Does music technically qualify as a language?

[Steve Black]

Dear Scott and Glenn,
I think one of the best places where an anthropological perspective on these issues is addressed is in Steven Feld and Aaron Fox's 1994 piece, "Music and Language," in Annual Review of Anthropology. One of their points in there is that from the "music as language" perspective, music is semantically more opaque and syntactically more redundant. You can't say, "I need to go to the store to get some bread," through music, unless you know how to do this with a talking drum or you add lyrics to the music. And the rhythm, harmony, and melody of most music is much more repetitive than any other form of communication.

Of course, if you shift your focus from a formalist perspective to an ethnographic and communicatively oriented one, then you start to see many more shared features, and to really understand how it is that music communicates emotion. I myself have found great value in viewing both music and language as types of communication that differentially utilize the full breadth of semiotic modalities available to humans (syntax, prosody, stress, volume, but also gesture, facial expression, body orientation, the physical environment) [This semiotic modalities perspective comes from the work of Charles and Marjorie Goodwin]. I wrote a little about this in a recent Anthro News article, in January 2011, "The Body in Sung Performance." But there is a wealth of important literature discussing the music language connection, especially from an ethnographic standpoint. Two of my favorite recent contributions are Aaron Fox's book, "Real Country: Music and Language in Working Class Culture," and David Samuels' book, "Putting a Song on Top of It: Expression and Identity on the San Carlos Apache Reservation."

Best,
Steve Black



On May 12, 2011, at 7:14 AM, Scott F. Kiesling wrote:

> Colleagues:
> 
> I received this query and thought some of you musically minded folks
> might be able to help (or any of you really). Please reply to Mr.
> Rudolph and not to me. Of course, discussion on the list might be
> interesting too.
> 
> SFK
> 
> ----- Forwarded message from "Glenn L. Rudolph" <glrudolph at verizon.net> -----
> 
>> From: "Glenn L. Rudolph" <glrudolph at verizon.net>
>> Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 12:40:04 -0400
>> To: "Kiesling, Scott F" <kiesling at pitt.edu>
>> Subject: Does music technically qualify as a language?
> 
>> Good Afternoon Dr. Kiesling,
> 
>> Please bear with me for a bit - I write you as a composer seeking advice and information from a linguist. I hope you don't mind my contacting you - I pulled your email address from the PITT Linguistics Department website.
> 
>> I very recently (last week) received my Masters Degree in Music Composition from Duquesne. Other than composition, a major interest of mine is music's ability to communicate meaning and emotion. Essentially, the question I'm exploring is (speaking of classical, or art music) "why is it that when I hear contemporary (20th/21st) century compositions for instance, some pieces I 'get' and others I do not?" A very different question from whether I like the work or not. I might understand a piece musically, but not particularly like it, while others I simply don't understand. My intent here is to formulate a theory that answers the question and submit it to one of the various music theory journals.
> 
>> My gut feeling is that I simply don't understand the composer's musical language - the musical vocabulary, syntax, and grammar that the composer employs - which presupposes that music is a language of some sort. Volumes have been written about music and meaning and music as a language which I have been reading for the past year or so. Some of the arguments presented against music qualifying as a true language is it's lack of key features that languages possess, such as the ability to indicate past tense or possessive case. My initial, uneducated reaction to these arguments was that I wasn't sure all languages have the ability to indicate past tense or possessive case.
> 
>> So my questions for you are:
> 
>> *
>> linguistically, is there a list of qualities or mechanics that a system must possess, at a minimum, in order to qualify as  language
>> *
>> knowing what you now do about my area of interest, can you recommend resources that would be helpful in giving me a basic understanding of the branch of linguistics appropriate to this endeavor?
>> *
>> is there presently a graduate student in your program who might be interested in collaborating on and co-authoring this project?
> 
>> Thanks so much for your time and attention,
> 
>> Glenn L. Rudolph
>> 298 Cottingham Place
>> Cranberry Twp., PA 16066
>> Phone: 724.453.0683
>> Email: glenn at reindeermusic.com
>> Website: www.reindeermusic.com
> 
> ----- End forwarded message -----
> 
> -- 
> Scott F. Kiesling, PhD
> 
> Associate Professor 
> Department of Linguistics
> University of Pittsburgh, 2816 CL
> Pittsburgh, PA 15260
> http://www.linguistics.pitt.edu
> Office: +1 412-624-5916

“Natural science gives us an answer to the question of what we must do if we wish to master life technically, but it leaves quite aside… whether we should and do wish to master life technically and whether it ultimately makes sense to do so” --Max Weber

"Yesterday is history. Tomorrow is a mystery. And today? Today is a gift. That's why we call it the present." --Babatunde Olatunji