[Lingtyp] language typology, linguistic typology, comparative linguistics

Wed Feb 28 12:56:32 UTC 2018

This is an old point, but I really think we should be careful to use analogies with biology to describe discovery in linguistics. There are no theory-independent criteria for identifying even the most basic word classes or justifying what linguistic forms are worthy of being called grammatical categories. Classification in linguistics is not equivalent to dissecting objectively observable components of plants and animals, but consists of projecting theoretical concepts, with some historical philosophical baggage onto new data. We think that nouns and verbs are the most central grammatical categories in language because we think predication is a fundamental property of syntax. We find non-referential categories such as modality difficult to deal with, because we assume reference is a primary function of language. However sensible such assumptions might be, they need to be challenged, and that involves not only new descriptions or designing comparative concepts, but developing a broader view of how our theoretical assumptions and comparative concepts relate to each other.

If description is a fundamental source for innovation in diversity linguistics/linguistic typology/language typology/comparative linguistics (which obviously it is!), engagement with questions of what grammar is at a fundamental level has to be as well, however we label the field.

Best,
Stef

Stef Spronck
Postdoctoral researcher at the University of Helsinki (HU Humanities Programme; Indigenous languages)
Research affiliate at CoEDL<http://www.dynamicsoflanguage.edu.au/>, The Australian National University and FunC<https://www.arts.kuleuven.be/ling/func>, University of Leuven
Section editor<http://www.degruyteropen.com/people/stef-spronck/> Linguistic Typology and Pragmatics at Open Linguistics<https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/opli>
https://participationgrammar.net<https://participationgrammar.net/>

From: Lingtyp [mailto:lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org] On Behalf Of Maia Ponsonnet
Sent: 28. helmikuuta 2018 13:12
To: <LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG> <LINGTYP at listserv.linguistlist.org>
Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] language typology, linguistic typology, comparative linguistics

Hi,

I've been wondering all day about Dan's parallel:

"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."

I certainly find it accurate, but if I am to avoid feeling apologetic about it, I might as well not use this formulation in my next grant application ;-)

(especially as some people may want to look at Chomsky for Darwin's role, and wonder what we're waiting for...)

Maïa

Dr Maïa Ponsonnet
Senior Lecturer in Linguistics
ARC Discovery Early Career Researcher Fellow

Social Sciences Building, Room 2.47
Faculty of Arts, Business, Law and Education
The University of Western Australia
35 Stirling Hwy, Perth, WA (6009), Australia
P.  +61 (0) 8 6488 2870 - M.  +61 (0) 468 571 030

________________________________
From: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org>> on behalf of Dan I. SLOBIN <slobin at berkeley.edu<mailto:slobin at berkeley.edu>>
Sent: Wednesday, 28 February 2018 10:51 AM
To: Hedvig Skirgård
Cc: <LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG<mailto:LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG>>
Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] language typology, linguistic typology, comparative linguistics

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.)
Comparative linguistics - Wikipedia<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_linguistics>
en.wikipedia.org
Comparative linguistics (originally comparative philology) is a branch of historical linguistics that is concerned with comparing languages to establish their ...

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 and Academia.edu<http://academia.edu/>.
[http://a.academia-assets.com/images/citation-illustration.svg]<http://academia.edu/>

Academia.edu - Share research<http://academia.edu/>
academia.edu
Academia.edu is a place to share and follow research.

(It seems that on Academia.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.)
[http://a.academia-assets.com/images/citation-illustration.svg]<http://academia.edu/>

Academia.edu - Share research<http://academia.edu/>
academia.edu
Academia.edu is a place to share and follow research.

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

_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
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

_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
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

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20180228/2828c6bd/attachment.htm>