Culture and space

In the previous two chapters, I suggested how a number of factors such as complexity of mental operations, perceptual input versus short-term memory, and small-scale versus large-scale space play a relevant role in affecting choices of specific frames of reference for Tongan speakers. In addition, I introduced a clear tendency to privilege different FoRs in linguistic production in small-scale space (relative) and performance in the three psychological ‘frame of reference’ tasks in the same space (absolute). In other communities (i.e., Guugu Yimithirr, Australia; Kilivila, Trobriand Islands; and Tamil, India), Levinson (1996a, 2003), Senft (1994), and Pederson (1993, 1995) administered the same tasks (linguistic and psychological) and obtained very different results.

In speakers of Guugu Yimithirr, a high congruence between the use of the absolute FoR in the language tasks and the psychological tasks was found (Levinson, 1996a). In the second group, Kilivila, no specific preference was detected in either group of tasks (Senft, 1994). And finally, two different groups of Tamil speakers, one urban and one rural, were found to privilege either a relative or an absolute FoR, respectively. Both groups were consistent in both type of tasks (Pederson, 1993, 1995).