24.1023, Calls: Linguistic Theories, Philosophy of Language/ Energeia (Jrnl)

[linguist at linguistlist.org]

LINGUIST List: Vol-24-1023. Wed Feb 27 2013. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 24.1023, Calls: Linguistic Theories, Philosophy of Language/ Energeia (Jrnl)

Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Eastern Michigan U <aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Aristar-Dry, Eastern Michigan U <hdry at linguistlist.org>

Reviews: Veronika Drake, U of Wisconsin Madison
Monica Macaulay, U of Wisconsin Madison
Rajiv Rao, U of Wisconsin Madison
Joseph Salmons, U of Wisconsin Madison
Anja Wanner, U of Wisconsin Madison
       <reviews at linguistlist.org>

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Do you want to donate to LINGUIST without spending an extra penny? Bookmark
the Amazon link for your country below; then use it whenever you buy from
Amazon!

USA: http://www.amazon.com/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlist-20
Britain: http://www.amazon.co.uk/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlist-21
Germany: http://www.amazon.de/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlistd-21
Japan: http://www.amazon.co.jp/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlist-22
Canada: http://www.amazon.ca/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlistc-20
France: http://www.amazon.fr/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlistf-21

For more information on the LINGUIST Amazon store please visit our
FAQ at http://linguistlist.org/amazon-faq.cfm.

Editor for this issue: Justin Petro <justin at linguistlist.org>
================================================================  


Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:21:06
From: Johannes Kabatek [kabatek at uni-tuebingen.de]
Subject: Linguistic Theories, Philosophy of Language/ Energeia (Jrnl)

E-mail this message to a friend:
http://linguistlist.org/issues/emailmessage/verification.cfm?iss=24-1023.html&submissionid=8832810&topicid=3&msgnumber=1
 
Full Title: Energeia 


Linguistic Field(s): Linguistic Theories; Philosophy of Language 

Call Deadline: 30-Jun-2013 

Call for contributions: Energeia 5 (2013)

Discussion forum: Causal and final explanations in linguistics 

Deadline: June 30th
The discussion process will be opened once the first contributions have
arrived and will be closed on August 31st.
Publication: October 2013.
Address:
www.energeia-online.de

One of the central aims of contemporary linguistics is to find causal
explanations of linguistic activity (language use) and language change.

Does this mean that the criticism of causal explanations of language change
(and, in a wider sense, of linguistic activity in general) levelled by Coseriu
as early as 1958 is now finally overcome and has altogether lost its
importance? Coseriu states: "The very idea of 'causality' in the so-called
'evolution' of language is a residue of the old conception of languages
considered as 'natural organisms' as well as of the positivistic dream to
discover the 'laws' of human speech (or languages) and to transform
linguistics into a 'science of laws' analogous to physics." (Coseriu 1958,
101, our translation).

Coseriu draws on the classical, Aristotelian distinction of four different
kinds of causes. He claims that the dynamics of language use and language
change can only be properly understood in terms of finality, i.e. if the
object of linguistic research is conceived as an intentional phenomenon in the
Aristotelian sense of a "causa finalis": as a product of individual, free,
goal-oriented action (enérgeia), subordinating the other causalities to the
final cause. According to Coseriu, the telos, the goal of linguistic activity,
is not (at least not in general) the modification of a language but, quite
simply, successful communication.
 
This is what Rudi Keller tried to separate in his theory of "the invisible
hand" in language change. On the one hand, Keller stated that pure causal
theories are not adequate to explain language change and that from the
viewpoint of the individual engaged in communication only finality is at
stake. On the other hand, on the level of language, Keller claims that change
is the "causal consequence" of the sum of intentional individual actions. The
question that arises is whether this "causal consequence" is really something
else than the individual's finality and whether it makes sense to look at
change independently from the speaker's linguistic activity - in the sense of
general "laws of change", be they culturally or even physically determined.
Moreover, can it be the purpose of research into the dynamics of language use
and language change to explain causality or even to predict language
evolution?

These and similar questions arise with respect to phonology, morphology,
semantics, syntax and pragmatics, thus bearing on the theory of language in
general. The idea of the discussion forum is not to propose a strict format or
limitation of any sort, but to invite interested scholars to participate in
the discussion with any kind of relevant contribution, be it a short
statement, a discussion note with a few arguments or an elaborate article. All
contributors will have access to all contributions prior to publication; they
will be given the opportunity to add comments to statements of other scholars
so that in the end not only the original points of view but also the outcome
of a whole discussion process will be published.







----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-24-1023	
----------------------------------------------------------