The study of person reference stands at the cross-roads of linguistics, anthropology and psychology. As one aspect of an ethnography of communication, this book deals with a single problem — how one knows who is being talked about in conversation — from a rich and varied ethnographic perspective. Through a combination of grammatical agreement and free pronouns, Bininj Gunwok possesses a pronominal system that, according to current theoretical accounts in linguistics, should facilitate clear cut reference. However, the descriptions of Bininj Gunwok conversation in this volume demonstrate that frequently a vast gulf lies between knowing that, say, an object is '3rd singular', and actually knowing who it refers to. Achieving reference to people in Bininj Gunwok can involve a delicate and refined set of calculations which are part of a deliberate and artful way of speaking. Speakers draw on a diverse set of grammatical and lexical devices all underpinned by shared knowledge about a diverse range of social relationships and cultural practices.

Proper names in Bininj Kunwok are one of a number of unmarked referring expressions in contexts of high social familiarity. In most other contexts and especially where culturally motivated circumspection is required, names are avoided in favour of a range of other referring expressions. The traditional philosophy of language view is that proper names allow speakers to avoid having to state circumlocutory identity details each time reference to an individual is made. In Bininj Kunwok however, cultural restrictions on the use of proper names in many contexts mean that speakers often use alternative expressions which frequently rely heavily on shared common ground to achieve recognition. The kind of shared cultural knowledge that is indexed for recognition of referents is spelt out in the analysis of data from a telephone conversation.

No abstract

The sociolinguistic concept of an Ausbau language is widely thought of as exclusively associated with the standardization of languages for the political and social purposes of nation states. Language policy initiated by state institutions, the development of literacy and new specialist registers of language are typical elements involved in the Ausbau process. However, the linguistic ideologies of small language groups such as those of the minority languages of Aboriginal Australia can drive certain forms of deliberate language elaboration. An important aspect of Aboriginal linguistic ideology is language diversity, reflected in the development of elemental sociolinguistic varieties such as patriclan lects. In the Bininj Kun-wok dialect chain of western Arnhem Land, a regional system of lectal di¤erentiation known as Kun-dangwok has developed, reflecting an Aboriginal linguistic ideology whereby being di¤erent, especially di¤erent ways of speaking, are seen as central aspects of identity. The functions of the Kun-dangwok clan lect system are described using examples of naturally occurring conversation which provide evidence that clan lects are the result of an Ausbau process that results in the opposite of language standardization and an increase in Abstand between varieties.

They bin make im Ubarr, everyone bin go there, make that Ubarr, and they bin look that didjeridu. 'Hey! Ubarr alright!' And everyone they bin know…I went in front. They tell me…'This thing you can't tell im kid, you can't tell im friend, you can't tell im anybody, even your wife. You find your son…you can't tell im story about Ubarr, you got to tell im what I'm telling you now. This "outside" story. Anyone can listen, kid, no-matter who, but this "inside" story you can't say. If you go in Ring-place, middle of a Ringplace, you not supposed to tell im anybody…but oh, e's nice.' 2-Bill Neidjie