[Lingtyp] language typology, linguistic typology, comparative linguistics

[Anders Holmberg]

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.


Anders


Prof. Anders Holmberg
School of English Literature, Language, and Linguistics
Newcastle University
Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU
UK
________________________________
From: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> on behalf of Martin Haspelmath <haspelmath at shh.mpg.de>
Sent: 27 February 2018 21:10:05
To: LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG
Subject: [Lingtyp] language typology, linguistic typology, comparative linguistics

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 and Academia.edu.

(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.)

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)

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).

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






-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20180228/e846a860/attachment.htm>