<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none;"><!-- P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;} --></style>
</head>
<body dir="ltr">
<div id="divtagdefaultwrapper" style="font-size:12pt;color:#000000;font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif;" dir="ltr">
<p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0"></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">The definition of linguistic (or language) typology in the first issue of Linguistic Typology is fine, but it’s also fine as a definition of generative comparative linguistics. If asked, it’s moe or less what I tell people that my research
is about. I think your point is good, Martin. We linguists may know what language/linguistic typology and generative linguistics mean, roughly, as names of research programmes or communities. There are differences in favoured methods and some differences in
‘ultimate aims’. For whatever social-historical reasons they have evolved into two distinct research communities, with some (but not much) overlap and collaboration. But for the rest of the world the distinction between them is entirely unclear. It just looks
like the same research programme. Comparative linguistics is the right term for this broad research programme.</p>
</div>
<br>
<p></p>
<p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">Anders<br>
</p>
<div id="Signature">
<div style="font-family:Tahoma; font-size:13px">
<div class="BodyFragment"><font size="2">
<div class="PlainText"><br>
<br>
Prof. Anders Holmberg<br>
School of English Literature, Language, and Linguistics<br>
Newcastle University<br>
Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU<br>
UK</div>
</font></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%" tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" style="font-size:11pt" color="#000000"><b>From:</b> Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces@listserv.linguistlist.org> on behalf of Martin Haspelmath <haspelmath@shh.mpg.de><br>
<b>Sent:</b> 27 February 2018 21:10:05<br>
<b>To:</b> LINGTYP@LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [Lingtyp] language typology, linguistic typology, comparative linguistics</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div style="background-color:#FFFFFF">Dear all,<br>
<br>
What is the name of our subfield (or subcommunity): <span lang="EN-US"><br>
<br>
“language typology”?</span><span lang="EN-US"> <br>
“linguistic typology”?</span><span lang="EN-US"> <br>
or maybe simply “comparative linguistics”?<br>
<br>
Linguists know that there is no difference between the first two, and they also understand the shorter "typology", but this term is opaque for nonlinguists, and the duality of
</span><span lang="EN-US">“language typology”</span><span lang="EN-US"> and “linguistic typology” is inconvenient, because there is incomplete aggregation on sites like Google Scholar and Academia.edu.
</span><br>
<span lang="EN-US"><span lang="EN-US"><br>
(It seems that on Academia.edu, 6354 people are followers of “language typology”, 8732 follow “linguistic typology”, and 7090 follow “typology”, though perhaps not all of the latter mean typology in the linguistics sense.)
<br>
</span></span><br>
<span><span>Historically, it seems clear that “language typology” is the older term, and has become current in the 1970s.
</span></span><span lang="EN-US" style=""></span><span lang="EN-US">Since the 1990s, it got a competitor ("linguistic typology"), for unclear reasons.<br>
<br>
(More on the history of these two terms can be found in the following blogpost: <a class="x_moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://dlc.hypotheses.org/1022">
https://dlc.hypotheses.org/1022</a>)<br>
<br>
So I'm wondering: Maybe we should consider switching to an entirely different, fully transparent term, namely "comparative linguistics"?<br>
</span><br>
<span lang="EN-US">It seems that there are quite a few well-established fields with “comparative” in their names: comparative economics, comparative education, comparative law, comparative literature, comparative mythology, comparative psychology, and “comparative
zoology” even has a famous museum on the Harvard campus.</span><span lang="EN-US">
<br>
<br>
</span><span lang="EN-US">(So far, at least one department of comparative linguistics in the relevant sense exists: at the University of Zurich,
<a class="x_moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.comparativelinguistics.uzh.ch/en.html">
http://www.comparativelinguistics.uzh.ch/en.html</a>).</span><span lang="EN-US"> </span>
<br>
<div>
<div class="">
<div class="x__1mf x__1mj"><span><span><br>
I feel that the term “comparative linguistics” for what used to be called “language/linguistic typology” has another big advantage: The term fails to signal association with a particular subcommunity – and this is good. After all, many comparative linguists
work in a generative framework, and these do not usually associate with the term “typology”. However, much of what they do is clearly “typological” in the usually understood sense, so it is really odd to exclude this community terminologically.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="x__1mf x__1mj"><span><br>
</span></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="x__1mf x__1mj"><span><span>In any event, the question of the name of our subfield of linguistics seems not gto have been discussed explicitly. Maybe it would not be a complete waste of time to engage in some discussion.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="x__1mf x__1mj"><span><br>
</span></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="x__1mf x__1mj"><span><span>Martin</span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<span lang="EN-US"></span><span lang="EN-US" style=""><style>
<!--
@font-face
{font-family:"ＭＳ 明朝"}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math"}
@font-face
{font-family:Cambria}
p.x_MsoNormal, li.x_MsoNormal, div.x_MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Cambria}
.x_MsoChpDefault
{font-family:Cambria}
@page WordSection1
{margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt}
div.x_WordSection1
{}
-->
</style></span><span lang="EN-US"><style>
<!--
@font-face
{font-family:"ＭＳ 明朝"}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math"}
@font-face
{font-family:Cambria}
p.x_MsoNormal, li.x_MsoNormal, div.x_MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Cambria}
.x_MsoChpDefault
{font-family:Cambria}
@page WordSection1
{margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt}
div.x_WordSection1
{}
-->
</style><br>
</span><span lang="EN-US"></span>
<p class="x_MsoNormal"></p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal"><style>
<!--
@font-face
{font-family:"ＭＳ 明朝"}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math"}
@font-face
{font-family:Cambria}
p.x_MsoNormal, li.x_MsoNormal, div.x_MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Cambria}
.x_MsoChpDefault
{font-family:Cambria}
@page WordSection1
{margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt}
div.x_WordSection1
{}
-->
</style></p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal"></p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal"><style>
<!--
@font-face
{font-family:"ＭＳ 明朝"}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math"}
@font-face
{font-family:Cambria}
p.x_MsoNormal, li.x_MsoNormal, div.x_MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Cambria}
.x_MsoChpDefault
{font-family:Cambria}
@page WordSection1
{margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt}
div.x_WordSection1
{}
-->
</style><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<style>
<!--
@font-face
{font-family:"ＭＳ 明朝"}
@font-face
{font-family:"ＭＳ 明朝"}
@font-face
{font-family:Cambria}
p.x_MsoNormal, li.x_MsoNormal, div.x_MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Cambria}
.x_MsoChpDefault
{font-family:Cambria}
@page WordSection1
{margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt}
div.x_WordSection1
{}
-->
</style>
<pre class="x_moz-signature" cols="72">--
Martin Haspelmath (<a class="x_moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:haspelmath@shh.mpg.de">haspelmath@shh.mpg.de</a>)
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History
Kahlaische Strasse 10
D-07745 Jena
&
Leipzig University
IPF 141199
Nikolaistrasse 6-10
D-04109 Leipzig
</pre>
</div>
</body>
</html>