linguistic questions

[Richard J Senghas]

At 4:38 PM -0500 4/17/03, Robert Lawless wrote:
>
>I find Faller's statement extraordinary. I'm admittedly only
>partially trained in linguistics, but does Faller mean to say that
>we should not try to teach sociolinguistics to monolinguals? I guess
>most linguists should now resign their teaching positions. And
>somehow I had the notion that almost all the data that linguists
>work with comes from monolinguals. I didn't realize that linguists
>speak only to multilinguals. Ron and Richard, are you ever going to
>speak to me again? I have another confession. I have thoroughly
>forgotten the five or six other languages I used to know, a couple
>(maybe) even with "deep knowledge." Robert.

<snip>

>>At 10:26 AM At 2:51 PM -0400 4/17/03, hmfaller at umich.edu wrote:
>>>I feel compelled to take issue with this statement.
>>>
>>>>No linguist worth his or her snot can think comparatively without
>>>>deep knowledge of more than one linguistic system.

<snip>

>>>>4/17/2003 -0700, you [I] wrote:
>>>>>  And in an amusing irony, linguists often don't develop conversational
>>>>>  command of a particular language even when they *have* developed a
>>>>>  sophisticated linguistic understanding of said language.

Addressing Robert L's response to Faller: I don't think Faller
actually indicated that the linguistic topics shouldn't be taught TO
monolinguals, but that something might be wrong when sociolinguistics
is taught BY monolinguals.

Turning back to Faller's possible implication that I might have
suggested that linguists don't have deep knowledge of more than one
linguistic system: to quote a sibling of mine, "That snot what I
said!" ;-)

Note that I did say "a particular language," and that I didn't imply
that the linguist didn't have deep conversational command of some
(maybe several) other languages. With deep understanding of even a
few languages, one can make (some) interesting comparative
observations and discoveries regarding a language that is  being
newly studied/acquired. The developed metalinguistic perspective is
key. Also, some levels of description and theorizing do indeed
require deep and practical levels of understanding, while others may
require less.

It all depends on context (how many times are we going to hear lx
anthro types repeat that one, eh?).

Regards,

-Richard
--
======================================================================
Richard J Senghas, Assoc Professor       | Sonoma State University
Chair, Dept of Anthropology/Linguistics  | 1801 East Cotati Avenue
Coordinator, Linguistics & TESL Programs | Rohnert Park, CA 94928-3609
Richard.Senghas at sonoma.edu               | 707-664-2307 (v); 664-3920 (fax)