4. THE FUNCTIONS OF LANGUAGE “The question “Why do we use language?” seems hardly to require an answer. But, as is often the way with linguistic questions, our everyday, familiarity with speech and waiting can make ic difficult co appreciate the complexity of the skills we have learned. This is particularly so when we try to define che range of fanctions to which language can be put. “To communicate out ideas’ is the usual answer to she question ~ and, indeed, this. must surely be the most widely recognized function of language. Whenever we tell people abour ourselves or our circumstances, or ask for information about other selves and circumstances, we are using language in order co exchange facts and opinions. The use of language is often called ‘referential’, ‘propositional’ ot “ideational. It is the kind of language which will be found throughout this encyclopedia — and in any spoken or written interaction where people wish co lesen from each other. But it would be wrong to think of it as the omly way in which we use language. Lan- guage scholars have identified several other functions where the communication of ideas is a marginal ar irrelevant consideration. . EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION Me X carefully leans his walking stick against a wall, bout it falls over. He tries again, and ic falls a second time. Mr X roundly curses the walking stick. How should we classify this function of language? It cannot bbe'communication of idea, for there is no-one lsein the room. Here we have oneof the commonest uses of language a means of getting tid of our nervous energy when we ae uncle stress. Iris the clearest case of what i often called an ‘emotive’ ot ‘expressive Function of language. Emotive language can be used whether or not we ate alone. Sweat words and obscenities are probably the ‘commonest signals to be used in this way, especially svhen we are in an angry or frustrated state (P. 01). But there ate also many emotive utterances of a positive lend, sch as our involuntary verbal reactions o bea tifularcorscenery, our expression of fearand affection, and the emotional ourpourings of certain kinds of poetry. ‘The most common linguistic expressions of emotion consist of conventional words or phrases (such as Gesh, My, Daca it,and What a sight) and the semi-linguistic noises often called interjections (such as Tit-tut, Ugh, Wous Ow, and uel). Aiso, an important function of the prosody of language ($29) is to provide an outlet for our attitudes while we speak. Aca more sop! cated level, there are many literary devices of grammar and vocabulsry which convey the writers feelings (612). However, in these more complex cases it becomes difficult to distinguish the emotional fun sion of language from the ‘ideational” function described above. SOCIAL INTERACTION Mrs P sneezes violently. Mrs Q says “Bless you!” Mrs P says ‘Thank you.’ Again, chi hardly seems to be a ease of language being, used to communicate idees, but rather to maintain a comfortable relationship becween people. Its sole function isto provide a means of avoid: inga situation which both patties mighcotherwise find embarrassing. No factual content is involved. Si Farly the use of sch phrases. as Gaod morningor Pleased to meet you, and ritual exchanges about health or the ‘weather, do not ‘communicate ideas in the usual sense Sentences of this kind are usually automatically produced, and stereotyped in structure, They often stave the obvious (e.g. Lovely day) or have no content at all(eg. Hell). They certainly requite a special kind of explanation, and this is found in the idea that language is here being used for the purpose of maintaining rap- port berween people. ‘The anthropologist Bronislaw Malinowski (1884-1942) coined the phrase ‘phatic communion’ to refer to this social function of lan- guage, which arises our of the basic human need 10 signal friendship ~ of, at least, lack of enmity. For someone to withhold these sentences when they are expected, by staying silent, is a sure sign of distance, alienation, even danger, ‘These illustsations apply to English and to many European language. But cultures vary greatly in the topics which they permit as phatic communion. The conversation-filler as the English might like co think! For example, Rundi weather is not as univers SNEEZING IN TONGA ‘wen someone sneezes, the English stock response Bless you. But there sr ‘word to use is isch (thank you'r in Bembe (Congo), eis uma be well; and'n equivalent tasuch formsin Malagasy. itisvelona any languages, andany alive). In Tonga, a sneeze is remarks which might be often takento be asign that made can have a totally lfferent meaning and func tion. nGerman, your loved one is missing Youn ite quite common for Fomeane to 8y Jakinaly, iter asneeze, la ke mofo poo mus! -litealy, Mot to ‘Mende (Sierra Leone), The be nothing las.'The sens Intended het the loved ‘one who has caused the Sneeze should he thinking bout nothing, instead of fsbautthe one who has sneezed. A majar aifferen ‘with English is thatthe pe on vivo har sneezed ray Utter the phrare akind Bless metRS“ ~ Oo, wonen (in Murwndi, Cenueal Africa), upon aking witinely and politely, ‘I must yo home now, ormy husband will beat thc? Moreover, phatic conn leave, are quite often heard 10 say, jon itself is far foo tuniversul: some cultures say lite, and prefer silence asi the ease ofthe Paliyans of sourdern Ladi or he Ariana of Columbia THE POWER OF SOUND In 1992, childcen skipping in a school playyround were heard to chant: “Shisley Oneple, Shisley Twople, Shisley Threeple ...” and so on up (0 ‘Shirley Tenple’ (ie Temple). The instance was recorded by Tona and Peter Opie in. The Lave and Language of Schoolchildren (1959), and it clearly illustrates the ‘phonesic’ cia ter of children’s shysnes and games. Ie is langely nonsense, and yet ie performs an important function: the repetitive syluns help to control the game, and th cliklcen play take great delight in ic These fe muny situations where the only apparent reason fora wscoFlanguage isthe effecrthe sounds have ‘We can group together here such dilfercut cases a she vaythncal lcanies of rel gious groups, the persuasive cadences of political specclimaking, she dislogue canes used by prisoners Gr slaves as they work, the various kinds of language games played by childven and adults (p. 59), and the ‘ke coffee, ke tea, ike ado, and TV. ball bouncing monologue voices of individuals singing in the kitchen or the bath. Perhaps the clearest cases are the lyrics of popular songs and che rangeof phonetic effects which can be encoun tered in poetry. Uninceligible words and phrases are commonplace in the oral poetry of many languages, and can be explained only by a universal dese co exploit the sonic potential of lan SPEAKING IN TONGUES paka bente rie sokuntare Imare paka fore moti shalara tamere pakashara merime sounds are simpler and more Fepatiive there are fw predictable structural units End there is no systematic ‘ord-orsentence-mearing When asked, glossolaliss fare usually unable to repeat Utterancer exactly, or give 2 detailed account of their mesning Glossoialic speech isinter pretedina general way. Te peak in tongues is taken asa signofthesincerity of ' person's belief, oras tridence of conversion, The Speokersreatitasa highly Significant, emotional fevent, which eflects tele newfound sense ofthe presence of God. tnthis Fespect, the phenomenon (orits written equivalent, Thisis part of an utterance hich occurred sponta neously a araligious service Idisplaysthe Fepetitive, reduced renge | ofsyliabicand shythenie patterns typical of tongue Specking, oF glosiofaia~2 ‘widespread phenomenon within the Pentecostal tradition of Protestantism Sind charismatic Roman Cauvotism Though many glosolaits believe they are speaking 2 real butunknown | language, the utterance patterns are quite unlike | ordinary language: the | Grapticrower La andl | Fite ot lebanon | | | | atl | | wets | isms | \witing and print can exercise a purely visual effect upon the reader, ver and above the linguistic content of the | word (633). This is best illustrated poatry where the thape of the poem rflecs it subjact matter asin this pov from Guillaume Apellinaire's Caligrammes 1918), Showing ¢ mandolin, a bamboo stick, and a flower. ICELANDIC NAMES ‘The namesof dwar inthe 13th century lealandic Eda are like a painting in oun ‘few ofthe names.esembie ‘words in thelanguage, but mort have nomeaning. (0 find Pare the th sound in thisand thin respactively) Nyiok Nii, Noror Suse Austr Vos Alnj6tr Bvalinn, Nir ox Nainn, Nipingr, Bain, Bifur, Bofurt, Bombe, Nex, 4, Onatr, Ginn, Miawitr, Vigge ok Gandsit, Vindiltr, borin, Fil il, Fundinn, Vall, x, brdinn, Deke, utr ok Vite, Ny json, ek, Rédivee.IDEAS ABOUT LANGUAGE THE CONTROL OF REALITY RECORDING THE FACTS In the northem borderland of Nigeria, an Igbo man invokes the spirit powers in his ancestral prayers, using a formulaic curse: Kivo, un, kuvesiokire! (Wash, all of you, wash down upon all of our enemies!). In an English church, a priest holds a baby over a font, and pours water on its head, saying I baptise you. ‘Devi dancer performing a healing ritualin Matava, Sti Lanka All forms of supernatural beligf involve the use of languageasa means of controling the forces which the believers feel affect their lives. The various prayers and formulac which ate directed at God, gods, devils, spir- its, objects, and other physical forces are always highly distinctive forms of language (p. 388). In some cases, the language might be regarded asa form of ideational communication, with a supernacural being as the recipient but ifs, itis a somewhat abnormal type of communication, for the response is usually appreci: ated only in the mind or behaviour of che speaker, and there may be no evident response at al In other cases, the function of the languages to con- trol matter or the reality which the matter is supposed to represent. For example, the gardening ritual of che Trobriand Islanders involves. series of formulae which ‘charm’ the axes, making them effective tools. At & Roman Catholic Mass, the speaking of the words hit ‘my bodyislolieved to identify the moment when the communion bread is changed into the body of Chris. Several ocher situations, apart from the magical and the eligious, illustrate chis ‘performative’ function of language — such as the words which name a ship at a launching ceremony. A solicitor, preparing a case fora client, pulls down an old book of judgments (rom the shelf, and reads a report of a case which took place 25 years ago. What use of language is this? Ac irs sight, ie would appear to be ideational’; bur the situation in which the commu. nication takes place is quite different in several respects When information is stored for Future use, ie is impossible to predict who is likely to use it ~ indeed, much of the marerial may never be referred to again Theres therefore ‘dialogue’ element in the comm nication. ‘The information has to he as self-contained as possible, for itis impossible to predict the demands which may one day be made upon it, and in most cases there is no way in which the user ean respond so as to influence the writer. Accordingly, when langunge is used for the purposes of recording faets, it is very ci ferent from that used in everyday conversation ~ in particular, ie displays a much greater degree of ongani- zation, impersonality, and explicitness. This Function of language ie represented by all kinds of record-keeping, such as historical records, geo graphical surveys, business accounts, scientific reports, Parliamentary acts, and public d essential domain of lahguage use, For the availability of this macerial guarantees the knowledge-base of subse: quent generations, which is a prerequ evelopment ‘THE DOMESDAY BOOK | The two volumes which | comprise Domesday Book This wos thesummarizing | recordor witty ot England, which was carried | outin 1086. The smatier vo: | ume contains all the informa: | tion returned ebout Essen, Leg te of social Norfolk, and Suffolk; the larger volume contains the abbrevisted account of all tether counties surveyed {the whole of englans texceptsame of the most hortherly areas). The once: tind-forall function ofthis ind of language well symbolized by the popular Tae for the books ‘Domesday’. which carne to be widely used by the 120% ‘century From Uns ecard there wad be no apneTHE INSTRUMENT OF THOUGHT ‘Awornan its aloncata workbench, staringata piece of equipnicac with a puzzled frown, She says: ‘So if| put re four there, and fink ie co blue three, hall leave bluesix tee. Then [can use that For green four Right. She sets to work People often feel the need 10 speak heir thoughts aloud. Haske why they do it, they reply dat it helps thir concentration. Aukhors often make similar pout the need 10 get a frst draft down on paper, in order vo sce whether whac they have wricten ocmesponds 1o what dhey had in mind. The French, thinker, Joseph Joubert (1754-1824), once said: “We donly Kvow just whac we meane € say after we have remarks said it” Perhaps the most common use of language as an instrument of chought is found when people perform tnathcinatical calculations “in their head’. Very often, this supposedly ‘mental acc is accompanied by a verbal conmmettary. However, itis noc essential that language ‘ed in this way should abwaysbespoken aloud or wit- ten dwn. Often, people can be seen to move cher lips while they are chinking, bur no wet Language is evidently present, but in.a’sub-vocal form, Several dheuties have been proposed concerning the sound emerges role of langage asthe instrumenc of hough that of the ‘Russian psychologist, Lev Semenovich Vygowky (1896-19334), who argued for a concept of iinerspeech’, a mencal use of wons wo evokea sequence cof thoughts. Does all thought, then, requite language? ‘This complex question will be reviewed in $5. notably THE EXPRESSION OF IDENTITY The crow attending President Reagan's pre-election icesings in 1984 repeatedly shouced in unison ‘Four ‘vou years!” What kind of language is this? ‘Such language is hardly informative wo those who use it buc it plainly has au importanc cole in Fostering a seuse of identity ~ in this case, among those who share thesame political views. Many social situations display Language which unites rather chan informs~ the chas ing uf a crowd at a foosball match, the shouting of tumnds oF slogans at public micetings aged audience reactions co clevision game shows, oF the stage-man- theshouts of atfinnacion acsome religious meetings, Our use of lang iret deal about ourselves ‘can tell our listener or veader a in pacticulas, about our fegjoual origins, social background, level ofeducation, oupation, aye, sex, and personality. The way k auage is used Co express chese variables is so complex thac it requizes separate discussion (§§6-12), bur the general point can be made here, chac a major function bf language isthe expression of personal identiey ~ she signalling of who we sie and where we"bel |THE FUNCTIONS OF LANGU, AGH : These signals enter into the whole of our linguistic bbchaviour, so much so chatitis often a problem distin- guishing the identifying function of language from thar used for che communication of ideas. In & public meeting, for instance, Mr A may make a speech in support of Mr B, and it may be dilficule co decide whether che reason for his speech is to make a fresh point, orsimply vo demonstcate call concerned thacA is on B's side. The arena of political debate is full of such manoeuvtings, as individuals strive co express aici solidarity with (or distance from) each other way !pronounce them, with thesound of my own voice, land this interior audition Stays ith mea good part ofthe day’ inabserving him perform onstage, he wasusualy seen tomoveis | Nipear mutter and he often accompanied this by exaggerated gestures and pacing ‘An interesting paralllis sometimes drawn between prodigious calculating bilities and language. Are these mental feate very a Femaved from our impres sive everyday generative There are two kinds of mental aleaating prodi- ties those who hear’ num bers and those who ‘see! them. Both rely on some kindof inner language, ‘espacial when faced with 3 complex problem. Inaudi laatone ofthe great aude tory calculators. Though he did notleam to read or ‘write unt newas 20, bythe fag¢ of 7 he was able to mul tiply two S-digit numbersin ishead, ‘When he was studied by the psychologist Alfred Binet 1894, Inguds aud sacques inauct = tory techniques leary ability (616) to manipulate (167-1950) timerged~inhisown the complexstructure of ‘words, Thearnumbers..._avastrange of nove! AGesoundiamyear,inthe Sentences? a es | Grapniciwenrity “The characteristic typefaces of several British news papers provide an illustra tion of identity using the ‘raphic medi (p. 187) These examples are all, ir taken from the Guardian's spoof edition of April | 1978, in which news from the fictitious sland af Sen Serriffe was presented ina seriesaf pica formats and fanguagestyles lampooning actual Briish newspapers ff the ime, Me|oke relies {tally on the reader being ‘ble to enti these formetsimmediately, using amisture of typographic Sndlinguistic cues. THESS TIMES The HS Celegraph SS GUARDIAN5 » LANGUAGE AND THOUGHT Iescemsevident that thereis the closest of relationships bbotween language and thought: everyday experience suggests that muich oFour thinking is faciliaced by lan- guage (p. 13). Bue is there identity between the «wo? 1s it possible to think without language? Or does our language dictate the ways in which we are able to K2 ‘Such matters have exercised generations of philosophers, psychologists, and linguists, who have uncovered layers of complexity in these apparently siraightforward questions. A simple answer is certainly not possible; buat eastweean beclear about the main Factors which give rise to the complications. KINDS OF THINKING Many kinds of behaviour have been referred to as ‘thinking’, but not all of them require us to posit a relationship with language. Mast obviously, there is no suggestion that language is involved in our emotional response to someobjector event, such as when we react ‘6 a beautiful painting or an unpleasant incident: we may usc language co explain our reaction to others, but the emotion itself is ‘beyond words’. Nor do people engaged in the creative arts find it essential to think using language: composers, for example, often report shat they “hear the music they wish co write. Also, our everyday fantasies, day-dreams, and other free asocia- ‘ions can all proceed without language. The thinking which seems wo involve languages ofa different kind? chis is the reasoned thinking which «akes place as we work out problems, tll staries, plan strategies, and so on. Te has been called ‘rational, ‘irected!, “logical’, oF ‘propositional’ thinking. Ic involves elements that are both deductive (when we solve problems by using a given set of rules, as in an arithmetical task) and inductive (when we solve prob- Jemson the basis of data placed before us, asin working ‘out a travel route). Language seems to be very impor: tant for this kind of thinking, ‘The formal properties of language, such as word order and sentence sequencing, conscituce the medium in which our connected thoughts ean be presented and organized. INDEPENDENCE OR IDENTITY? But how close isthis lationship berween languageand thought? eis usual to sce this question in terms oF two extremes. Fitst, these isthe hypothesis thae language and thoughitare totally separate entities, with one being, dependent on the other. At the oppasite extreme, the: is the hypothesis thae language and thought are iden cal ~ that ie is not possible to engage in any rational shinking without using language. The tuth seems to lie somewhere between these two positions Within the first position, there are plainly ewo possibilities: fanguage might be dependent upon thought, or thought might be dependent upon lan- guage. The traditional view, which is widely held at a popular level, adopts the first of these: people have thoughts, and then they put these thoughts into words. Ie is summarized in stich metaphorical views of language as the ‘dress’ or ‘tool! of thought. The view is well represented in the field of child language acquisition ($38), where children are seen to develop a range of cog; cede the learning oF language. ‘The second possibility has also heen widely hele the way people use language dictates the lines along which they can think. An expressive summary of this is Shelley’s ‘He gave men speech, and speech cteated thought, AWhich is the measure of the universe (Prometheus Unbound). This view isalso epresented in the language acquisition Feld, in the argument that the child’s earliest encounters with language are the main influence on the way concepts are learned. The most influential expression of this position, however, is found in the Sapir—Whoef hypothesis (sce facing page). A thitd possibilty, which is also widely held these days, is that language and thought are interdependent — but thisis not to say that they areidentieal. The iden: tity view (forexample, chat thought sno more chan an internalized vocalization) is no longer common. There are too many exceptions for such a strong position to bbe maintained: we need think only of the various kinds of mental operations which we ean perform without Janguage, such as recalling a sequence of movements in A game or sport, or visualizing the route from home to work, Icisalso widely reengnized that pictorial images and physical models are helpful in problem-solving, and may at times be more efficient than purely verhat representations ofa problem. On the other hand, chese cases are far outnumbered by those where language does seem co be the main means whereby suecessful thinking can proceed. To see Tangusige and though as interdependent, then, is to recognize that language is a regular part of the process ‘of thinking, atthe same time recognizing thar we have to think in order to understand language. It is not a quéstion of one notion raking precedence over the other, but of both notions being essential, ff we are to explain behaviour. Once again, people have searched for metaphors to express their views. Language has been likened to the arch of a tunnel; thought, to the tunnel itself, Bur the complex structure and finnetion of language defies such simple analogies ve abilities which pre- NON-VERBAL AND VERBAL THOUGHT “The twodimensionsto rational thinking = linguist and non linguistic-can be discovered ina simple experiment, which anyone anpertorn | think of where you work ‘Mow vinunlize the route you fallow, asi you were drivin ‘longin con as you procee The sequence of visual images which you bring to ‘min wil be argely inde dent oflangunae: 2. Now imagine youhave to ‘explain toa visor how to each your house fer wor “Think out the steps af your explanation, asyou nad present them, without "ying anything aout the Eequence of ident wl be fexpresed internally using Tanguage.PHE SAPIR-WHORE HYPOTHESIS he romantic idealism of die ke 18th cencary, as encountered inthe of Johann Herder (1744-1803) and Wilhelm vou Humbolds (1762 135), placed reat value on the diversity ofthe world’s languages and cultures. The tradi the American linguist and anthropologist Edward Supir(1 884-1939) and his pupil Benjasnin Lee Whos (1897-1941), and vesulced ina view abour the relation Lerween language \ which was widely influ cata in the middle decades of this century. The ‘Supic-Whorl hypothesis, as ic came © be «alled, combines «wo principles, The first is known as was cakes up by Jingaistc deerminism: ic staves chat language dever- mines the way we think. The second follows from this, ann is kisawn as Linguduic relativity Wt staves that the distinctions encoded in one language are not found in. any other language. In a much-quoted paragraph, Whos? propounds the view as follows: We diaseer native slong lines laid down by our navive hin ipmyes: The categories and types tharwe solace ftom the work! of plienomena we de not find there because they sare “Bey abserver in dhe faces on che conteaey, dhe word is pre= pressions which has 0 bheanganized by our osinuls~and dis means largely by dhe senved ina kaleidoscope lax of linguisticsystems in our winds, We eut nature up, organize itimo concepts, and ascribe siguilicances as we do, largely because We ae patties at agseement co organize tin this vayaw ugrecneat chat holds throughout our speech com> sity adi coi i the paterns of our language. The agiccment is, of course, an implicicand unstated one, but ters are absoliely abligacory, we canna tlle all except by subscribing w dic organizativn and classticaion of data le areenet decrees Whoit illustraced is view by taking examples from several languages, and in particular from Hopi, an Amerindian language. In Hopi, there is one word (naidstaki) for everything that Mies except birds — which would include insects, aeroplanes and pilots. ‘This seemis alien 0 someone used co thinking. in English, but, Whorf argues, ic is no stranger than oglsh-speakers having one word for many kinds of win eons to Eskimo, where dhere are different words for filling snow, snow on the ground, show pucked hard like ice, slushy snow (cf English lus, and s0 on, In Aatec, a single word (with differenc end- ings) covers an even greater range of English notions ~ snow, cal, and ice, When more abstract notions are considera (uel as time, duration, velocity), the di ferences become yet more complex: Hopi, Forinstance, lacks concep oftime sen asa dimension; there are no forms eo sponding to English tenses, but there ate a series uf forms which make i possible ro talk about var ious durations, from the speakers point of view. It HAVING A WORD FORT ‘Theres nating in everyeay English tocorrespond tothe many Arabic words forharse forcamel, the eskimo words {or snowy orthe Australian language’ words for hole or sand. Speakarsot English have to resort to crcurmlocs tionsif they wante draw the {itinction which these lan ‘9unge convoy by separate ‘Words~suchas the size, ‘reed, funtion, and cond tion ofa camel. Gn the other hand, several languages can rotrmatch the many words English has available to len tify different sizes, types, ane ses of vehicles cr, ory, bus. tractor, axl, moped, truck, ands0.0n~andmight hhavejustone word fr allot these ‘Theres n fact nasinale word in English for the diver ‘ofall kinds of motor vehides cinotorst being restricted to private cars, and aver being Unacceptable tor motorqcies “Slexieal gap wnich greatly ‘worried the British Automo- bile Association in 1963.1 ‘wat feltthatsuch a word would ba useful, and they therefore asked or sugges tions, Aanong the 500 they would be very difficult, Whorf argues, for a Hopi and an English physicist co understand each other’ ¢hinle- ing, given the majordifferencesbetwcen the languages. Examples such as thege made the Sapir-Whorf hypochesis very plausible: buc in iesstromgese form itis unlikely co have any adherents now. The fact that suc- ful translations berween languages can be made isa major argumene agains i, as is che fact that the con- ceptual uniqueness of a language such as Hopi can nonetheless be explained using English, That chere are some concepewal differences between culeures due co language is undeniable, bur this is noc ro say thae the differences are so great sha macual comprehension is impossible. One language may take many words c say ‘whiae another language says a single word, but in the ‘end the circumlocution can make the point Sinsilaly, ie does noc follow thar, because t language lucks a word, its speakers therefore cannot grasp the concept. Several kinguages have Few words for numer als: Australian aboriginal languages, for example, are ofien restricted to a few general words (such as ‘ll ‘many’, few’), ‘one! and ‘ewo". In such cases, iis some- cimes said that the people lack the coneepr of number~ ‘hac Aborigines ‘havent che inclligence co count’ a it ‘once pur. Buc this is nor so, asisshown when these speakers lean English asa second language: their abil- co count and calculates quite comparable to tha of English native spe However, a weaker version of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is gencrally accepced. Language may not determine the way we chink, but it does influence the ‘way we perecive and remember, and ic affects the ease with which we perform mental casks. Several experi- ‘ments have shown thac people recall chings more easily if the things courespond to readily available words ot phrases, And people certainly find ic easier to make a ‘conceptual distinction ific meaty corresponds to words available in cheie linguage. A limited salvation forthe SapitWhor! hypothesis can therefore be Found in these studies, which are carried oucwithin thedevelop- ing field of psycholinguistics (p. 418) received were ‘sutost utonaut foadist vehicist Chassmover — murderist ‘mobitst roadent wheelst ——veticunary doice (Driver Of Internal ‘combustion Engine) pupamotor (Person Using Power-asssted Mecrsaf Travelon Roats) Jicentat (censed internal ‘Combustion engine Navigator Tained in ‘Automobile Tactic) Howaver, aoneof these Ingenious ideas has survived. WORDS FOR HOLEIN PINTUPI Ietakes between three and 14Englsh words to ‘tinguish the various senses fof hoe in this Australian Aboriginal language, butthe ftstineions can nonetheess be conveyed. yarla aboleinan object birtiaholeinthe ground pirnki a hole formed by Fock shelf kartaloa asmallholein the ‘round ‘yuplipaashatiow halen vehich ants ive ‘mutaraaspeciat hole in a spear nyacrkalpa a burrow for “mall animals pulpa a rabbit butrow ‘makarnpa a goanna burrow arartathenole left by 2 ‘gaara when thas broken thesurface after hibernation