Linguistics
Linguistics is the
scientific study of human
language and
speech, and someone who engages in this study is called a
linguist.
Concerning the linguistic profession, it may be useful to distinguish linguistics as conducted along two major axes, namely:
*
Theoretical vs.
Applied:
Theoretical (or general) linguistics is concerned with frameworks for describing individual languages and theories about universal aspects of language;
applied linguistics applies these theories to practical problems such as
language teaching,
speech synthesis, or
speech therapy.
*
Autonomous vs.
Contextual (note: these terms are not well-established): Autonomous linguistics studies what
Saussure called
langue or what
Chomsky calls
I[nternal]-language: the nature of language abstracting away from many aspects of its day-to-day usage. Contextual linguistics is concerned with what
Saussure called
parole or what
Chomsky calls
E[xternal]-language, namely how language fits into the world: its social function, or its use in the broader context of human behavior.
Given these distinctions, scholars who call themselves simply
linguists or
theoretical linguists, with no further qualification, tend to be concerned with autonomous, theoretical synchronic linguistics, which is acknowledged as the core of the discipline.
Linguistic
inquiry is pursued by a wide variety of specialists, who may not all be in harmonious agreement; as
Russ Rymer flamboyantly puts it:
"Linguistics is arguably the most hotly contested property in the academic realm. It is soaked with the blood of poets, theologians, philosophers, philologists, psychologists, biologists, anthropologists, and neurologists, along with whatever blood can be got out of grammarians." 1
The central concern of autonomous theoretical linguistics is to characterize the nature of human linguistic ability, or competence: to explain what it is that an individual knows when an individual knows a language, and to explain how it is that individuals come to know languages. All humans (setting aside extremely pathological cases) achieve competence in whatever language is spoken around them when they are growing up (or signed, in the case of sign language), without formal instruction being necessary. Non-humans do not. Therefore, there is some basic innate property of humans that causes them to learn language. Since children learn whatever language is spoken around them, there is no genetic basis for the differences between one language and another.
Linguistic structures are pairings of meaning and sound (or other externalization). Linguists may specialize in some subpart of the linguistic structure, which can be arranged in the following terms, from sound to meaning:
*
Phonetics, the study of the sounds of human language
*
Phonology (or phonemics), the study of patterns of a language's basic sounds
*
Morphology, the study of the internal structure of words
*
Syntax, the study of how words combine to form grammatical sentences
*
Semantics, the study of the meaning of words (
lexical semantics) and fixed word combinations (
phraseology), and how these combine to form the meanings of sentences
*
Pragmatics, the study of how utterances are used (literally, figuratively, or otherwise) in communicative acts
*
Discourse analysis, the study of sentences organised into texts
The independent significance of each of these areas is not universally acknowledged, however, and many linguists would agree that the divisions overlap considerably. Nevertheless, each area has core concepts that foster significant scholarly inquiry and research.
Intersecting with these specialty domains are fields arranged around the kind of external factors that are considered. For example
*
Language acquisition, the study of how language is acquired
*
Historical linguistics or Diachronic linguistics, the study of languages whose historical relations are recognizable through similarities in vocabulary, word formation, and syntax
*
Psycholinguistics, the study of the cognitive processes and representations underlying language use
*
Sociolinguistics, the study of social patterns of linguistic variability
A substantial part of linguistic investigation is into the nature of the differences among the languages of the world. The nature of variation is very important to an understanding of human linguistic ability in general: if human linguistic ability is very narrowly constrained by biological properties of the species, then languages must be very similar. If human linguistic ability is unconstrained, then languages might vary greatly.
But there are different ways to interpret similarities among languages. For example, the Latin language spoken by the Romans developed into Spanish in Spain and Italian in Italy. Similarities between Spanish and Italian are in many cases due to both being descended from Latin. So in principle, if two languages share some property, this property might either be due to common inheritance or due to some property of the human language faculty.
Often, the possibility of common inheritance can be essentially ruled out. Given the fact that learning language comes quite easily to humans, it can be assumed that languages have been spoken at least as long as there have been biologically modern humans, probably at least fifty thousand years. Independent measures of language change (for example, comparing the language of ancient texts to the daughter languages spoken today) suggest that change is rapid enough to make it impossible to reconstruct a language that was spoken so long ago; as a consequence of this, common features of languages spoken in different parts of the world are not normally taken as evidence for common ancestry.
Even more striking, there are documented cases of
sign languages being developed in communities of congenitally deaf people who could not have been exposed to spoken language. The properties of these sign languages have been shown to conform generally to many of the properties of spoken languages, strengthening the hypothesis that those properties are not due to common ancestry but to more general characteristics of the way languages are learned.
Loosely speaking, the collection of properties which all languages share can be referred to as "
universal grammar" (or UG). However, there is much debate around this topic and the term is used in several different ways.
Universal properties of language may be partly due to universal aspects of human experience; for example all humans experience water, and the fact that all human languages have a word for water is probably not unrelated to this fact. The challenging questions regarding universal grammar generally require one to control this factor. Clearly, experience is part of the process by which individuals learn languages. But experience by itself is not enough, since animals raised around people learn extremely little human language, if any at all.
A more interesting example is this: suppose that all human languages distinguish nouns from verbs (this is generally believed to be true). This would require a more sophisticated explanation, since nouns and verbs do not exist in the world, apart from languages that make use of them.
In general, a property of UG could be due to general properties of human cognition, or due to some property of human cognition that is specific to language. Too little is understood about human cognition in general to allow a meaningful distinction to be made. As a result, generalizations are often stated in theoretical linguistics without a stand being taken on whether the generalization could have some bearing on other aspects of cognition.
It has been understood since the time of the ancient Greeks that languages tend to be organized around grammatical categories such as noun and verb, nominative and accusative, or present and past. The vocabulary and grammar of a language are organized around these fundamental categories.
In addition to making substantial use of discrete categories, language has the important property that it organizes elements into recursive structures; this allows, for example, a noun phrase to contain another noun phrase (as in
the chimpanzee's lips) or a clause to contain a clause (as in
I think that it's raining). Though recursion in grammar was implicitly recognized much earlier (for example by
Jespersen), the importance of this aspect of language was only fully realized after the 1957 publication of
Noam Chomsky's book
Syntactic Structures,
[Chomsky, Noam. 1957. "Syntactic Structures". Mouton, the Hague.] which presented a formal grammar of a fragment of English. Prior to this, the most detailed descriptions of linguistic systems were of phonological or morphological systems, which tend to be closed and admit little creativity.
Chomsky used a
context-free grammar augmented with transformations. Since then, context-free grammars have been written for substantial fragments of various languages (for example
GPSG, for English), but it has been demonstrated that human languages include cross-serial dependencies, which cannot be handled adequately by Context-free grammars. This requires increased power, for example transformations.
An example of a natural-language clause involving a cross-serial dependency is the Dutch
[Bresnan, Joan, Ronald Kaplan, Stanley Peters, and Annie Zaenen. 1982. Cross-serial dependencies in Dutch. Linguistic Inquiry 13:613-636.][ Shieber, Stuart. 1985. Evidence against the context-freeness of natural language. Linguistics and Philosophy 8:333-344.]Ik denk dat Jan Piet de kinderen zag helpen zwemmen:I think that Jan Piet the children saw help swim:'I think that Jan saw Piet help the children swim'
The important point is that the noun phrases before the verb cluster (
Jan,
Piet,
de kinderen) are identified with the verbs in the verb cluster (
zag,
helpen,
zwemmen) in left-right order.
This means that natural language formalisms must be relatively powerful in terms of generative capacity. The models currently used (
LFG,
HPSG, Minimalism) are very powerful, in general too powerful to be computationally tractable in principle. Implementations of them are scaled down.
Contextual linguistics
Contextual linguistics may include the study of linguistics in interaction with other academic disciplines. Whereas in core theoretical linguistics language is studied for its own sake, the interdisciplinary areas of linguistics consider how language interacts with the rest of the world.
Sociolinguistics,
anthropological linguistics, and
linguistic anthropology are social sciences that consider the interactions between linguistics and society as a whole.
Critical discourse analysis is where
rhetoric and
philosophy interact with linguistics.
Psycholinguistics and
neurolinguistics combine
medical science and linguistics.
Other cross-disciplinary areas of linguistics include
language acquisition,
evolutionary linguistics,
computational linguistics and
cognitive science.
Applied linguistics
Whereas theoretical linguistics is concerned with finding and
describing generalities both within particular languages and among all languages,
applied linguistics takes the results of those findings and
applies them to other areas. Often
applied linguistics refers to the use of linguistic research in language teaching, but results of linguistic research are used in many other areas, as well.
Many areas of applied linguistics today involve the explicit use of computers.
Speech synthesis and
speech recognition use phonetic and phonemic knowledge to provide voice interfaces to computers. Applications of
computational linguistics in
machine translation,
computer-assisted translation, and
natural language processing are extremely fruitful areas of applied linguistics which have come to the forefront in recent years with increasing computing power. Their influence has had a great effect on theories of syntax and semantics, as modelling syntactic and semantic theories on computers constrains the theories to
computable operations and provides a more rigorous mathematical basis.
Diachronic linguistics
Whereas the core of theoretical linguistics is concerned with studying languages at a particular point in time (usually the present), diachronic linguistics examines how language changes through time, sometimes over centuries. Historical linguistics enjoys both a rich history (the study of linguistics grew out of historical linguistics) and a strong theoretical foundation for the study of
language change.
In universities in the United States, the non-historic perspective seems to have the upper hand. Many introductory linguistics classes, for example, cover historical linguistics only cursorily. The shift in focus to a non-historic perspective started with
Saussure and became predominant with
Noam Chomsky.
Explicitly historical perspectives include
historical-comparative linguistics and
etymology.
Main article: Prescription and description.
Research currently performed under the name "linguistics" is purely
descriptive; linguists seek to clarify the nature of language without passing value judgments or trying to chart future language directions. Nonetheless, there are many professionals and amateurs who also
prescribe rules of language, holding a particular standard out for all to follow.
Prescriptivists tend to be found among the ranks of language educators and journalists, and not in the actual academic discipline of linguistics. They hold clear notions of what is right and wrong, and may assign themselves the responsibility of ensuring that the next generation use the variety of language that is most likely to lead to "success," often the
acrolect of a particular language. The reasons for their intolerance of "incorrect usage" may include distrust of
neologisms, connections to socially-disapproved dialects (i.e.,
basilects), or simple conflicts with pet theories. An extreme version of prescriptivism can be found among censors, whose personal mission is to eradicate words and structures which they consider to be destructive to society.
Descriptivists, on the other hand, do not accept the prescriptivists' notion of "incorrect usage." They might describe the usages the other has in mind simply as "idiosyncratic," or they may discover a regularity (a
rule) that the usage in question follows (in contrast to the common prescriptive assumption that "bad" usage is unsystematic). Within the context of
fieldwork,
descriptive linguistics refers to the study of language using a descriptivist approach. Descriptivist methodology more closely resembles scientific methodology in other disciplines.
Most contemporary linguists work under the assumption that
spoken language is more fundamental, and thus more important to study than
written language. Reasons for this perspective include:
* Speech appears to be a human universal, whereas there have been many
cultures and speech communities that lack written communication;
* People learn to speak and process spoken languages more easily and much earlier than writing;
* A number of
cognitive scientists argue that the
brain has an innate "
language module",
knowledge of which is thought to come more from studying speech than writing, particularly since language as speech is held to be an evolutionary adaptation, whereas writing is a comparatively recent invention.
Of course, linguists agree that the study of written language can be worthwhile and valuable. For linguistic research that uses the methods of
corpus linguistics and
computational linguistics, written language is often much more convenient for processing large amounts of linguistic data. Large corpora of spoken language are difficult to create and hard to find, and are typically
transcribed and written.
The study of
writing systems themselves is in any case considered a branch of linguistics.
Early Indian Vedic texts (Rig Veda 1:164:45; 4:58:3; 10:125) provide a reasonably convincing structure for Languages in general: Language is composed of sentences with four stages of evolution that are expressed in three tenses (past, present and future). The sentences are composed of words that have two distinct forms of existence (vocal form, the word, and perceptional form, the meaning). These words are recognized mainly as verbs that represent real world acts and nouns that take on seven* cases (depending on their mode of participation in real world acts). (* The number, seven, here is not very critical; the message is that the nouns are inflected into appropriate cases to indicate their mode of participation in concerned acts).In
ancient India, the
Sanskrit grammarian (c.
520–
460 BC) is the earliest known linguist and is often acknowledged as the founder of linguistics. He is most famous for formulating the 3,959 rules of Sanskrit
morphology in the text
, which is still in use today.
grammar of Sanskrit is highly systematised and technical. Inherent in its analytic approach are the concepts of the
phoneme, the
morpheme and the
root, only recognized by Western linguists some two millennia later. His rules fully describe Sanskrit morphology without any redundance. A consequence of his grammar's focus on brevity is its highly unintuitive structure, reminiscent of contemporary "machine language" (as opposed to "human readable" programming languages). His sophisticated logical rules and technique have been widely influential in ancient and modern linguistics.
The
South Indian linguist
Tolkāppiyar (c.
3rd century BC) wrote the
Tolkāppiyam, the grammar of
Tamil, which is also still in use today.
Bhartrihari (c.
450–
510) was another important author on
Indic linguistic theory.He theorized the act of speech as being made up of four stages: first, conceptualization of an idea, second, its verbalization and sequencing and third, delivery of speech into atmospheric air, all these by the speaker and last, the comprehension of speech by the listener, the interpreter. The work of , and the later Indian linguist Bhartrihari, had a significant influence on many of the foundational ideas proposed by
Ferdinand de Saussure, professor of Sanskrit, who is widely considered the father of modern structural linguistics.
Other early
scholars of linguistics include
Jakob Grimm, who devised the principle of consonantal shifts in pronunciation known as
Grimm's Law in 1822,
Karl Verner, who discovered
Verner's Law,
August Schleicher who created the "Stammbaumtheorie" and
Johannes Schmidt who developed the "Wellentheorie" ("wave model") in 1872.
Ferdinand de Saussure was the founder of modern structural linguistics.
Edward Sapir, a leader in American structural linguistics, was one of the first who explored the relations between language studies and anthropology. His methodology had strong influence on all his successors.
Noam Chomsky's formal model of language,
transformational-generative grammar, developed under the influence of his teacher
Zellig Harris, who was in turn strongly influenced by
Leonard Bloomfield, has been the dominant one from the
1960s.
Chomsky remains by far the most influential linguist in the world today. Linguists working in frameworks such as
Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar (HPSG) or
Lexical Functional Grammar (LFG) stress the importance of formalization and formal rigor in linguistic description, and may distance themselves somewhat from Chomsky's more recent work (the "Minimalist" program for
Transformational grammar), connecting more closely to earlier work of Chomsky's. Linguists working in
Optimality Theory state generalizations in terms of violable rules, which is a greater departure from mainstream linguistics, and linguists working in various kinds of
functional grammar and
Cognitive Linguistics tend to stress the non-autonomy of linguistic knowledge and the non-universality of linguistic structures, thus departing importantly from the Chomskian paradigm.
Interdisciplinary linguistic research
*
Anthropological linguistics*
Cognitive linguistics*
Cognitive science*
Comparative linguistics*
Computational linguistics**
Machine translation**
Natural language processing**
Speaker recognition (authentication)
**
Speech processing**
Speech recognition**
Speech synthesis*
Critical discourse analysis*
Cryptanalysis*
Decipherment*
Ecolinguistics*
Evolutionary linguistics*
Forensic linguistics*
Glottometrics*
Language acquisition*
Language attrition*
Language engineering*
Neurolinguistics*
Orthography*
Second language acquisition*
Stratificational linguistics*
Text linguistics*
Writing systems
See also
*
Historical-comparative linguistics*
Integrational linguistics*
Lexicography*
Lexicology*
Corpus linguistics*
Descriptive linguistics*
Linguistic typology*
Semiotics*
History of linguistics*
Intercultural competence*
List of basic linguistic topics*
List of linguistic topics*
Metacommunicative competence*
Philology, the study of
ancient texts and languages
*
StructuralismTextbooks
*
Aitchison, Jean (1995) Linguistics: An Introduction. London: Hodder & Stoughton; London: Hodder Headline, 1999, 2nd Edition.
*
Akmajian, Adrian et al (2001),
Linguistics, 5th ed., MIT Press. (ISBN 0262511231)
*
Sergiusz Griniewicz, Elwira M. Dubieniec. Introduction To Linguistics. 2nd ed. Białystok, WSFiZ, 2004, 91 s.
*
Hudson, G. (2000)
Essential Introductory Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.
*
Lyons, John (1995),
Linguistic Semantics, Cambridge University Press. (ISBN 0521438772)
*
Napoli, Donna J. (2003)
Language Matters. A Guide to Everyday Questions about Language. Oxford University Press.
*
O'Grady, William D., Michael Dobrovolsky & Francis Katamba [eds.] (2001),
Contemporary Linguistics, Longman. (ISBN 0582246911) - Lower Level
*
Taylor, John R. (2003),
Cognitive Grammar, Oxford University Press. (ISBN 0198700334)
*
Trask, R. L. (1995)
Language: The Basics. London: Routledge.
*
Ungerer, Friedrich & Hans-Jorg Schmid (1996),
An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics, Longman. (ISBN 0582239664)
Academic works
*
Fauconnier, Gilles** (1995),
Mental Spaces, 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press. (ISBN 0521449499)
** (1997),
Mappings in Thought and Language, Cambridge University Press. (ISBN 0521599539)
**
& Mark Turner (2003),
The Way We Think, Basic Books. (ISBN 0465087868)
*** Rymer, p. 48, quoted in Fauconnier and Turner, p. 353
*
Sampson, Geoffrey (1982),
Schools of Linguistics, Stanford University Press. (ISBN 0804711259)
*
Sweetser, Eve (1992),
From Etymology to Pragmatics, repr ed., Cambridge University Press. (ISBN 0521424429)
Popular works
*
Bloomfield, Leonard.
Language.
*
Burgess, Anthony** (1964),
Language Made Plain
** (1992), A Mouthful of Air*
Deacon, Terrence (1998),
The Symbolic Species, WW Norton & Co. (ISBN 0393317544)
*
Deutscher, Guy, Dr. (2005),
The Unfolding of Language, Metropolitan Books (ISBN 0805079076) (ISBN 9780805079074)
*
Hayakawa, Alan R & S. I. (1990),
Language in Thought and Action, Harvest. (ISBN 0156482401)
*
Pinker, Steven** (2000),
The Language Instinct, repr ed., Perennial. (ISBN 0060958332)
** (2000),
Words and Rules, Perennial. (ISBN 0060958405)
*
Rymer, Russ (1992),
Annals of Science in "
The New Yorker", 13th April
*
Sapir, Edward.
Language.
*
Saussure, Ferdinand de.
Cours de linguistique générale [
Course in general linguistics].
*
White, Lydia (1992),
Universal Grammar and Second Language Acquisition.
Reference books
*
Aronoff, Mark & Janie Rees-Miller (Eds.) (2003)
The Handbook of Linguistics. Blackwell Publishers. (ISBN 1405102527)
*
Asher, R. (Ed.) (1993)
Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Oxford: Pergamon Press. 10 vols.
*
Bright, William (Ed) (1992)
International Encyclopedia of Linguistics. Oxford University Press. 4 Vols.
*
Brown, Keith R. (Ed.) (2005)
Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (2nd ed.). Elsevier. 14 vols.
*
Bussmann, H. (1996)
Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. Routledge (translated from German).
*
Crystal, David
** (1987)
The Cambridge Encyclopaedia of Language. Cambridge University Press.
** (1991)
A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Blackwell. (ISBN 0-631-17871-6)
** (1992)
An Encyclopaedic Dictionary of Language and Languages. Oxford: Blackwell.
*
Frawley, William (Ed.) (2003)
International Encyclopedia of Linguistics (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
*
Malmkjaer, Kirsten (1991)
The Linguistics Encyclopaedia. Routledge (ISBN 0415222109)
*
Trask, R. L.
** (1993)
A Dictionary of Grammatical Terms in Linguistics. Routledge. (ISBN 0-415-08628-0)
** (1996)
Dictionary of Phonetics and Phonology. Routledge.
** (1997)
A student's dictionary of language and linguistics.
** (1999)
Key Concepts in Language and Linguistics. London: Routledge.
*
subfields according to the Linguistic Society of America*
Glossary of linguistic terms and
French<->English glossary at
SIL International*
"Linguistics" section of A Bibliography of Literary Theory, Criticism and Philology, ed. J. A. García Landa (University of Zaragoza, Spain)
*
A Preliminary Field Guide to Linguists, Part One: A humorous overview of the various branches of linguistics and their practitioners. There is also a
Part Two.
*
The Linguist List*
Linguistics Forum*
Lingformant: The Science of Linguistics in the News*
Lexicon of Linguistics created by Johan Kerstens, Eddy Ruys and Joost Zwarts at the Utrecht institute of Linguistics OTS, university of Utrecht*
Linguistics Research Journal*
The Virtual Linguistics Campus, The world's largest E-Learning Platform for Linguistics*
The sci.lang FAQ - Frequently asked questions about linguisticsRepresentation of speech
*
International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA), a system used to write down and reproduce the
sounds of
human speech.
*
SAMPA, an
ASCII-only transcription for the IPA used by some authors. See also
the SAMPA home page.
fiu-vro:Keeletiidüs
