LINGUISTICS 377

evidence that Whorf was wrong in claiming that the Hopi conception of time differs radically from Standard Average European. Vermeersch, as a logical empiricist, seeks to formulate an ap- proach to the question of how much any par- ticular language is a constraint upon human perception, and vice versa. Beluffi notes that psychiatry has been composed of a series of metalanguages imposed on the differences be- tween everyday language and the language of afflicted persons - often imposed repressively as justificatory schemes for social intervention and control-yet traditional psychiatric theories have not dealt effectively with language-use, the heart of which is conversation (das Gesprach). He proposes Binswanger’s Daseinsanalyse, in- spired by the role of language-use in the crea- tion of shared social realities (Weltlzchkeiten), as a humanistic alternative. Laszlo’s concern is with the Whorfian relativity evidenced by the fragmentation of contemporary science and the difficulties in communicating across specialty boundaries at interdisciplinary meetings. His personal experience suggests that those difficul- ties can be mitigated when persons have famil- iarity with general-systems theory as a metalan- guage. Sharing Laszlo’s concern, De Mey brings Whorf and Kuhn together to reveal how the in- commensurability of paradigms and the un- translatability of languages presents a specific threat to the public nature of science. Boullart asks to what extent different linguistic and cultural systems may be incompatible and, in order to assess the possible range of relativism involved, develops a general theory of incom- patibility and incomparability in which three distinct forms of relativism are differentiated. Stemmer is concerned with early-childhood lan- guage acquisition, particularly ostensive defini- tion and the processes of generalization, which, he finds, offer tentative support for the weak version of the Whorfian hypothesis. And finally, Cipolla analyzes the qualities of T V in relation to primary and secondary socialization and diglossia in order to weigh the possible effects of viewer competence upon other forms of language competence and our perceptions of ourselves (roles) and our environment (commit- ment and authority).

In summary, these papers bring much sug- gestive thought, considerable debate, some con- ceptual clarifications, a little evidence, and a bit of social action into the human drama that it is all about. The issues of freedom and constraint, universalism and relativism, of course, remain.

Aboriginal Cognition: Retrospect and Pros- pect. G . E. Kearney and D. W . McElwain, eds. Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies Psy- chology Series, 1. Atlantic Highlands, N.J.: Humanities, 1977. 418 pp. $23.00 (cloth), $13.00 (paper).

Geoffrey White East-West Culture Learning Institute

In May of 1974 a “cognition symposium” held at the Biennial Meeting of the Australian Insti- tute of Aboriginal Studies brought together re- searchers to discuss issues in cross-cultural psy- chology as well as particular studies involving Australian aboriginal groups. The volume re- viewed here contains 28 revised papers prepared originally for that symposium by some 35 parti- cipants. The bulk of contributions present methods and findings from field studies, although six participants invited from outside Australia (Richard Brislin, Tom Ciborowski, Leonard Doob, Jacqueline Goodnow, Udai Pareek, and Harry Triandis) deal with general methodological, theoretical, and ethical topics.

The background and purposes of the sym- posium are outlined briefly in an introduction by the editors. As they indicate, the choice of a title is somewhat arbitrary, indicating more a preference for vocabulary than a uniform focus on distinctively cognitive problems. The aboriginal focus is taken to include mainland populations who so define themselves. Of 17 field studies, six are located in the Northern Territory, four in Queensland, four in South Australia, and two in the western desert. The book provides a useful index organized accord- ing to authors, subjects, places, and psycholog- ical tests.

All of the papers are concernedwithquestions that arise from the application of psychological methods to societal problems afflicting Aborigines (a revealing index of the severity of these problems is given by an estimated decline in the Aboriginal population by a factor of six over the last 130 years). Keywords here are ‘in- tervention’ and ‘evaluation’- words surrounded by a host of methodological and ethical quan- dries. The discussion of these issues in this volume is edifying for researchers who consider their work to have potential benefit for people with whom they have done fieldwork.

Most of these papers address issues related to education. The underlying assumption is that schooling is a primary avenue to desired socio- cultural change. Many of the studies reported

378 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST 181, 19791

here derive from a tradition of psychological testing aimed at assessing various cognitive and linguistic skills. They follow a common research design that typically administers one or more formal tasks (such as the Porteus Maze Test, the Embedded Figures Test, or the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test) to two or more populations whose performances are then compared. So, for example, L. A. McIntyre reports the perfor- mance of both urban and rural groups of aborig- inal and white Australian school children on a battery of tests and finds that, in general, the urban/rural factor is a better predictor of task- performance than ethnicity. Not surprisingly, the use of standardized tests of cognitive and linguistic skills shows consistent deficits for rural aboriginal populations when compared with white Australians (with such interesting excep- tions as the superiority of desert aboriginal children on a visual memory task as reported by Kearins [209]).

The comparison of such linguistically and culturally diverse groups as white Australians and Australian aboriginals is fraught with prob- lems of interpretation and generalization. What is the significance of performance on a formal psychological task outside of the experimental situation, or even outside of a school setting? A number of papers in this volume explicitly state the difficulty in generalizing the results of stan- dardized tests to social and cultural contexts beyond the experimental setting (no matter how much the instrument may be tailored to local elicitation cues). Several authors cite statements by Michael Cole and William Labov relevant to the problems of assessing cognitive and lin- guistic skills independent of specific situations or task-environments. However, most of the studies reported here clearly show the inertia of the paradigm of psychological testing in their design and interpretation. Most authors adduce overly sweeping generalizations about dif- ferences in cognitive processes from cultural, ecological, urbadrural , or educational com- parisons. Such generalizations are evident in the editors’ conclusion that, “. . . there is clearly a significant deficit in psycholinguistic abilities in English over all categories for Aboriginal chil- dren . . . ” (p. 400), and “The more traditional general intelligence measures also suggest some difference” (p. 401).

While many of the findings reported in this volume will be of interest to both cross-cultural researchers and educators, their usefulness (and meaningfulness) is limited by the absence of more thoroughgoing ethnographic description,

which would allow assessment of their signifi- cance for the daily lives of those who are gen- eralized about. The need for improved ethnog- raphy in the type of research reported here is especially evident in two of the more broad- ranging papers, which venture into anthro- pologically familiar topics, such as time-con- cepts and ethnopsychiatry, and yet give little in- dication of the existing literature in those areas.

Following the title of this volume, one is led to ask, “What, in retrospect, has been learned about studying cognition in cultural context since the pathbreaking work by Rivers and others in the Torres Straits expedition of 1898?” and “What are the prospects for such research so long as the fields of cross-cultural psychology and psychological anthropology maintain such seemingly parochial attitudes about their ap- proaches to the study of cognition and culture?”

A Comparative Study of the Foe, Huli, and Pole Languages of Papua New Guinea. W. M . Rule. Oceania Linguistic Monographs, 20. Sydney: University of Sydney, 1977. vi + 124 pp. Af3.00 (paper).

New Guinea Area Languages and Language Study. Vol. 2: Austronesian Languages. S . A . Wurm, ed. Pacific Linguistics, Series C, 39. Canberra: Department of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University, 1976. xxxv + 736 pp. Af23.50 (cloth).

T h e Languages of the Madang District, Papua New Guinea. J . A . Zgruggen. Pacific Linguistics, Series B , 41. Canberra: Depart- ment of Linguistics, School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University, 1975. vi + 154 pp. A$5.00 (paper).

Linda Amy Kimball Western Washington University

A major forefront. of anthropological lin- guistics lies in study of the Austronesian and non- Austronesian languages of the greater Pacific region, including Melanesia, Papua and New Guinea, and Australia. Each of these books makes a significant contribution to that study.

Z’graggen’s precise linguistic demography of the 117,105 Madang District speakers of 175