Book review of Language Contact in Amazonia. Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. 320 pp., 1 map. ISBN 978-0-19-925785-0

Basso, Ellen B

English

Trinity University

Tipití: Journal of the Society for the Anthropology of LowlandSouth AmericaISSN: 2572-3626 (online)Volume 6 | Issue 1 Article 10June 2008Language Contact in AmazoniaEllen B. BassoUniversity of ArizonaFollow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.trinity.edu/tipitiPart of the Anthropology CommonsThis Reviews is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ Trinity. It has been accepted for inclusion in Tipití: Journal of theSociety for the Anthropology of Lowland South America by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ Trinity. For more information, please contactjcostanz@trinity.edu.Recommended CitationBasso, Ellen B. (2008). "Language Contact in Amazonia," Tipití: Journal of the Society for the Anthropology of Lowland South America:Vol. 6: Iss. 1, Article 10.Available at: http://digitalcommons.trinity.edu/tipiti/vol6/iss1/10128 TipitíLanguage Contact in Amazonia.   Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald.  Oxford:  Oxford University Press, 2003.  320 pp., 1 map. £90.00 (cloth).  ISBN 978-0-19-925785-0.  [www.oup.com]ELLEN B. BASSOUniversity of Arizona	 The	discourse-areal	approach	suggested	as	suited	to	a	more	complex	study	of	Amazonian	languages	(Beier	et	al.	2002)	appears	at	a	time	when	scholarly	integration	of	formerly	quite	different	anthropological	perspectives	has	proven	exceptionally	productive	in	Amazonian	studies.		Particular	with	regard	to	the	newer	interest	in	“ethnogenesis,”	this	approach	demonstrates	the	many	benefits	of	 an	 orientation	 away	 from	 sodalities	 to	 social	 networks,	 characterized	by	multiple	overlapping	relations	of	marriage,	ritual	practice,	trade,	and	warfare	alliances	in	the	recent	discussions	of	Amazonian	ritual	practices	that	probe	the	actual	sources	of	community,	and	which	understands	these	to	involve	processual	shifts	from	latent	hostility	and	inherent	“tension”	to	at	least	temporary	sociality.	We	 are	 also	moving	 from	 attention	 to	 such	 public,	 large-scale	 ceremonial	practices	to	more	private	ritual	talk,	coming	to	understand	the	pervasiveness	of	household-centered	ritual	genres	and	registers	or	styles,	still	in	need	of	more	careful	study.		What	we	have	learned	so	far	is	that	such	apparently	“everyday”	events	as	joking	and	avoidance,	honorification,	greetings,	leave	takings,	protests,	and	 the	 languages	 of	 trade	 and	marketing	 seem	 in	 fact	 to	 have	 important	resonances	within	the	far	better	known	collective	ceremonial	events.		 In	connection	with	these	approaches	to	discourse,	and	influenced	by	the	shift	to	typological-comparative	interests	in	linguistics,	a	good	deal	of	linguistic	research	has	turned	to	the	pervasive	fact	of	Amazonian	multilingualism.		Of	special	 interest	 of	 course	 is	 the	Northwest	Amazon	 area,	where	 language	contact	involves	different	members	of	Arawak,	Tucanoan,	Hup	(a	member	of	the	so-called	“Maku”	[Epps	2006])	and	Carib	language	families.		As	these	are	typologically	as	well	as	genetically	different	languages,	linguists	are	interested	in	how	contact-induced	changes	may	have	affected	their	grammars,	or	“internal”	constructions.		In	Alexandra	Aikhenvald’s	view,	only	where	there	is	extensive	bi-	or	multilingualism,	can	we	hypothesize	a	linguistic	area,	where	diffusion	has	caused	local	genetically	distinct	languages	to	share	extensive	and	“reasonably”	distinctive	traits	not	found	elsewhere	(p.	8).		 Alexandra	Aikhenvald’s	book	on	languages	in	contact	is	a	special	example	of	 how	 researchers	may	 construct	 answers	 to	 such	 typological	matters	 in	multilingual	contexts.		The	result	of	at	least	10	years	work	in	the	Vaupès	Basin	studying	Northern	Arawakan	Tariana	and	neighboring	Tukanoan	languages	(as	well	as	the	influences	of	Portuguese),	Aikhenvald	makes	productive	use	of	several	sub-fields	of	linguistics,	resulting	in	an	important	contribution.		In	the	Vaupès	1Published by Digital Commons @ Trinity, 2008	 Book Reviews 129Basin	(and,	one	might	add,	in	the	very	different	but	also	multilingual	Alto	Xingu	area	of	central	Brazil),	multilingualism	involves	in	the	author’s	words	“a	strong	tendency	to	keep	languages	strictly	apart	by	restricting	the	influx	of	borrowed	forms.”		Aikhenvald	(p.	2)	continues:		“This	creates	an	almost	ideal	‘linguistic	laboratory’	for	investigating	diffusion	of	patterns	rather	than	forms.”		What	is	needed,	she	shows,	is	an	approach	that	goes	far	beyond	collecting	lists	of	the	more	obvious	lexical	importations	to	see	how	linguistic	structures	themselves	are	affected.		This	is	a	complex	project	requiring	historical,	typological	and	social	considerations,	that	is,	to	investigate	the	specific	sociolinguistic	parameters	at	work	in	the	different	contact	situations	(p.		30).		The	author	includes	descriptions	of	the	historical	consequences	of	European	influences	in	the	area,	which	have	relentlessly	promoted	a	politics	of	 language	use	 through	religio-educational	institutions;		she	provides	examples	of	how	the	relative	statuses	of	different	local	languages	vis-á-vis	one	another	influence	the	context	of	use	and	confidence	of	use	of	particular	languages	or	varieties	by	individual	multilinguals,	and	discusses	at	length	the	changing	practices	regarding	marriage	(formerly	strictly	language	exogamous)	as	one	crucial	locus	of	language	enculturation	into	which	speakers	have	been	recruited	by	kinship.		 The	 sociolinguistic	descriptions	of	 individual	 lives	 in	 effect	provide	 the	anthropologist	with	many	good	details	for	understanding	the	workings	of	those	very	networks	of	relationships	mentioned	at	the	start	of	this	review.		While	her	discussion	focuses	upon	language	in	process,	Aikhenvald	cannot,	in	fact,	help	but	remark	upon	the	social	relationships	between	speakers	that	motivate	those	processes.		While	the	book	includes	numerous	detailed	linguistic	descriptions	of	phonology,	grammar,	syntax	(and	to	a	lesser	extent,	discourse),	the	whole	is	set	in	a	historical	and	social	frame	which	provides	the	actual	contexts	for	understanding	 the	 speech	practices	 of	 specific	 individuals	 and	 the	network	of	socialization	involving	speakers	and	their	children.		As	such,	Aikhenvald’s	book	is	a	particularly	important	illustration	of	how	understanding	languages	in	process	promotes	anthropological	understanding	more	generally.				REFERENCES	CITEDBeier,	Christine,	Lev	Michael	and	Joel	Sherzer		 2002	 “Discourse	 Forms	 and	Processes	 in	 Indigenous	Lowland	 South	America:	An	Areal-Typological	 Perspective.”	 	Annual Review of Anthropology		31:121-145.Epps,	Patience		 2006	 “The	Vaupés	Melting	Pot:	Tucanoan	Influence	on	Hup.”		In	Grammars in Contact: A Cross-Linguistic Typology.		Alexandra	Y.	Aikhenvald	and	Robert	M.W.	Dixon,	editors,	pp.	267-289.		Oxford:	Oxford	University	Press.2Tipití: Journal of the Society for the Anthropology of Lowland South Americahttp://digitalcommons.trinity.edu/tipiti/vol6/iss1/10

Language Contact in Amazonia

https://digitalcommons.trinity.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1089&amp;context=tipiti

Language Contact in Amazonia

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Trinity University