“Communication”
in antropologhy and linguistics
The
ethnography of comunications builds a single integrated framework language
communication has a central rule in both antropologycal and linguistic studies.
Linguistic and antropologhy are diciplines whose data, problems, methods, and
theories are often seen as clearly distinct from one another. Since language is
the central means by which people communicate with one another in everyday
life, understanding communication is an important goal for linguists. The
understanding of communication is also important for antropologhists : the way
we communicate is part of our cultural repertoire for making sense of – and
inteacting with – the world.
Antropologhists often ignore language as cultural behavior and/or
knowledge, neglecting the way that language is a system of use whose rules
norms are as integral a part of culture as any other system of knowledge and
behavior. Thus, the status of linguistic communication as a grammatical system
that is used for communication and that is part of culture – and a framework
for analyzing it as such – was surprisingly neglected prior to Hymmes’ work. We
noted above that antropologists often pay little attention to language cultural
behavior and/or knowledge. Note that it has asssumed here that “behavior” and
“knowledge” are both “part of” culture. Culture thus comprises a general “world
view” : a set of assumptions and believes that orient and organize the way
people think, feel, and act.
Methodology
: an etic grid for ethnography
The
methodology is based on distinction between ‘emic’ and ‘etic. Linguists
studying the sound system of an unfamiliar language try to discover phonemic patterns
with the help of a phonetic classification. The classificatory grid that Hymes
(1972b) proposed is known as SPEAKING grid: each letter is an obbreviation for
a different possible component of communication. The SPEAKING grid can be used
to discover a local taxonomy of communicative ‘units’ that are ‘in some
recognizable way bounded of integral’ (Hymes 1972b: 56). The largestsuch unit
is the speech situation: the social occasion in which speech may occur. The
smallest unit is the speech act: although Hymes (1972b) does nit explicity
define this, his example include act that can be defined through their
illocutionary force, as well as those that cannot be do defined.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar