Shifting relations
Structure and agency in the language of Bininj Gunwok kinship
This chapter examines the connections between shared cultural knowledge about kinship structure and the pragmatic inferences that enable interlocutors to assess each other’s (multiple) perspectives. By drawing on Bininj Gunwok conversational data this chapter shows how linguistic choices are influenced by the dynamics of social relationships, particularly by context-specific speaker goals and stance-taking that focuses on intersubjectivity. The choice of kinterm is an essential component of stance-taking. A switch in kinterm shifts the indexes of various aspects of speaker agency (e.g. effecting solidarity, ratifying relationships with addressee and referent, justifying joint action). Kinterms in four different contexts are discussed: basic kin terms for affines; basic kin terms for skewed relationships; kin term shifts within unnamed superclasses; and triadic terms.
References (26)
References
Agha, Asif. 2007.
Language and Social Relations
. Cambridge: CUP.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Barth-Weingarten, Dagmar, Dehé, Nicole & Wichmann, Anne (eds). 2009.
Where Prosody Meets Pragmatics: Research at the Interface
. Bingley: Emerald.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Berndt, Ronald M. & Berndt, Catherine H. 1992/1964.
The World of the First Australians. Aboriginal Traditional Life: Past and Present
. Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bloch, Maurice. 1971. The moral and tactical meaning of kinship terms.
Man
(N.S.)6: 79–87. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brown, Penelope. 2007. Principles of person reference in Tzeltal conversation. In
Person Reference in Interaction
, Tanya Stivers & Nick J. Enfield (eds), 172–202. Cambridge: CUP.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dousset, Laurent. 2005. Structure and substance: Combining ‘classic’ and ‘modern’ kinship studies in the Australian Western Desert.
The Australian Journal of Anthropology
16(1):18–30. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Drew, Paul. 1997. ‘Open’ class repair initiators in response to sequential sources of troubles in conversation.
Journal of Pragmatics
28: 69–101. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Du Bois, John. 2007. The stance triangle. InEnglebretson (ed.), 139–182.
Evans, Nicholas. 2003.
Bininj Gun-wok. A Pan-dialectal Grammar of Mayali, Kunwinjku and Kune
, 2 Vols. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Evans, Nicholas. 2005. View with a iew: Towards a typology of multiple perspective Constructions.
Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society
31(1): 93–120.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fitzmaurice, S.2004. Subjectivity, intersubjectivity and the historical construction of interlocutor stance: From stance markers to discourse markers.
Discourse Studies
6(4): 427–448. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Garde, Murray. 2003. Social Deixis in Bininj Gun-wok Conversation. PhD dissertation, University of Queensland.
Garde, Murray. 2011. The forbidden gaze: The 1948 Wubarr ceremony performed for The American-Australian Scientific Expedition to Arnhem Land. In
Exploring the Legacy of the 1948 Arnhem Land Expedition
, Martin Thomas & Margot Neale (eds). Canberra: National Museum of Australia.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gumperz, John J.1982.
Discourse Strategies
. Cambridge: CUP. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kärkkäinnen, E.2006. Stance taking in conversation: From subjectivity to intersubjectivity.
Text and Talk
. 26: 699–731. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Krauss, Robert M. & Fussell, Susan R. 1991. Perspective-taking in communication: Representations of others’ knowledge in reference.
Social Cognition
9: 2–24. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kronenfeld, David B.2009.
Fanti Kinship and the Analysis of kinship Terminologies
. Champaign IL: University of Illinois Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Laughren, Mary. 1982. Warlpiri kinship structure. In
Languages of Kinship in Aboriginal Australia
[Oceania Linguistic Monographs 24], Jeffrey Heath, Francesca Merlan & Alan Rumsey (eds), 72–85. Sydney: Oceania (University of Sydney).![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lounsbury, Floyd G.1964. A formal account of Crow- and Omaha-type kinship terminologies. In
Explorations in Cultural Anthropology
W. H. Goodenough (ed.), 351–393. New York NY: McGraw-Hill.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Merlan, F.1989. Jawoyn relationship terms: Interactional dimensions of Australian kin classification.
Anthropological Linguistics
31(3–4): 227–263.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Moore, Sally Falk. 1963. Oblique and asymmetrical cross-cousin marriage and Crow-Omaha terminology.
American Anthropologist
. 65(2): 296–311. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Scheffler, Harold W.1978.
Australian Kin Classification
. Cambridge: CUP. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schegloff Emanuel.A., Jefferson, Gail & Sacks, Harvey. 1977. The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation.
Language
53: 361–82. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Verhagen Arie. 2005.
Constructions of Intersubjectivity: Discourse, Syntax and Cognition
. Oxford: OUP.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Zeitlyn, David. 1993. Reconstructing kinship or the Pragmatics of kin talk.
Man
(N.S.)28(2): 199–224. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Claire Bowern
2023.
The Oxford Guide to Australian Languages,
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.