Hostname: page-component-77c78cf97d-v4t4b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-03T19:59:38.282Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Language as category: using prototype theory to create reference points for the study of multilingual data

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 May 2019

RACHEL WATSON
RACHEL WATSON*
Affiliation:
SOAS, University of London
*
†Address for correspondence: e-mail: rw44@soas.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper I present a framework for the conceptualization of languages based on the prototype theory of categorization proposed by Eleanor Rosch and her colleagues for natural semantic categories. It is motivated by research in the Casamance region of southern Senegal, where a high level of multilingualism in non-standardized varieties is the norm, making accurate description of languages, and thus analysis of multilingual discourse, problematic. I show that languages in this context can be conceived of as categories, of which linguistic features may be more or less prototypical members. Such an approach can form the basis for a more robust method of language description, integrating rich sociolinguistic data, and facilitating more nuanced analysis of multilingual discourse data.

Keywords

multilingualismJoolaprototype theorylinguistic descriptionsociolinguistic variation

Information

Type
Article
Information
Language and Cognition , Volume 11 , Issue 1 , March 2019 , pp. 125 - 164
Copyright
Copyright © UK Cognitive Linguistics Association 2019 

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

This paper forms part of the research output of the Leverhulme Research Leadership Award Project ‘At the Crossroads – investigating the unexplored side of multilingualism’ led by Professor Friederike Lüpke at SOAS. Our project website is at <https://soascrossroads.org/>. I am grateful for the support of the funder, as well as the invaluable input of my colleagues on the project. Alexander Cobbinah, Samantha Goodchild, Abbie Hantgan, Friederike Lüpke, and Mia Weidl have provided detailed feedback on versions of this paper, which have been immensely helpful in formulating and expressing the framework described herein, as have the generous comments of three anonymous reviewers. I am continually grateful to our research assistants, collaborators, consultants, and friends in Casamance, without whom no such research would be possible. Any errors or misconceptions remain my own.

References

references

Auer, P. (1999). From code-switching via language mixing to fused lects: toward a dynamic typology of bilingual speech. International Journal of Bilingualism 3(4), 309–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austin, P. K. (2007). Training for language documentation: experiences at the School of Oriental and African Studies. In Rau, V. & Florey, M. (Eds.), Documenting and Revitalizing Austronesian Languages (LD&C Special Publication No. 1) (pp. 25–41). University of Hawai‘i Press.Google Scholar
Bassène, A.-C. (2007). Morphosyntaxe du joola banjal: Langue atlantique du Senegal. Grammatische Analysen afrikanischer Sprachen: Vol. 32. Köln: Köppe.Google Scholar
Bassène, M. (2012). Morphophonology of Joola Eegimaa. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
Beyer, K. (2010). Language contact and change: a look at social factors in an African rural environment. Journal of Language Contact 3(1), 131–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beyer, K., & Schreiber, H. (2013). Intermingling speech groups. In Léglise, I. & Chamoreau, C. (Eds.), Studies in Language Variation: The Interplay of Variation and Change in Contact Settings (Vol. 12, pp. 107–134). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blommaert, J. (2008a). Artefactual ideologies and the textual production of African languages. Language & Communication 28(4), 291–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blommaert, J. (2008b). Linguistic diversity: Africa. In Helinger, M. & Pauwels, A. (Eds.), Handbook of language and communication: diversity and change (pp. 123–149). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Blommaert, J. (2013). Complexity, accent, and conviviality: concluding comments. Applied Linguistics 34(5), 613–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blommaert, J. M. E., & Backus, A. (2013). Repertoires revisited: ’knowing language’ in superdiversity. Working Papers in Urban Language & Literacies 67. Retrieved from <https://research.tilburguniversity.edu/en/publications/repertoires-revisited-knowing-language-in-superdiversity>.Google Scholar
Blommaert, J., & Rampton, B. (2012). Language and superdiversity. MMG Working Papers 12-09. Retrieved from <http://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-000E-7CFE-9>.Google Scholar
Brooks, G. E. (1993). Landlords and strangers: ecology, society, and trade in Western Africa, 1000–1630. Boulder, CO/Oxford: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Bucholtz, M. (2015). The elements of style. In Djenar, D. N., Mahboob, A., & Cruickshank, K. (Eds.), Language and identity across modes of communication (Vol. 6, pp. 27–60). Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG.Google Scholar
Bucholtz, M., & Hall, K. (2005). Identity and interaction: a sociocultural linguistic approach. Discourse Studies 7(4/5), 585–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bucholtz, M., & Hall, K. (2010). Locating identity in language. In Llamas, C. & Watt, D. (Eds.), Language and Identities (pp. 18–28).Google Scholar
Calvet, L.-J., & Dreyfus, M. (1992). La famille dans l’espace urbain: trois modèles de plurilinguisme. Des Villes Plurilingues, Plurilinguisme 3, 29–54.Google Scholar
Childs, T., Good, J., & Mitchell, A. (2014). Beyond the ancestral code: towards a model for sociolinguistic language documentation. Language Documentation and Conservation 8, 168–191.Google Scholar
Cobbinah, A. (2013). Nominal classification and verbal nouns in Baïnounk Gubëeher. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, SOAS, University of London.Google Scholar
Cobbinah, A., Hantgan, A., Lüpke, F., & Watson, R. (2016). The diversity of diverse: Zoom on multilingual regional systems on the Upper Guinea Coast of West Africa. Pre-conference session on small-scale multilingualism, LDLT5, London. Retrieved from <https://soascrossroads.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/crossroads-workshop-ldlt.pdf>..>Google Scholar
Di Carlo, P. (2011). Lower Fungom linguistic diversity and its historical development: proposals from a multidisciplinary perspective. Africana Linguistica 17, 53–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Di Carlo, P. (2016). Multilingualism, affiliation and spiritual insecurity: from phenomena to process in language documentation. In Seyfeddinipur, (Ed.), Language documentation and conservation (pp. 71–104). Retrieved from <https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/10125/24649/1/3_DiCarlo.pdf>.Google Scholar
Dobrin, L. M., & Berson, J. (2011). Speakers and language documentation. In Austin, P. & Sallabank, J. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of endangered languages (pp. 187–211). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dreyfus, M., & Juillard, C. (2005). Le plurilinguisme au Sénégal: Langues et identités en devenir. Paris: KARTHALA Editions.Google Scholar
Eckert, P. (2012). Three waves of variation study: the emergence of meaning in the study of sociolinguistic variation. Annual Review of Anthropology 41, 87–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epps, P. (2018). Contrasting linguistic ecologies: indigenous and colonially mediated language contact in northwest Amazonia. Language & Communication 62, 156–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
François, A. (2012). The dynamics of linguistic diversity: egalitarian multilingualism and power imbalance among northern Vanuatu languages. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 214, 85–110.Google Scholar
Giles, H., & Baker, S. C. (2008). Communication accommodation theory. In Donsbach, W. (Ed.), The international encyclopedia of communication . Malden, MA/Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Gippert, J., Himmelmann, N. P., & Mosel, U. (Eds.) (2006). Essentials of language documentation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Good, J., & Di Carlo, P. (2014). What are we trying to preserve? Diversity, change, and ideology at the edge of the Cameroonian Grassfields. Retrieved from <https://ubir.buffalo.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10477/38634/DiCarloGood-LFIdeology.pdf?sequence=1>..>Google Scholar
Goodchild, S. (2016). ‘Which language(s) are you for?’ ‘I am for all the languages.’ Reflections on breaking through the ancestral code: trials of sociolinguistic documentation. In Lu, Lu & Ritchie, S. (Eds.), SOAS Working Papers in Linguistics 18, 75–91.Google Scholar
Goodchild, S. (2019). Sociolinguistic spaces and multilingualism: practices and perceptions in Essyl, Senegal. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, SOAS, University of London.Google Scholar
Goodchild, S., & Weidl, M. (2016). Documentation of speakers’ linguistic practices in two sociolinguistically diverse settings in the Casamance, Senegal: the triangulation method. LDLT 5, London.Google Scholar
Goodchild, S., & Weidl, M. (2019). Translanguaging practices in the Casamance, Senegal: similar but different – two case studies. In Sherris, A. & Adami, E. (Eds.), Making signs, translanguaging ethnographies: exploring urban, rural and educational spaces (pp. 123–142). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Hantgan, A. (2017). Choices in language accommodation at the Crossroads: convergence, divergence, and mixing. Journal of the Anthropological Society of Oxford Online 9(1), 102–118. Retrieved from <https://www.anthro.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/anthro/documents/media/jaso9_1_2017_102_118.pdf>.Google Scholar
Haugen, E. (1966). Dialect, language, nation. American Anthropologist 68(4), 922–935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Himmelmann, N. P. (2006). Language documentation: What is it and what is it good for? In Gippert, J., Himmelmann, N., & Mosel, U. (Eds.), Essentials of language documentation (Vol. 178, pp. 1–30). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Irvine, J. T. (1995). The family romance of colonial linguistics. Pragmatics: Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) 5(2), 139–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Irvine, J. T. (2001). Formality and informality in communicative events. In Duranti, A. (Ed.), Linguistic anthropology: a reader (pp. 189–207). Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Irvine, J. T., & Gal, S. (2000). Language ideology and linguistic differentiation. In Kroskrity, P. V. (Ed.), Regimes of language: ideologies, polities, and identities (pp. 35–84). Santa Fe, NM: School of American Research Press.Google Scholar
Jan, D., & Zeevaert, L. (2007). Receptive multilingualism: linguistic analyses, language policies and didactic concepts (Vol. 6): Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.Google Scholar
Jørgensen, J. N., Karrebæk, M. S., Madsen, L. M., & Møller, J. S. (2011). Polylanguaging in Superdiversity. Diversities 13(2). Retrieved from <http://www.mmg.mpg.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Subsites/Diversities/Journals_2011/2011_13-02_art2.pdf>.Google Scholar
Joseph, J. E. (2002). Is language a verb? Conceptual change in linguistics and language teaching. In Trappes-Lomax, H. & Ferguson, G. (Eds.), Language learning & language teaching: language in language teacher education (Vol. 4, pp. 29–47). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juffermans, K. (2015). Local languaging, literacy and multilingualism in a West African society. Bristol/Buffalo, NY/Toronto: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juillard, C. (1990). Répertoires et actes de communication en situation plurilingue : le cas de Ziguinchor au Sénégal. Langage Et Société 54(1), 65–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juillard, C. (2005). Hétérogénéité des plurilinguismes en Afrique à partir du terrain sénégalais. La Linguistique 41(2), 23–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kopytoff, I. (1989). Introduction. In Kopytoff, I. (Ed.), The African frontier: the reproduction of traditional African societies (pp. 1–87). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Krajcik, C. (2019). A window into the multilingual mind: exploring deictic gestures and spatial language in Casamance, Senegal. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, SOAS, University of London.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: what categories reveal about the mind. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1991). Concept, image and symbol: the cognitive basis of grammar. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Lüpke, F. (2010a). Multilingualism and language contact in West Africa: towards a holistic perspective. Journal of Language Contact 3(1), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lüpke, F. (2010b). Research methods in language documentation. Language Documentation and Description 7, 55–104.Google Scholar
Lüpke, F. (2015). Ideologies and typologies of language endangerment in Africa. In Essegbey, J., Henderson, B., & Mc Laughlin, F. (Eds.), Culture and language use: language documentation and endangerment in Africa (Vol. 17, pp. 59–106). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lüpke, F. (2016a). Pure fiction – the interplay of indexical and essentialist language ideologies and heterogenous practices: a view from Agnack. Language Documentation and Conservation Special Publication, (10), 8–39.Google Scholar
Lüpke, F. (2016b). Uncovering small-scale multilingualism. Critical Multilingualism Studies 4, 35–74.Google Scholar
Lüpke, F. (2017a). African(ist) perspectives on vitality: fluidity, small speaker numbers, and adaptive multilingualism make vibrant ecologies (Response to Mufwene). Language 93(4), e275–e279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lüpke, F. (2017b). Language endangerment and language documentation in Africa. In Wolff, E. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of African Linguistics (pp. 468–490). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lüpke, F. (2017c). Multiple choice: language use in rural Casamance between convergence and divergence. In Knörr, J. & Trajano Filho, W. (Eds.), Creolization and pidginization in contexts of postcolonial diversity (pp. 181–209). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lüpke, F., & Storch, A. (2013). Repertoires and choices in African languages. Berlin/Boston, MA: De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mufwene, S. S. (2001). The ecology of language evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mufwene, S. S. (2017). Language vitality: the weak theoretical underpinnings of what can be an exciting research area. Language 93(4), e202–e223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, G. L. (2002). The big book of concepts: a Bradford book. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myers-Scotton, C. (2003). Code-switching as indexical of social negotiations. In Wei, Li (Ed.), The bilingualism reader (pp. 137–165). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Myers-Scotton, C. (2017). Code-switching. In Coulmas, D. (Ed.), Blackwell handbooks in linguistics: the handbook of sociolinguistics (pp. 217–237). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Otsuji, E., & Pennycook, A. (2010). Metrolingualism: fixity, fluidity and language in flux. International Journal of Multilingualism 7(3), 240–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosch, E. H. (1973). Natural categories. Cognitive Psychology 4(3), 328–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosch, E. (1975a). Cognitive representations of semantic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 104(3), 192–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosch, E. (1975b). Universals and cultural specifics in human categorization. In Brislin, R. W., Bochner, S., & Lonner, W. J. (Eds.), Cross-cultural perspectives on learning (pp. 177–206). New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Rosch, E. (1999). Principles of categorization. In Margolis, E. & Laurence, L. (Eds.), Concepts: core readings . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rosch, E. H. (2011). Slow lettuce: categories, concepts, fuzzy sets, and logical deduction. In Bělohlávek, R. & Klir, G. J. (Eds.), Concepts and fuzzy logic (pp. 89–120). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rosch, E., & Mervis, C. B. (1975). Family resemblances: studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology 7(4), 573–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosch, E., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., Johnson, D. M., & Boyes-Braem, P. (1976). Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology 8(3), 382–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sagna, S. (2008). Formal and semantic properties of the Gújjolaay Eegimaa (Aka Banjal) nominal classification system. SOAS, University of London. Retrieved from <https://eprints.soas.ac.uk/28825/>.Google Scholar
Sambou, P.-M. (1979). Diola Kaasa Esuulaalur: phonologie, morphophonologie, morphologie. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Université Cheikh Anta Diop, Dakar.Google Scholar
Segerer, G. (2009). Combien y a-t-il de langues Joola? Lyon. Retrieved from <www.guillaumesegerer.fr/Ling/Documents/Pub/Segerer_Lyon09.pps>..>Google Scholar
Segerer, G., & Pozdniakov, K. (forthcoming). A genealogical classification of Atlantic languages. In Lüpke, F. (Ed.), Atlantic languages . Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Silverstein, M. (2003). Indexical order and the dialectics of sociolinguistic life. Language & Communication 23(3/4), 193–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singer, R. (2018). A small speech community with many small languages: the role of receptive multilingualism in supporting linguistic diversity at Warruwi Community (Australia). Language & Communication 62, 102–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singer, R., & Harris, S. (2016). What practices and ideologies support small-scale multilingualism? A case study of Warruwi Community, northern Australia. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 241, 163–208.Google Scholar
Tendeng, O. (2007). Le Gusiilay: un essai de systematisation: une contribution a l’étude du Jóola (Vol. 258). Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Thurston, W. R. (1987). Processes of change in the languages of North-Western New Britain. Pacific linguistics. Series B: no.99. Canberra: Department of Linguistics. Retrieved from <https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/bitstream/1885/145417/1/PL-B99.pdf>.Google Scholar
Thurston, W. R. (1992). Sociolinguistic typology and other factors effecting change in northwestern New Britain, Papua New Guinea. In Dutton, T. E. (Ed.), Culture change, language change: case studies from Melanesia (pp. 123–139). Canberra: Department of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University.Google Scholar
Trudgill, P. (2011). Sociolinguistic typology: social determinants of linguistic complexity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Vaughan, J. (2018). ‘We talk in saltwater words’: dimensionalisation of dialectal variation in multilingual Arnhem Land. Language & Communication 62, 119–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, R. (2015). Kujireray: morphosyntax, noun classification and verbal nouns. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, SOAS, University of London.Google Scholar
Watson, R. (2018). Patterns of lexical correlation and divergence in Casamance. Language & Communication 62, 170–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, R. (forthcoming). A sketch of Kujireray. In Lüpke, F. (Ed.), Atlantic languages . Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Weidl, M. (2019). Nga ne!? [What did you say!?] The role of Wolof in multilingual conversations in the Casamance: fluidity of linguistic repertoires. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, SOAS, University of London.Google Scholar
Weinreich, U. (1954). Is a structural dialectology possible? WORD 10(2/3), 388–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodbury, A. (2011). Language documentation. In Austin, P. & Sallabank, J. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of endangered languages (pp. 159–186). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar