Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m8s7h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T18:28:30.572Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Learning how to ask: Native metacommunicative competence and the incompetence of fieldworkers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2008

Charles L. Briggs
Charles L. Briggs
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, Vassar College and the Committee on Degrees in Folklore and Mythology, Harvard University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Every speech community boasts an array of devices for characterizing communicative events. These native metacommunicative repertoires are culturally patterned in terms of both use and acquisition. Interviews meet with varying degrees of success by virtue of their relative (in-)compatibility with the norms underlying such events. An analysis of the way in which Spanish speakers in rural New Mexico gain metacommunicative competence suggests that native metacommunicative routines provide a rich source of sociolinguistic and social/cultural data and that awareness of these repertoires can assist fieldworkers in using interviews more appropriately and effectively. (Interview techniques, metacommunication, acquisition of sociolinguistic competence, ethnopoetics, New Mexican Spanish)

Type
Articles
Information
Language in Society , Volume 13 , Issue 1 , March 1984 , pp. 1 - 28
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bates, E. (1976). Language and context: The acquisition of pragmatics. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bates, E.Camaioni, L. & Volterra, V. (1979) The acquisition of performatives prior to speech. In Ochs, E. & Schieffelin, B. B. (eds.), Developmental pragmatics. New York: Academic Press. 111–129.Google Scholar
Bloch, M. (1975). Introduction. In Bloch, M.(ed), Political language and oratory in traditional society. London: Academic Press, 1–28.Google Scholar
Briggs, C. L. (1980). The wood carvers of Córdova, New Mexico: Social dimensions of an artistic “revival.” Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press.Google Scholar
Briggs, C. L. (1983a). Questions for the ethnographer: A critical examination of the role of the interview in fieldwork. Semiotica.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briggs, C. L. (1983b). Treasure tales and pedagogical discourse in Hispanic New Mexico. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Briggs, C. L. (in press). The pragmatics of proverb performances in New Mexican Spanish. American Anthropologist.Google Scholar
Churchill, L. (1978). Questioning strategies in sociolinguistics. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Cicourel, A. V. (1970). The acquisitionof social structure: Towards a developmental theory of language and meaning. In Douglas, J. (ed), Understanding everyday life. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
Cicourel, A. V. (1974). Some basic theoretical issues in the assessment of the child's performance in testing and classroom settings. In Cicourel, A. V. et al. , Language use and school performance. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Cook-Gumperz, J., & Corsaro, W. A. (1976). Social-ecological constraints on children's communicative strategies. In Cook-Gumperz, J. & Gumperz, J. J., Papers on language and context. Working Paper #46, Language Behavior Research Laboratory, University of Califomia, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Cook-Gumperz, J., & Gumperz, J. J. (1976). Papers on language and context. Working Paper #46, Language Behavior Research Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Corsaro, W. A. (1979). Sociolinguistic patterns in adult–child interaction. In Ochs, E. & Schieffelin, B. B. (eds.), Developmental pragmatics. New York: Academic Press. 373–89.Google Scholar
Eisenberg, A. R. (1982). Language acquisition in cultural perspective: Talk in three Mexicano homes. Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Ervin-Tripp, S. (1972). On sociolinguistic rules: Alternation and co-occurrence. In Gumperz, J. J. & Hymes, D. (eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics: The ethnography of communication. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston. 213-50.Google Scholar
Ervin-Tripp, S. (1979). Children's verbal turn-taking. In Ochs, E. & Schieffelin, B. B. (eds.), Developmental pragmatics. New York: Academic Press. 391–414.Google Scholar
Espinosa, A. M. (1911). The Spanish language in New Mexico and southern Colorado. Historical Society of New Mexico, Publication No. 16. Santa Fe.Google Scholar
Espinosa, A. M. (1930). Estudios sobre el espanol de Nuevo Mejico. 2 vols. Translated and edited by Alonso, A. & Rosenblat, A.. Buenos Aires: Imprenta de la Universidad.Google Scholar
Geertz, C. (1973). Deep play: Notes on the Balinese cockfight. In The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Anchor.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, A. D. (1969). Language as data and as obstacle in sociological research. Items 23: 17–21.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, A. D. (1969–1970). Some problematic spects of communication in crossracial research in the United States. Sociological Focus 3 (2): 67–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hotchkiss, J. C. (1967). Children and conduct in a Ladino community of Chiapas, Mexico. American Anthropologist 69 (4): 711–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hymes, D. H. (1971). Sociolinguistics and the ethnography of speaking. In Ardener, E. (ed.), Social anthropology and language. (ASA Monographs 10.) London: Tavistock. 47–93.Google Scholar
Reprinted and revised in Blount, B. G. (ed), Language, culture, and society: A book of readings. Cambridge, Mass.: Winthrop, 1974. 189–223.Google Scholar
Hymes, D. H. (1972). Models of the interaction of language and social life. In Gumperz, J. J. & Hymes, D. H. (eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics: The ethnography of communication. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston. 35–71.Google Scholar
Hymes, D. H. (1981). “In vain I tried to tell you”: Essays in Native American ethnopoetics. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karp, I., & Kendall, M. B. (1982). Reflexivity in field work. In Secord, P. F. (ed), Explaining social behavior: Consciousness, human action, and social structure. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage. 249–73.Google Scholar
Keenan, E. (1973). A sliding sense of obligatoriness: The polystructure of Malagasy oratory. Language in Society. 2: 225–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLendon, S. (1982). Meaning, rhetorical structure, and discourse organization in myth. In Tannen, D. (ed.), Analyzing discourse: Text and talk. Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics, 1981. Washington: Georgetown University Press. 284–305.Google Scholar
Menyuk, P. (1977). Language and maturation. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ochs, E. (1979). Introduction: What child language can contribute to pragmatics. In Ochs, E. & Schieffelin, B. B. (eds.), Developmental pragmatics. New York: Academic Press. 1–17.Google Scholar
Ochs, E. (1982). Talking to children in Western Samoa. Language in Society 11 (1): 77–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peirce, C. S. (1932). Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Vol. II, Elements of logic, Hartshorne, C. & Weiss, P. (eds.). Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Pelto, P. J., & Pelto, G. H. (1978). Anthropological research: The structure of inquiry. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rael, , Juan, B. (1937). A study of the phonology and morphology of New Mexican Spanish, based on a collection of 410 folktales. Dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Schieffelin, B. B. (1979). Getting it together: An ethnographic approach to the study of the development of communicative competence. In Ochs, E. & Schieffelin, B. B.. (eds.). Developmental pragmatics. New York: Academic Press. 73–108.Google Scholar
Shotter, H. (1979). The cultural context of communication studies: Theoretical and methodological issue. In Lock, A. (ed), Action, gesture and symbol: The emergence of language. New York: Academic Press. 43–79.Google Scholar
Silverstein, M. (1976). Shifters, linguistic categories, and cultural description. In Basso, K. & Selby, H. A. (eds.), Meaning in anthropology. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. 11–55.Google Scholar
Silverstein, M. (1979). Language structure and linguistic ideology. In Clyne, P. R., Hanks, W., & Hotbauer, C. L. (eds.), The elements: A parasession on linguistic units and levels. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society 193–247.Google Scholar
Silverstein, M. (1981). The limits of awareness. Sociolinguistic Working Paper 84. Austin, Texas: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.Google Scholar
Snow, C. (1977). Mother's speech research: An overview. In Snow, C. & Ferguson, C. (eds.), Talking to children: Language input and acquisition. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Strauss, A., & Schatzman, L. (1955). Crossclass interviewing: An analysis of interaction and communication styles. Human organization 14 (2): 28–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tedlock, D. (1971). On the translation of style in oral narrative. Journal of American Folklore 84 (“Toward new perspectives in folklore,” Paredes, A. & Bauman, R., eds.): 114–33.Google Scholar
Tedlock, D. (1972). Finding the center: Narrative poetry of the Zuni Indians. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Trevarthen, C. (1979). Communication and cooperation in early infancy: A description of primary intersubjectivity. In Bullowa, M. (ed.), Before speech. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Trotter, R. T., II, & Chavira, J. A. (1981). Curanderismo: Mexican American folk healing. Athens: University of Georgia Press.Google Scholar
Whorf, B. L. (1956). Language, thought, and reality: Selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. Carroll, J. B., ed. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Wolfson, N. (1976). Speech events and natural speech: Some implications for sociolinguistic methodology. Language in Society 5: 189–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar