[Lingtyp] language typology, linguistic typology, comparative linguistics
Martin Haspelmath
haspelmath at shh.mpg.de
Wed Feb 28 05:59:51 UTC 2018
Yes, in the past (before Greenberg), "comparative linguistics" was
primarily used for historical-genealogical linguistics, but this use
seems to be long obsolete (as I note in my blogpost:
https://dlc.hypotheses.org/1022).
At MPI-SHH in Jena where I work now (perhaps currently the best-funded
place where people are engaged in historical-genealogical studies),
people use terms like "evolutionary linguistics" or "phylogenetic
linguistics".
Incidentally, there is no difference between "comparative linguistics"
and "vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft" -- the latter was used for
historical-genealogical linguistics, but is now obsolete in this sense.
Balthasar Bickel uses it in the broader sense that I have suggested.
But there is an English-German contrast in that nobody uses
"linguistische Typologie" -- this sounds like a different meaning is
intended, namely "typology of linguistics"; and who knows, maybe this is
intended by the shift from "language typology" (= typology of
languages?) to "linguistic typology" (= typology in linguistics?).
Martin
On 28.02.18 03:51, Dan I. SLOBIN wrote:
> And I've lectured to confused non-linguists who wonder what all of
> these strange phenomena have to do with "topology." All of this back
> and forth shows that there's no rubric that a complex set of questions
> can fit under. I share Martin's misgivings--but do remember that we
> have a journal and an association dedicated to "linguistic typology"
> --as much as I wish there was an English equivalent of /vergleichende
> Sprachwissenschaft./
>
> Indeed, in the historical framework, typological and taxonomic studies
> are precursors to more systematic science. That was, for example, the
> contribution of Linnaeus. We're still at the stage when we need good
> descriptive work, and we don't have to be apologetic about that.
> Sometimes I see us as a collection of Linnaeus's waiting for Darwin,
> not knowing what Darwin will need.
>
> Dan
>
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 4:49 PM, Hedvig Skirgård
> <hedvig.skirgard at gmail.com <mailto:hedvig.skirgard at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Just as an illustration of non-linguists (or even non-typologists)
> not understanding the short term "typology". Recently at an event
> for our research centre I did a short presentation of the field
> and there were non-linguists in the audience who found it very
> enlightening, because they had thought that "typology" was the
> study of how people type language.
>
> /Hedvig
>
> *
> *
>
> *Med vänliga hälsningar**,*
>
> *Hedvig Skirgård*
>
>
> PhD Candidate
>
> The Wellsprings of Linguistic Diversity
>
> ARC Centre of Excellence for the Dynamics of Language
>
> School of Culture, History and Language
> College of Asia and the Pacific
>
> The Australian National University
>
> Website <https://sites.google.com/site/hedvigskirgard/>
>
>
>
>
> 2018-02-28 9:18 GMT+11:00 Siva Kalyan
> <sivakalyan.princeton at gmail.com
> <mailto:sivakalyan.princeton at gmail.com>>:
>
> I would point out that in English, the term "comparative
> linguistics" is typically used as a shorthand for
> "historical-comparative linguistics", i.e. that part of
> historical linguistics that concerns itself with genealogical
> relatedness between languages, reconstruction etc., as opposed
> to diachronic change within a single language. (See e.g.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_linguistics
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_linguistics>.)
>
> I see that in German (according to the corresponding Wikipedia
> entry), the term /vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft/ has a
> broader meaning which encompasses both historical linguistics
> (/historisch-vergleichende S---/) and typology
> (/allgemein-vergleichende S---/); this makes sense of the name
> of the department in Zurich (otherwise a bit puzzling for an
> English-speaker).
>
> Thus the use of "comparative linguistics" to refer to (only)
> linguistic typology would seem to be in competition with
> existing usage in both English and German. That said, I can
> see the utility of having a cover term that encompasses both
> historical linguistics and typology, and would support using
> "comparative linguistics" in the German sense. I'm not sure if
> this is within the scope of the current discussion, though.
>
> Siva
>
>> On 28 Feb 2018, at 8:10 am, Martin Haspelmath
>> <haspelmath at shh.mpg.de <mailto:haspelmath at shh.mpg.de>> wrote:
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> What is the name of our subfield (or subcommunity):
>>
>> "language typology"?
>> "linguistic typology"?
>> or maybe simply "comparative linguistics"?
>>
>> 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"language typology" and "linguistic typology" is
>> inconvenient, because there is incomplete aggregation on
>> sites like Google Scholar andAcademia.edu <http://academia.edu/>.
>>
>> (It seems that onAcademia.edu <http://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.)
>>
>> Historically, it seems clear that "language typology" is the
>> older term, and has become current in the 1970s.Since the
>> 1990s, it got a competitor ("linguistic typology"), for
>> unclear reasons.
>>
>> (More on the history of these two terms can be found in the
>> following blogpost:https://dlc.hypotheses.org/1022
>> <https://dlc.hypotheses.org/1022>)
>>
>> So I'm wondering: Maybe we should consider switching to an
>> entirely different, fully transparent term, namely
>> "comparative linguistics"?
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> (So far, at least one department of comparative linguistics
>> in the relevant sense exists: at the University of
>> Zurich,http://www.comparativelinguistics.uzh.ch/en.html
>> <http://www.comparativelinguistics.uzh.ch/en.html>).
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> Martin
>>
>> --
>> Martin Haspelmath (haspelmath at shh.mpg.de <mailto:haspelmath at shh.mpg.de>)
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lingtyp mailing list
>> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>> <mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
>> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>> <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> <mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> <mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> /<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> /
>
> /Dan I. Slobin /
>
> /Professor Emeritus of Psychology and Linguistics/
>
> /University of California, Berkeley/
>
> /email: slobin at berkeley.edu <mailto:slobin at berkeley.edu>/
>
> /address: 2323 Rose St., Berkeley, CA 94708/
>
> /http://ihd.berkeley.edu/members.htm#slobin/
>
> /<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> /
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
--
Martin Haspelmath (haspelmath at shh.mpg.de)
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20180228/0af151e4/attachment.htm>
More information about the Lingtyp
mailing list