yumi/mipela

[courtney jill handman]

On Mon, 27 Nov 2000, John Lynch wrote:

> I was interested to see one correspondent refer to Miriam Meyerhoff's
> documentation of this same feature in Bislama. I do not have the reference
> with me here. It seems strange on the surface, since ALL Vanuatu languages
> have an inclusive/exclusive disticntion, and I have never heard ni-Vanuatu
> using these forms differently from what was expected. Perhaps, though, she
> may be referring to first language speakers who may be making an innovation
> there too. Can anyone enlighten me on what she said?
> 
> John Lynch
> 
I haven't read this article in a few years, but just in flipping through
it now, I found the following: "The data was collected ... in urban and
village communities in northern Vanuatu".  I don't think she
specifies anywhere else in the article whether she worked with
1st language speakers or not.  Regardless, Meyerhoff talks
about how different identities can be invoked in different conversational
situations, in her particular cases these being gender, nationality, and
residence.  If those identities were salient in some way in the
conversation, inclusive v. exclusive would depend upon membership or
non-membership in one of those categories.  She also notes some cases
where there was confusion as to whether speakers were using a literal v. a
'social identity' kind of yumi/mipela distinction.

Courtney Handman