Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

A pragmatic study of selected pairs of Yoruba proverbs Adebayo Lawala, Bade Ajayib, Wumi Rajic Institute of Education, ni!ersit" of llorin, P#$#%# 1515, llorin, &igeria ' (e)artment of *inguistics and &igerian *anguages, ni!ersit" of llorin, llorin, &igeria# c (e)artment of $odern Euro)ean *anguages, ni!ersit" ofllorin, llorin, &igeria # Received May 1995; revised version June 1996. Abstract Proverbs represent the quintessence of a people's collective isdo! sustained and trans!itted fro! "eneration to "eneration. #ue to the poly!orphous nature of the conte$t and co!petence needed to be reactivated in interpretin" the!% they also provide insi"ht into so!e of the "reatest pra"!atic constraints in lan"ua"e use. &he purpose of this study as to identify the illucutionary acts perfor!ed throu"h the use of t elve 'oruba proverbs and then analyse the types of pra"!atic conte$t and co!petence hich listeners have to invo(e and deploy respectively to interpret the! appropriately% and to also resolve the overt contradiction in each of the si$ selected pairs of proverbs. )n the basis of the findin"s% reco!!endations have been !ade to ards a !ore pra"!atic teachin" and testin" of 'oruba proverbs in particular and of the lan"ua"e as a hole. 1. I troductio *tudies on speech acts have focused on the 'ho ' and ' hy' of verbal e$chan"es in the conte$t of natural co!!unication +e.". ,de"bi-a% 19..a/% in literary discourse +e.". ,de"bi-a% 19..b/ and in !ass 101
a

Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

co!!unication +e.". ,de"bi-a% 19.0/. ,s far as our (no led"e is concerned% little or nothin" has been investi"ated in the area of the pra"!atics of proverbs ith a vie to understandin" the 'ho ' and ' hy' of usin" the!% and ho insi"hts "ained can enrich the theory of pra"!atics in "eneral. &his ne"lect is unfortunate since proverbs% by their poly!orphous nature% can shed !ore li"ht on lin"uistic perfor!ance and thus e$tend the current frontiers of pra"!atic theory. 2n the ords of 3a al +1990b/% proverbs see! to contain the richest pool of pra"!atic factors since a proverb% properly conte$tuali4ed% provides data that are at once lin"uistic% philosophical% psycholo"ical and cos!olo"ical. Proverbs thus e$eit so!e of the "reatest pra"!atic constraints on lan"ua"e users. &his is particularly true of 'oruha lan"ua"e in hich the proverbs are not only le"ion and !ultifarious% each ith its o n distinctive pra"!atics of usa"e% but here also the presence of overtly contradictory pairs of proverbs accentuates the proble!. &he appropriate use and interpretation of proverbs% therefore% represent so!e of the "reatest difficulties e$perienced by !ost learners of 'oruba as a first lan"ua"e +32/ at all levels of the 5i"erian school syste!% and particularly as a second 5i"erian 3an"ua"e +530/ at the Junior *econdary school level. &he puipose of this study as to analyse the pra"!atic factors underlyin" this proble! usin" si$ overtly con6 tradictory pairs of 'oruba proverbs ith a vie to su""estin" useful peda"o"ical directions. &he study as therefore a descriptive one% e!ployin" a qualitative analysis of the pra"!atic !appin"s hich co!petent users deploy to unravel the hidden !eanin" of each proverb% and to resolve the superficial contradiction that subsists bet een the pairs of proverbs. 2n addressin" this research proble!% the investi"ators sou"ht ans ers to the follo in" questions7 1. 8hat (inds of perfor!atives are the selected proverbs9 0. 8hat types of conte$t and correspondin" co!petencies are invo(ed to resolve overt contradictions in the selected pairs of proverbs9 ,s a corollary% e note the i!plications of ans ers to these questions for the teachin" and learnin" of 'oruba proverbs in both the 32 and 530 situations.1 !. "#eoretical bac$grou d 10:

Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

&he bac("round of the literature on pra"!atics% especially on speech act theory% and on the functions and sources of 'oruba proverbs has provided useful insi"hts for for!ulatin" a conceptual fra!e or( and the !ethodolo"y for this study. 2#1# +unctions and sources of ,oru'a )ro!er's Proverbs for! a "reat part of a people's traditional repository of hat they consider to be of "reat value and concern to the!. &hey are the quintessence of a people's collective isdo! sustained and trans!itted fro! "eneration to "eneration +3a al% 1990b/. &hus% a!on" the 'oruba there are proverbs about proverbs% one of hich clai!s that ;proverbs arc the veritable horse that conveys one safely to the discovery of ideas;. ,chebe% in his popular novel -.ings fall /)art, has also asserted that ;a!on" the 2bo% the art of conversation is re"arded very hi"hly and proverbs are the pal!6oil ith hich ords are eaten; +19.<75/. &he stylistic i!port of proverbs% as su""ested by ,chebe% can be seen in their rhetorical and poetic vi"our% and this ould perhaps e$plain hy a traditional ,frican ould constantly punctuate his speech ith appropriate proverbs and aphoris!s to drive his points ho!e +3a al% 1990b/. ,!on" the 'oruba% proverbs taste s eetest in the !ouths of very old people. &his is not% ho ever% i!plyin" that youn"er ones cannot use proverbs in their speeches% but they have to defer to% and see( per!ission fro! elders present% sayin"7 ;2 bo to you elders; it ants to "o the ay of proverbs ...;. ,nd the elders ill "rant hi! per!ission% blessin" hi!7 ;May you live lon" to use !ore proverbs;. Proverbs are thus e!ployed to reinforce and sustain the traditional respect for elders. 2n this re"ard% it also serves as a potent !eans of social control. 2n settlin" quarrels and disputes% a proverb co!es in handy7 ;2t is only he ho is (no led"eable in ords and proverbs that can settle quarrels';. ,"ain% the traditional deference to elders is here underscored. &he aesthetic qualities and functions of proverbs can be "leaned fro! their different poetic techniques. &here are certain stylistic devices such as the fore"roundin" of sound% i!a"ery and diction hich are not co!!on in ordinary usa"es. &his e$plains the intellectual% e!otional and i!a"inative appeals of several 'oruba proverbs. =ence% another 105

Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

proverb clai!s that ;the a"idi"bo dru! is sounded li(e proverbs; it is only the ise that can dance to its rhyth!% and the (no led"eable +in ords/ that can interpret its !essa"e;. 'oruba proverbs also serve didactic functions% especially for the youn"er "eneration. &his is hy level6headed youths crave the co!pany of elders so that they can "lean lin"uistic% cultural and historical infor!ation usually conveyed in elders' speeches hich% as indicated earlier on. are full of appropriate proverbs. ,s the proverbs "o% ;it is the old !outh that (no s the ripeness of (ola; and ;any youth that ashes its hands clean shall dine ith elders;. , cursory e$a!ination of the contents of even a s!all nu!ber of 'oruba proverbs ould reveal an eclectic socio6cultural ori"in. &he sources are as varied as the historical% social and cultural e$periences of the 'oruba people. &he si"nificance of historicity% for instance% can be seen in this proverb7 ;>reetin" is so!ethin" but tauntin" another thin"; e do not "reet a !an by callin" hi! an 2-aye !an passin" throu"h the fronta"e of )"un!ola's house;. &his proverb contains a historical allusion to the 2-aye ar of the early 1.6<'s and the historic role of )"un!ola in the ar. Perhaps the "reatest nu!ber of 'oruba proverbs are !inted fro! the socio6cultural realities of traditional 'oruba e$perience. =ence% ;as soon as the suitor ins the consent of his o!an% the !atch6!a(er !ust ithdra his services;% and ;inheritors cannot be li(ened to true heirs;. 2n addition% ;the slave dies ithout the (no led"e of the !other% but pande!oniu! "reets the death of the freeborn;. &his last one ould see! to be equivalent in pra"!atic function to the *ha(espcarean coina"e; ;8hen be""ars die there are no co!ets seen; the heavens the!selves bla4e forth the death of princes; +?alpurnia in *ha(espeare's Julius 0aesar, ,ct 222% *c. ii./. 8ithin the real! of socio6cultural e$perience% the 'oruba reli"ious and !oral ethos is perhaps the richest sub6source. *o!e of the proverbs derived fro! this area include7 ;2f !y deity cannot support !e% he should leave !e as he !et !e;; ;)ur character is deity% the !ore positive it is% the !ore supportive;; and ;5o deity .supports the indolent; it is our ar!s that support us;. &hese last t o proverbs ould see! to echo the @n"lish equivalent hich clai!s that ;character is fate;. &here are a handful of 'oruba proverbs that !anifest deep psycholo"ical penetration and an understandin" of ani!al behaviour. 106

Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

& o e$a!ples of these are ;=u!an bein"s never assist in lic(in" your hands hen they are s!eared ith blood% e$cept hen they are shi!!erin" ith pal!6oil;; and ;a sheep that (eeps the co!pany of do"s !ust eat faeces;% in other ords% ;sho !e your friends and 2 ill (no ho! you are;. ?ertain lines of divinatory and incantatory poetry have co!e to stay as idely accepted proverbs a!on" the 'oruba. #ue essentially to their poetic ori"in% this cate"ory of proverbs displays philosophical profundity and a (een sensitivity to the environ!ent. Aor instance% ; hen the ood6insect "athers stic(s% on its o n head it carries the!% in the sa!e ay as ;the ash !ust trail hoever blo s it;% and ;the earth shall consu!e those ho betray it;. 2#2# -.eoretical models of )ragmatics &here are as !any definitions of pra"!atics as there have been atte!pts by pra"6!aticians to shed li"ht on the nature of the discipline one of the youn"est in the idenin" field of lin"uistic inquiry. 2t is si"nificant to note that pra"!atics e!er"ed as a result of the li!itations of structural se!antics to capture satisfactorily the sociolo"ical and other non6lin"uistic di!ensions of verbal co!!unication% -ust as soci6 olin"uistics% the fore6runner to pra"!atics% evolved as a result of the inadequacy of structural lin"uistics to e$plicate the factors of lin"uistic perfor!ance. Just as the "oal of the "ra!!arian is to describe hat constitutes "ra!!atical co!petence% the concern of the pra"!atician is to describe% in adequate ter!s% the co!ponents of the lan"ua"e user's pra"!atic co!petence. ,s the fore!ost proponent of speech act theory% ,ustin +1960/ postulates that en"a"in" in a speech act !eans perfor!in" the co!ple!entary acts of locution% illo6cution and perlocution. , locutionary act is a sentence uttered ith a deter!inate sense and reference% an act perfor!ed in order to co!!unicate. &he study of locu6 tionary act is the do!ain of descriptive lin"uistics hich co!prises phonetics% synta$% phonolo"y and lin"uistic se!antics. ,n illocutionary act is a non6lin"uistic act perfor!ed throu"h a lin"uistic or locutionary act. 2llocutionary acts include co!!andin"% darin"% no!inatin"% resi"nin"% etc.% and can be effected throu"h perfor!ative sentences% hether or not they contain perfor!ative verbs +Aro!(lin and Rod6!an% 10B

Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

19.1/. Aor instance% ;it is rainin"; is an i!plicit perfor!ance of 'statin"' even hen the sentence contains no perfor!ative verb. , perlocutionary act results fro! a lan"ua"e user's utterance and% accordin" to 3evinson +19.</% it is the intended or unintended consequence of% or reaction to hat is said. &his act is not part of the conventional !eanin" of the utterance% but it is derived fro! the conte$t and situation of the utterance. &his i!plies that interpretin" utterances is !ore than -ust reco"nisin" the spea(er's intention by follo in" the con6 vention of verbal co!!unication. 2n an atte!pt to i!prove on ,ustin's effort% *earle +19B6/ puts for ard a ta$ono!y of illocutionary acts as 'assertives'% 'directives'% 'co!!issives'% 'e$pressives' and 'declaratives' hich are not radically different fro! ,ustin's. =o ever% *earle disa"rees ith the distinction bet een 'locutionary' and 'illocutionary' acts% hile at the sa!e ti!e ar"uin" that spea(in" a lan"ua"e involves perfor!in" acts accordin" to t o types of rules 6 re"ulative and constitutive. Re"ulative rules ;re"ulate antecedently or independently e$istin" for!s of behaviour; +*earle% 19B67 11/% and in ,de"bi-a's vie % they are the basis of appraisal of behaviour. ?onstitutive rules% on the other hand% do not !erely re"ulate% they create or define ne for!s of behaviour. 2t is thus ;a !atter of convention; +,de"bi-a% 19.07 1B/ for speech acts to be perfor!ed in a lan"ua"e. >rice +19B5/ proposes the ter! '?ooperative Principles' +?P/ to refer to the quasi6interactional a"ree!ent hich spea(ers enter into as they perfor! speech acts% assu!in" that other thin"s are equal. &he concepts of 'i!plicature' and 'presupposition' are i!portant in analysin" the !eanin" of lan"ua"e in use. 2!plicature is the !id6 ay bet een hat is said and hat is i!plied but not entailed or stated overtly. 2t could be conventional +3eech% 19.1/ or conversational +>rice% 19B./% hich is the purvie of pra"!atics. Presupposition% on the other hand% is the e$plicit assu!ption about the real orld hich spea(ers !a(e and on hich the !eanin" of an utterance lar"ely depends. Aairly related to the notions of 'i!plicature' and 'presupposition' is the concept of 'Mutual ?onte$tual Celiefs' +M?Cs/ proposed by Cach and =arnish +19B9/. ,ccordin" to the t o scholars% M?Cs centre around the spea(er's 'intention' and the listener's 'inference'. , speech act is perfor!ed ith the intention that the listener ill be able to understand and identify the intention of the spea(er. 8hen this happens% 10.

Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

the listener !a(es an inference; in other ords% the listener puts certain facts to"ether that ill help hi! reco"nise the spea(er's intention. &hese facts% hich are salient or ell6(no n to the interlocutors% are branded M?Cs. ,de"bi-a +19.0/ underta(es a se!inal critique of the earlier speech act theoretical !odels% observin" that !ost of these !odels have placed undue pre!iu! on convention as the decisive factor in identifyin" and interpretin" the illocutionary force of an utterance. =e ar"ues that% althou"h *earle su""ests that intention is also crucial in interpretin" illocutionary force% *earle's theory is biased in favour of conventional or constitutive rules. ,de"bi-a further appraises *addoc('s +19B:/ sub!ission% concludin" that *addoc( ta(es full co"ni4ance of lin"uistic convention but ne"lects other crucial aspects of a situation of verbal interaction such as intention and the pra"!atics of the situation of social interaction. ,de"bi-a further a"rees ith Cach and =arnish +19B9/ that understandin" speech acts is in the !ain an inferential process. =e also supports ,ustin's +1960/ and *earle's +19B6/ ar"u!ent that lan"ua"e users perfor! acts ith utterances. =e also points out that the effects of perlocutionary acts% hether intended or unintended% !ay be on the spea(er hi!self as ell as on the listener. ,de"bi-a stresses the con6 ventional aspect of speech acts% !aintainin" that hile illocutionary acts !ay be conventional% as proposed by ,ustin +1960/ and *earle +19B6/% they need not be. &his is because the force of so!e illocutionary acts is deter!ined by the intention of the spea(er or by the pra"!atics of the particular situation of social interaction. =e then concludes that at every sta"e of the discourse% both spea(ers and listeners have to !obilise appropriate areas of hat he ter!s their ;pra"!asociolin"uistic co!pe6 tence; hich refers to the constitutive pra"!atic% social% syntactic% se!antic and le$ical co!petencies% a!on" others. ,de"bi-a% li(e Cach and =arnish +19B:/% also points out that non6literalness results in ''2ndirect *peech ,cts; hich cannot be thorou"ly understood until the ;pra"!asociolin"uistic conte$t; is provo(ed. 8ritin" fro! a peda"o"ical and co!!unicative point of vie % 3a al +1990/ atte!pts an idealisation of the bipolar process of co!!unication in his 'pra"!a6co!!unicative' !odel. =e ar"ues that in encodin" and decodin" !eanin" ith lan"ua"e% the closer the pra"!aticDco!!unicative co!petencies of the interlocutors% the "reater 109

Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

the chances of fluent and efficient co!!unication and% conversely% the lesser the chances of !isunderstandin". *ince no t o users of any lan"ua"e are e$actly the sa!e in their pra"!atic co!petencies% the !eanin" intended by the encoder !ay not al ays be the sa!e as the inference dra n by the decoder. 3a al further e$presses preference for the use of 'listener' instead of ,de"bi-a's 'hearer'% since hearin" as a quantitative biolo"ical function is a necessary but not sufficient condition for listenin"% a qualitative% psycholin"uistic and pra"!atic s(ill. ,de"bi-a's +19.0/ use of 'pra"!asociolin"uistic co!petence' ould also see! superfluous as it is no clear that a lan"ua"e user's pra"!atic co!petence is an all6subsu!in" construct co!prisin" the lin"uistic% the social and situational aspects of his (no led"e% a!on" others. &hus the concept of 'pra"!atic co!petence' is dee!ed sufficient and all6 enco!passin" to capture all aspects of the (no led"e hich co!petent lan"ua"e users deploy to encode and decode !eanin" in lin"uistic co!!unication. %. A co ceptual framewor$ for t#is study &he bac("round literature on the functions and sources of 'oruba proverbs and on the e$istin" theoretical !odels of pra"!atics have assisted in distillin" a pra"!atic fra!e or( for this study. ?onsiderin" the uniqueness of the data for this study% no sin"le pra"!atic !odel as considered adequate and an eclectic approach is adopted in arrivin" at a synthesi4ed fra!e or(. 2n the vie of 3evinson +19.</% the !ain issue hich any pra"!atic theory !ust e$plain is speech acts% alon" ith presuppositions and i!plicatures. Cut beyond this% the theory !ust also atte!pt a description of the bac("round co!petencies hich lan"ua"e users reactivate to interpret speech acts% alon" ith presuppositions and i!plicatures. 2t is only then that such a theory can serve the necessary dia"nostic. develop!ental and re!edial purposes in the sphere of lan"ua"e and literary education% part of hich as the concern of this study.

11<

Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

Ai". 1. 3a al's !odel of the aspecis of a pra"!atic theory. &he !odel in Ai". 1 assu!es that there are five hierarchical conte$ts of an utterance% the first and !ost funda!ental of hich is the conte$t of lan"ua"e itself in ter!s of the phonolo"ical% le$ical and syntactic co!ponents and the structure of the sentence. &his conte$t is a sine qua non of lin"uistic co!!unication% and is follo ed by the situational conte$t hich refers to the topic of discourse and the factors of the physical event includin" concrete ob-ects% persons and location. &he psycholo"ical conte$t% lar"ely derivin" fro! the precedin" conte$t of situation% refers to the bac("round of the !ood% attitudes% personal beliefs% and the state of !ind of the lan"ua"e user. 5e$t is the social conte$t ich is concerned ith interpersonal relations a!on" the interlocutors. &he penulti!ate level of conte$t is the 'sociolo"ical' and this describes the socio6cultural and hislorical settin"s. &he ulti!ate and broadest conte$t is the 'cos!olo"icar by hich is !eant the lan"ua"e user's orld6vie % and the i!plicit references to the orld or aspects of it% and to certain universally established facts. +5ote that the bro(en lines in the hierarchies of conte$ts and co!petencies indicate that the

111

Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

levels are not neatly co!part!entalised% since they are not !utually e$clusive./ &he various levels of conte$t are sy!!etrically related to the equally hierarchical levels of bac("round (no led"e or co!petence necessary for the production and interpretation of speech acts. &he co!petence includes% in a fairly cu!ulative order% the lin"uistic + ich involves le$ical% phonolo"ical% !orpho6syntactic and !icro6se!antic (no led"e/% the psycholo"ical +i.e. a areness of% and sensitivity to !oods% attitudes and points of vie /% the situational + hich refers to the (no led"e of% and fa!iliarity ith the topic of discourse% location% ob-ects and persons in the physical settin"/% the social +(no led"e of social factors and principles "overnin" conversation/% the sociolo"ical +(no led"e of the socio6cultural and historical bac("round to the utterance/ and the cos!olo"ical + hich is the lan"ua"e user's (no led"e of the orld% his factual (no led"e and "eneral orld6 vie /. *o!e or all of these co!petencies can be e!ployed as pra"!atic !appin"s to interpret and classify an utterance into a particular type of speech act and to "ive an appropriate response or reaction. 2n perfor!in" this co!ple$ tas(% the lan"ua"e user deploys his co!petencies to identify and understand presuppositions% i!plicatures and M?Cs throu"h inference. *peech acts are also hierarchically or"anised and are so!e hat related to the conte$ts and co!petencies that produce the!. &he !ost basic act is locutionary and its identification and co!prehension depends on the purely lin"uistic constraints of the le$ical% !orpho6syntactic% phonolo"ical% phonetic and !icro6se!antic structure of the sentence. 3ocutionary acts are thus described in our !odel as the spea(er's overt lin"uistic behaviour and the co!petence and conte$t relative to their interpretation are also referred to as the 'surface structures'. 2n consonance ith the bac("round literature earlier revie ed% it is inferred that illocutionary act is a hi"her6order act hich can be either direct or indirect% intended or unintended and conventional or non6 conventional% dependin" on the hi"hly variable va"aries of the conte$t of co!!unication. 2llocutionary acts occupy a pri!ary level of non6 lin"uistic functions hich lan"ua"e users perfor! ith ords. &he ulti!ate level of speech acts is that of perlocutionary acts hich are the

110

Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

conventional or unconventional% intended or unintended consequences of utterances.

&. 'ata a alysis a d results &he proverbs that constitute the data for this study ere collected fro! infor!ants ho ere adult native spea(ers of the lan"ua"e% and also fro! literary te$ts. &hey are hereby presented +in both their ori"inal and @n"lish versions/ in hat loo(s li(e contradictory pairs. 2n translatin"% effort as !ade to preserve as !uch as possible the ori"inal point of vie % althou"h it as still difficult to recapture the ori"inal freshness and flavour. @ach proverb is analysed pra"!atically by statin" both the 'direct' and 'indirect; illocutionary acts it perfor!s% and then the conte$tsDco!petencies needed for interpretation are briefly outlined before sho in" ho conte$ts and co!petencies reveal the lac( of contradiction. &he conte$tual and functional dis6tincliveness of each proverb is thus underscored. +la/ 2rin ti a rin la a (o ni '2t's the ay a person presents hi!self that he's received

ll.cutionar" act1 +a/ direct1 assertive +clai!in"/ +b/ indirect1 e$pressive +blai!in"/ 0onte2ts3com)etencies *inguistic1 &his level of conte$tDco!petence is funda!ental. &he core and the !ost unifyin"% ho ever% of all the lin"uistic levels is the se!antic. ,s applicable to +and ill therefore be ta(en for "ranted for/ all the other proverbs% it is '!eanin"' that unites the le$ical% syntactic and phonolo"ical levels. &here are% ho ever% t o levels of se!antic !eanin" at either the le$ical or sentential level7 the pri!ary or literal level and the secondary or idio!aticDfi"urative level. &he pri!ary lo er level feeds the secondary hi"her level throu"h hat ould see! a funda!ental and 111

Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

tacit assu!ption by all co!petent users that every proverb is an idio! of a sort% a ti"hly condensed representation of a fairly co!parable and rather lar"e "roup of possibilities of socio6cultural e$perience. '3in"uistic !eanin"' is thus transferred in part to 'pra"!atic !eanin"' throu"h the use of such fi"urative devices as !etaphor% !etony!y% synecdoche and sy!bolis!. 2n the first proverb above% for instance% the literal translation of Inn is '!anner of al(in"'. Cut at the fi"urative level a person's "ait !etaphorises into his or her "eneral carria"e% co!port!ent and conduct. =ence% hat is presented as the @n"lish version of this proverb% and indeed !any of the other eleven proverbs% is not a literal but an idio!atic equivalent% at hich every co!petent user of the lan"ua"e is e$pected to arrive as the first !a-or si"n6post to a pra"!atic interpretation. 4ituational1 , person has presented hi!self in a shabby% unbeco!in" !anner and the topic centres around this. Ps"c.ological1 &he spea(er disapproves of the ay another person has presented hi!self% and this other person is e$pected to be a are of the disapproval. 4ocial1 Eno led"e of the social relations holdin" bet een the t o people directly involved in the event +e.". friend6friend% parent6child% husband6 ife relationship/% althou"h no special relationship need hold in this case. 4ociological1 &he 'oruba value decent and respectable appearanceDco!pany. 0osmological1 , areness of the fact that appearance is often used as a !easure of a stran"er's orth. +2b/ ,so nla (o ni cniyan rila. ', bi" dress does not !a(e a person i!portant.1 ll.cutionar" act +a/ direct1 assertive +statin"/ +b/ indirect1 verdictive +-ud"in"/ 0onte2t 3 com)ete n cies *inguistic1 ,"ain% there is a funda!ental se!antic require!ent of understandin" that 'dressin"' serves as a !etony!% or even a synecdoche% for personal orth as a hole. 11:

Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

4ituationai# , person of questionable character passes hi!self off as a di"nitary throu"h !ere i!pressive appearance and the topic focuses on hi!. Ps"c.ological1 &he spea(er disapproves of this false appearance and the listener is e$pected to be a are of this. 4ocial1 Eno led"e of relationship bet een the spea(er and the ob-ect of disapproval% althou"h no type of relationship need e$ist. 4ociological1 Eno led"e of the 'oruba traditional disapproval of all !anner of falsehood and dcceptiveness. 0osmological1 Eno led"e of the hu!an capacity for deceit and !a(e6believe. &he see!in" contradiction bet een proverbs +la/ and +2b/ can no be resolved by !appin" certain conte$tual variables ith the conver"ent !eanin" of the t o proverbs. 8hile the psycholo"ical conte$t of disapproval is co!!on to the t o proverbs% the situational conte$ts ould see! to be fairly opposite to each other% and the aspects of the sociolo"ical +or socio6cultural/ and cos!olo"ical co!petencies to be invo(ed in appreciatin" the pra"!atic validity of each proverb in its o n ri"ht% and in resolvin" the see!in" contradiction are radically different. &his ould e$plain the difference in the indirect or intended illocutionary force of the t o proverbs. &he 'ne ' !eanin" that no e!er"es fro! a har!onious blendin" of the t o proverbs is that% althou"h appearance !ay be deceptive% it is still desirable that e present ourselves decently and respectably. +0a/ )tosi e"bon !i -o"un aburo% )lorfburu(u baba nn -o"uri o!p. F2t is only the pauper that inherits the possessions of his youn"er ones% -ust as the never6do6 ell inherits his o n children's properties.G

Illocutionar" act1 +a/ direct1 assertive +clai!in"/ +b/ indirect7 e$pressive +bla!in"/

0onte2t30om)etencies1

115

Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

*inguistic1 &he interpreter needs to appreciate the !etaphorical use of 'a'a +father/ and omo +child/ as referrin" to any elder person and a youn"er one respectively% in a relative sense. 4it national1 , person assu!es ron"ful o nership of so!ethin" belon"in" to another !uch youn"er person. Ps"c.ological1 &he spea(er's !ood is that of disapproval and the listener is e$pected to (no this. 4ocial1 5o special relationship is requisite for both the direct and indirect +or intended/ illocutionary acts. 4ociological1 ,!on" the 'oruba% a"e confers both respect and responsibility on a person. 2n addition% the ish of the traditional 'oruba !an is that his children outlive hi! and inherit his belon"in"s. 0osmological1 &he idea of inheritance su""ests a ea(er or youn"er person en-oyin" the fruits of the responsibility and labour of a dead person assu!ed to be older or !ore dependable. +0b/ E 'o!o to -o"un% !a a -o"hon. 'Cefore a child inherits !y properties% 2 !yself ill have consu!ed thirty of the!.G Illocutionar" act1 +a/ direct1 co!!issive +vo in"/ +b/ indirect1 directive +advisin"/ 0onte2ts5 com)etencies *inguistic1 &o ensure basic co!petence in the se!antics of the sentence% the listener needs to understand the si"nificance of the polyse!ic pun on 6ogun, !eanin" 'inherit' and1 also 'eat t enty'% the t o of hich are si!ultaneously valid for interpretation at the non6 pra"!atic% sentential level. Aurther!ore% at the idio!atic level 'child' ould not be !isconstrued only literally in a biolo"ical sense% but fi"uratively as referrin" to any !uch youn"er person. 4ttuational1 , youn"er person relies on hat he e$pects the spea(er to pass on to hi! in ter!s of !aterial ob-ects% instead of or(in" hard to uplift hi!self. Ps"c.ological1 &he spea(er disapproves of the youn"er person's e$pectation and e$pects the listener+s/ to understand this.

116

Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

4ocial1 , special relationship of either parent6child% older siblin"6 youn"er siblin"% !aster6slave% etc. is necessary here for the intended illocutionary force of the proverb. 4ociological1 Eno led"e of the pre!iu!1 hich the 'oruba place on self6achieve!ent. 0osmological1 &he "eneral belief that people hardly appreciate undeserved re ard. &he apparent contradiction bet een proverbs +0a/ and +0b/ can also be resolved quite easily once e appreciate the fact that they only have a si!ilar psycholo"ical conte$t of disapproval% but are distinctively dissi!ilar in their social% situational% sociolo"ical and cos!olo"ical conte$ts of use% and the conco!itant co!petencies requisite for their interpretation as !utually independent speech acts. &he t o proverbs or( to"ether con"ruently to underscore an aspect of the cos!olo"ical vision of the 'oruba hich affir!s that parents and other adults should leave behind for the youn"er "eneration orthy !aterial +and !oral/ herita"e% but the latter should strive hard for their o n independent achieve!ents by startin" off herever their forebears stop. +1a/ Ci o(ete ba da"ba tan% o!u o!o re nf i !u. '8hen o7ete +a nocturnal rodent/ beco!es very old% it suc(s the breasts of her o n children.' Illocutionar" act1 +a/ direct1 assertive +infor!in"/ +b/ indirect1 directive +advisin"/ 0onte2ts3 com)etencies1 *inguistic1 &he personification of o7ete, a nocturnal rodent% as a special type of !etaphor !ust be understood% hile 'breasts' and 'suc(in"' !ust also be -ointly interpreted as sy!bolic of dependency. 2n addition% the !eanin" of 'child' !ust be e$tended beyond% the pri!arily biolo"ical to cover -ust any youn"er individual. 4ituational1 &he spea(er reacts to the listener's refusal to accept a "ift fro! a !uch youn"er person% or, !ore typically% the older person atte!pts to -ustify his de!ands on the youn"er individual. Ps"c.ological1 &he spea(er disapproves of the listener's refusal and he e$pects hi! to understand this. 11B

Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

4ocial1 , relationship of either friendship% (inship or acquaintanceship e$ists bet een the interlocutors. 4ociological1 Eno led"e of the 'oruba traditional e$pectation of filial concern and care for one's a"ed parents and other old relations. 0osmological1 &he fact of the co!!on reciprocity of filial and parental love. 1b 2(un o!o eni la ti ri ri ayo. '2t is in the tu!!y of her baby that a !other satisfies her o n hun"er.' Illocutionar" act1 +a/ direct1 assertive +infor!in"/ +b/ indirect1 directive +reco!!endin"/ 0onte2ts5 com)etencies *inguistic1 ,s before% 'baby' and '!other' are not to be understood in their pri!ary% literal senses but each as a le$ico6se!antic short6hand that potentially translates into several socio6cultural possibilities on the pa"es of e$perience. 4ituational1 , !other breast6feedin" her baby suddenly re!e!bers that her o n !eal is lon" over6due. &he *pea(er approves of the !other's parental concern and atte!pts to reinforce the act of !aternal self6denial. 2n essence% and !ore i!portantly% an older person denies hi!self or hi!self on account of a youn"er fello . Ps"c.ological1 &he spea(er is happy about the situation and e$pects the listeners to understand this. 4ocial1 , relationship of either friendship% acquaintanceship or (inship holds bet een the spea(er and the addressee. 4ociological1 Eno led"e of the i!!ense i!portance the 'oruba attach to children. 0osmological1 Eno led"e of the universality and inco!parability of !aterial love and devotion. Proverbs +1a/ and +1b/ ould see! to be perfor!in" the sa!e intended% indirect illocutionary function but in opposite directions and in different situationa3 psycholo"ical% sociolo"ical and cos!olo"ical aspects of the pra"!atic conte$t. &he philosophical i!plication of the !utal inclusiveness of the t o proverbs is that the 'oruba e$pect children to ta(e care of their a"ed parents and relations in the sa!e ay parents and old relations ta(e care of their youn" children and ards. 11.

Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

&he t o proverbs therefore represent% in philosophical and socio6 cultural ter!s, t o sides of the sa!e coin. +:a/ 2"i (an 16 da i"bo se. ')ne tree cannot !a(e a forest.G Illocutionar" act1 +a/ direct7 assertive +clai!in"/ +b/ indirect + arnin"% advisin"/ ?onte$ts D co!petencies *inguistic7 ,n understandin" of the possible personification of i"i +tree/ and 2"bo +forest/ respectively is funda!ental here. 4ituational7 , person over6esti!ates his orth% stren"th and independence ithin a "roup. Ps"c.ological7 &he spea(er fro ns at this and ants the listener to (no so. 4ociological1 &he 'oruba traditional e$pectation of personal !odesty and hu!ility irrespective of one's orth. 0osmological7 Eno led"e of the need for a person to be sensitive to the nor!s of his environ!ent% since a person's individuality derives fro! his "roup. +:b/ )(an soso araba o ya -u e"bee"berun psuhsuh ', sin"le !aho"any tree is better than a thousand osuD!! +a tall% "rass6 li(e type of plant/ Illocutionar" act1 +a/ direct7 assertive +clai!in"/ +b/ indirect7 verdictive +assessin"/ ?onte$tsD co!petencies *inguistic 7 &he sa!e type of idio!atic co!petence required in +:a/ also applies here. 4ituational7 , person% ell6(no n to the interlocutors% has several children but none is orthy of bein" proud of% and the interlocutors are discussin" the father and his children.

119

Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

P."sc.ological7 &he spea(er ishes to e$press his dis"ust at the orthlessness of all the !an's children. 4ocial7 , relationship of friendship% (inship or acquaintanceship e$ists bet een the interlocutors. 4ociological7 &he 'oruba traditional appreciation of the !oral% intellectual and e!otional orth of the individual. 0osmological7 Eno led"e of the co!!on tyranny of the !a-ority and the possible stiflin" of individual self6e$pression. ,"ain% these t o proverbs are contradictory only at the overt 'lin"uistic' level% and the see!in" inco!patibility can be re!oved if e apply in particular the pra"!atic !appin"s of the specific situational% psycholo"ical% sociolo"ical and cos!o6lo"ical aspects of the "eneral functional conte$ts of the proverbs. &he salient philosophical point here is that% hile it is essential for an individual to be !indful of the dictates of his environ!ent% the society !ust also respect the individuality and uniqueness of the person and "rant hi! adequate roo! for self6 actualisation. 2n essence% the dialectical a$io! that the individual deter!ines the collective% and vice6versa% is the -oint thrust of the t o proverbs. +5a/ )risa boo "be !i% fi !i sile bo o ti ba !i. '2f !y deity cannot support !e +in ti!es of need/% it should leave !e as it !et !e.' Illocutionar" act1 +a/ direct1 assertive +co!plainin"/ +b/ indirect1 declarative +re-ectin"/ 0onte2ts3com)etencies1 *inguistic1 &he listener is e$pected to appreciate the crucial fact that orisa +deity/ is only used as a sy!bol of all sources% both hu!an and non6hu!an% of support and benevolence. 4ituational1 , friend% acquaintance% associate or supporter is found to be disloyal or non6supportive especially at critical ti!es and the spea(er co!plains about hi!. Ps"c.ological1 &he spea(er feels stron"ly averse to the person's disloyalty and he ants the listener +possibly the disloyal individual/ to (no this. 1:<

Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

4ocial1 , close relationship e$ists bet een the interlocutors. 4ociological1 Eno led"e of the 'oruba belief in the deities and the !utal e$pectations bet een !an and the "ods. 0osmological1 , !easure of !a"nani!ity and support is e$pected fro! an ob-ect of reli"ious devotion. +5b/ )risa to n'"be die (d si; apa eni nil "be ni. '5o deity supports the loafer; it is a person's ar!s that can support hi!.' lllocutionar" act1 +a/ direct1 assertive +clai!in"% infor!in"/ +b/ indirect1 +directive% advisin"/ 0onte2ts5 com)etencies1 *inguistic1 &he listener is still e$pected to interprete onset +deity/ as done in +5a/% and to further appreciate the se!antic functions of a)a +ar!/ as both a synecdoche and a sy!bol. 4ituational1 , la4y !an bla!es >od for his oes% and the spea(er conde!ns this. Ps"c.ological1 &he spea(er is opposed to this attitude to life and ishes the idler to (no this. 4ocial1 , close relationship e$ists bet een the interlocutors ho both (no the la4y !an% at least fairly ell. 4ociological1 Eno led"e of the 'oruba belief in hard or( as an antidote for ab-ect poverty. 0osmological1 Eno led"e of the possibility of a person's character bein" instru!ental to his fate. &his pair of overtly contradictory proverbs can be e$plained particularly in ter!s of fa!iliarity ith% and co!petence in certain aspects of the situational% psycholo"ical% social% sociolo"ical and cos!olo"ical conte$ts hich "ive pra"!atic relevance to each as a !eanin"ful% independent illocutionary act. &he !oral point bein" under6 scored here is that% hile one !ay e$pect support and assistance fro! both hu!an and superhu!an fi"ures% the surest and !ost crucial support is fro! the self. +6a/ Ci iro ba lo lo"iin odun p-o (an ni otitp yo ' ba a. 1:1

Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

'2f a he runs for t enty years% it ta(es truth -ust a day to catch it.' Illocutinar" act1 +a/ direct1 assertive +clai!in"/ +b/ indirect1 verdictive +evaluatin"/ 0onte2ts3com)etencies *inguistic1 &he personification of iro +lie/ and dtito +truth/ and the rhetorical use of 't enty years' and 'a day' respectively need be specially appreciated. 4ituational1 , lon"6concealed lie has -ust been revealed and the spea(er e$presses this ne a areness to his listener+s/. Ps"c.ological1 &he !ood is that of pleasant surprise and !oral disillusion!ent. 4ocial1 &he interlocutors are so close to have both been 'i!prisoned' for so lon" in the dar(ness of the lie. 4ociological1 &he 'oruba traditional observation concernin" the see!in" elusive6ness and the relatively short span of lies hich are also considered a vice. 0osmological1 Eno led"e of the fact of the endurin" nature of truth. +6b/ Ei ile to pa osi(a% ohun re re yo 6 ti ba-e. 'Cefore the earth consu!es the evil6doer% "ood thin"s have been destroyed.' Illocutionar" act1 +a/ direct1 assertive +clai!in"/ +b/ indirect1 directive +advisin"% reco!!endin"/ 0onte2ts3com)etencies *inguistic1 , unique pre6requisite here is the personification% or rather the deification of 8e +land/ hich is sy!boli4ed as the final -ud"e. 4ituational1 ,n evil6doer is identified for hat he is and the spea(er ants his lis6tener+s/ to (no this. ill

1:0

Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

Ps"c.ological1 &he spea(er is un illin" to continue toleratin" the evil doer and he ants to in his listeners to his side. 4ocial1 &he spea(er and his lister+s/ are socially close to the e$tent that their continued tolerance of the evil6doer !ay have a ne"ative consequence on all of the!. 0osmological1 Justice delayed is% at best% inco!plete -ustice. &he !oral point in these t o apparently contradictory proverbs is that truth al ays outlives falsehood% but for as lon" as it lives% a lie% li(e any other vice% destroys both the liar and his victi!+s/% and eventual a areness% thou"h inevitable% !ay prove too late. &he illocutionary forces of the proverbs are different and this partly e$plains the differences in the specific aspects of the conte$t that need to be resorted to in !eanin"fully interpretin" each and in resolvin" the superficial% !utual ne"ation. 2n other ords% the inco!patibility is only conte$tual% not philosophical. (. )o cludi g remar$s &he findin"s of this study% apart fro! ans erin" the research questions earlier raised% could "o a lon" ay in e$tendin" the frontiers of pra"!atic theory and in sheddin" !ore li"ht on the co!!unicative and ethical si"nificance of proverbs especially a!on" the 'oruba. Aro! the fore"oin" analysis of the t elve proverbs% it can be inferred that the 'direct' perfor!ativeDillocutionary force of 'oruba proverbs tends to be !ainly 'assertive' throu"h either clai!in"% disclai!in"% infor!in" or co!plainin" about certain aspects of both the physical and the sub-ective orld. , relatively s!all a!ount of the proverbs are 'co!!isive' in their 'direct' illocutionary force by vo in"% pled"in" or pro!isin" so!ethin" to so!eone. 2n pra"!atic ter!s% and ithin the fra!e or( of our !odel% these 'direct' illocutionary acts of assertion and co!!ission are only foundational to the hi"her% 'indirect' acts hich require the activation of other co!petencies beyond the lin"uistic. &he !a-or 'indirect' illocutionary forces% hich happen to be intended acts the proverbs are used to perfor!% vary and include the 'e$pressive' act of bla!in"% the 'directive' ones of advisin"% reco!!endin" and arnin"% and lastly% but quite si"nificantly% the 1:1

Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

'verdictive' acts of -ud"in"% assessin" and evaluatin". 2t can thus be safely inferred that the proverbs perfor! illocutionary acts that are conventional and intentionally indirect. &he findin"s see! to su""est that the intended illocutionary force of the proverbs serves as an ethical !echanis! for re"ulatin" hu!an behaviour and enhancin" social control. @ssentially% therefore% the 'oruba proverbs% perhaps li(e proverbs in other lan"ua"es% represent a veritable tool for affectin" and effectin" desirable action% and for pro-ectin" a particular cos!olo"y. 2n understandin" the intended illocutionary functions of 'oruba proverbs% the lan"ua"e user e!ploys certain co!petencies +lin"uistic% situational% social% psycholo"ical% sociolo"ical and cos!olo"ical/ to identify% !ap and !atch the correspondin" conte$ts of use ith the !eanin". @ffective use of the proverbs is thus not a question of either intention or convention% but of an intricate blend of the t o. &hus% in line ith our !odel% conversational i!plicatures and presuppositions% hich are aspects of the M?Cs% are related and instru!ental to the 'indirect' illocutionary force of the proverbs. &hese M?Cs are not located in the 'surface structure' of the 'lin"uistic conte$t' but in the pro"ressively deeper structures of the situationaH% psycholo"ical% social% sociolo"ical and cos!olo"ical conte$ts. 2t is also in the deeper net or(s of conte$t and co!petence relative to the pra"!atics of each proverb that the see!in" contradictions bet een certain pairs of proverbs'can be resolved by identifyin" and e!ployin" bac("round facts% feelin"s% beliefs% situations and vie 6points hich are presupposed or i!plicated% as the case !ay be. ,s our previous analysis has indicated% 'oruba proverbs tend to affir! and pro-ect a orld in hich t o antipolar e$tre!es +e.". "ood vs. evil% truth vs. falsehood% coura"e vs. co ardice% etc/ stru""le for pre6e!inence and supre!acy. &he central philosophical point as deducible in the presence of several overtly contradictory pairs of proverbs is the pra"!atic need to achieve a proportional blend of the t o e$te!es. &he 'oruba traditional orld6vie hints thus at a cyclic rather than a linear perception of reality. &his is hy in the 'oruba proverbial syste! ;a balanced blend of friendship and en!ity sustains the orld; and ;(no in" hen to attac( and hen to retreat is the hall!ar( of a seasoned arrior; a arrior ho only (no s ho to attac(% but lac(s the s(ills of retreat ill sooner than later perish in a ar other than his o n;.0 1::

Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

Refere ces ,chebe% ?hinua. 19.<. &hin"s fall apart. 3ondon7 =eine!ann. ,de"bi-a% @.@.% 19.0. *peech act analysis of consu!er advertise!ent. Inpublished Ph.#. thesis% 2ndiana Iniversity Cloo!in"ton. ,de"bi-a% @.@.% 19..a. &o ards a speech act approach to 5i"erian literature in @n"lish. 3an"ua"e and *tyle 01+1/7 0596069. ,de"bi-a% @.@.. 19..b. My friend% here is ,nini97 #ecodin" the !eanin" of utterances. Journal of Pra"!atics 10+0/7 151616<.

*o!e people can die to be reborn% dependin" on the socio6!oraJ te$ture of their activities and e$periences hile on earth. =ence% there are such cos!olo"icaily revealin" na!es as Cabatunde +Aather has co!e a"ain/% Cabarinde +Aather has al(ed bac(/% Caba ale +Aather has co!e bac( ho!e/% Malo!o +#o not "o a"ain/. lyabo +Mother has returned/% 'etunde +Mother has co!e a"ain/ and 'e ande +Mother has co!e bac( to loo( for !e/ a!on" several others. ,ustin% J.3.% 1960. =o to do thin"s ith ords. ?a!brid"e% M,7 =arvard Iniversity Press% Cach% E. and R. =arnish% 19B9. 3in"uistic co!!unication and speech acts. ?a!brid"e% M,7 M2& Press. Aro!(in% K. and R% Rod!an% 19.1. ,n introduction to lan"ua"e. 1rd edition. 5e 'or(7 =olt% Rinehart and 8inston.

1:5

Journal of Pragmatics 27 (1997) 635-652

>rice% =.P.% 1975# 3o"ic and conversation. 2n7 P. ?ole and J. Mor"an% eds.% *ynta$ and se!antics. Kol. 17 *peech acts. 5e 'or(7 ,cade!ic Press. 3a al% R.,.% 2990a. &he use of the @n"lish dictionary. 2n7 )lu )bafe!i. ed.% 5e introduction to @n"lish lan"ua"e% 1:96166. 2badan7 '6Coo(s. 3a al% R.,.% 1990b. @n"lish lan"ua"e and a patriarchal oridvic . *avanna 11+0/7 B:6B9. 3eech% >.% 19.1. &he principles of pra"!atics. 3ondon7 3on"!an% 3evin% *.R.% 19BB. &he se!antics of !etaphor. 3ondon7 &he Johns =op(ins Iniversity Press% 3evinson% *tephen ?.% 19.<. *peech act theory7 &he state of the art. ?a!brid"e7 ?a!brid"e Iniversity Press. *addoc(% J.M.% 19B:. &o ards a lin"uistic theory of speech acts. 5e 'or(7 ,cade!ic Press. *earle% J.R.% 19B6. , classification of illocutionary acts. 3an"ua"e and *ociety 57 1601.

1:6