, u s e d b o th .i n ma scu l i n e d o e sn o t w o rk fo r th e b o ss: like' in Fr enchle chef does not havea either ( it does in contempofo rm, e l i e f-e d o e s not in Span' ish fem'inine maybe equa1,but not above . d i e C hef.in) .Fem ales , o w e ve r, r a r y Ge rma nh and fem injne speec h, m ascul' ine F o r a n e xp l o ra ti o n o f d i ffe rences between Pa r i s ' 1983' r n d c. F o rel, Par ler sjnascvlins,par ler s f6m jnjns, s e e v . A e b .i sch ea

-9 -

( z s 1 H o w e veo r n e su b d i vi d esthe chineselanguage comm unity it comes o u t c on si d e ra b l y a b o veth e number of peopletalking English ( 350 mill' i on) , (2 0 0 mi l l i o n ), A ra bic ( 120 m ill jon) , Por tugese ( t' tS m illion) . Sp a n - i sh F i g u r esfro m T h e E co n o mi st,26Januar y1980, basedon a study m ade b y L e Mo n d e .
t? 6 ) This is the theme of a f o rt h c o min g s t u d y , J o h a n G a lt u n g , S o c ia l

j- li zati on Theor y. C o s mo og l y, A n A p p ro a ch to C' iv