Kortmann / Kleinke / Yule Essentials Flashcards
Definition Linguistics
Scientific discipline concerned with the study of language. Descriptive mostly/usually.
- Either theoretical: e.g. Syntax, Morphology, Phonology.
Other branches: Pragmatics, Sociolinguistics. Either by themselves or in comparison: Contrastive Linguistics.
- Or Applied: Translation. Second language teaching, Forensic linguistics
Language / English language facts
6000 language currently
English Lingua franca - 1.3 Billion speakers, makes English linguistics important → since 1940s / 50s; development of theories about the language itself and approaches to the study of language
Central dichotomies in linguistics
synchronic - diachronic
prescriptive vs descriptive
form - function
1 language - 2 languages comparative
applied - theoretical
empirical - introspective
Applied vs non-applied linguistics
applied: forensic linguistics, second language teaching, translation
non-applied: purely theoretical interest -> either descriptive (looking at one language or two languages in comparison)
or general language interest (language acquisition, language processing, language change, perhaps universal language features)
Empirical study
basis of linguistic analysis as authentic data
e.g. corpora & quantitative analysis of large language data bases; working with a hypothesis and conduct experiments to verify or disproof the theory
Focus linguistics in 19th century vs early 20th ?
1800s: Focus on historical, comparative linguistics
Search from genetic links between language: family trees, Indo-European
Reconstruction of older language periods
1913: Paradigm shift: Saussure Cours de linguistique générale -> Synchronic state of one language
What is Structuralism
Founding father: Ferdinand de Saussure, Swiss
language as a closed system, a structure: in which all elements are linked to one another, and in which the value of every single element is defined by its place in the system alone.
purely synchronic approach, all former stages of a languages are separate systems
langue as study object = abstract language system
to be distinguished from parole = concrete use by individual, “external manifestation of langue”
Structuralism wants to recognise and describe all elements of the langue system (sounds, words, sentences, constituents) and their relations between them: paradigmatic and syntagmatic
Structuralism and value (+ example)
Kortmanns explanation for Value: with an example: status of past tense in ENG / GER are different: ENG has simple past, but it also has past progressive (GER does not) and present perfect (GER Perfekt ist not an exact equivalent) -> therefore GER Präteritum and ENG Simple past have different values
Paradigmatic
vertical relation of choice or interchangeability
E.g. choice of first initial sound: ban, can, Dan, fan, tan, van creates a different word
Synonyms
Syntagmatic
Syntagmatic = horizontal relation, a chain of combination
E.g. when a first initial sound is chosen (b or c), then +an has to be added -> creates either ban or can
phonotactic rules: which sounds a language can combine
Syntax: verb valency: how many argument slots a verb needs to have filled
example for paradigmatic and syntagmatic blur between two linguistic branches?
plural morpheme s and phonological effects:
paradigmatic: there are 3 possible options for plural “s” “z” or “iz”
Syntagmatic: is the phonological conditioning: the final sound of the word decides which option is “triggered”
Saussure’s idea of the linguistic sign
Bilateral sign: compares it to two sides of a paper, they are intrinsically linked, evoke each other, cannot be separated.
one side: sound image (signifier)
other side: mental concept (signified)
relation between them is ARBITRARY -> that is why languages have different vocabularies
Link is upheld by convention amongst speakers
Pierces theory of signs:
Icon (similarity) (pictogram images on signs, e..g toilette humans, a map)
Index (points to sth., physical effect points)(e.g. smoke -> fire , tears -> sadness)
symbol (arbitrary) = Saussure’s linguistic sign
generative linguistics or formalism
Founding father Chomsky
how to generate language: researchers try to collect a precise description of syntactic structures by means of a limited inventory of rules
- focus on syntax and phonology
-> concerned with correctness, rules allow evaluation of correctness
-> rules allow generation of all possible sentences in a language
-> concerned with finding a universal grammar innate to humans
formalism: competence and performance?
competence: Mental grammar, “entire (unconscious) mental linguistic knowledge an ideal speaker/hearer has at disposal”;
→ explains language creativity (ability to form all sentences, new sentences all correct)
performance: language use
difference langue and competence?
Saussure about language as a system of structures, disregards the speaker
Chomsky places the mental grammar as residing inside the mind of the speaker
Universal grammar
Chomsky’s “questions” / approach against Skinner’s behavioursm:
How can a child learn (quickly) an possible human language? How can it do so in such a short time (and with only a child’s brain)? And with poor input?
-> certain aspects of language must be universal: UG
- there must be an innate language acquisition device: highly abstract schema -> Child gets input and then works by checking hypotheses about which structures are correct and activating or inactivating those elements from the UG
Functionalism
Why is a language the way it is?
What motivates speakers to choose a certain structure over semantically equivalent structures?
How do communicative functions shape language?
Often umbrella term for all usage-based branches of linguistics: Cognitive Linguistics, Pragmatics, Sociolinguistics
differences Functionalism and Structuralism
Vacuum:
S: langue -> language as an abstract system in a vacuum
F: language use -> language not in a vacuum, Speakers and context influence language choice
Arbitrariness / Motivation:
S: ling sign is arbitrary, no motivation
F: there is motivation why certain forms are formed the way they are
Correctness
S: only regards correct language (more typical for formalism)
F: incorrect language has meaning / purpose too; functionalists ask why incorrect structures work regardless
dual meaning of “Function”?
It can either be interpreted as
‘task’ in the sense of ‘job’, i.e. how is a linguistic structure used by the speech community, in what communicative situations?
Or it may be interpreted as ‘meaning’ In the sense of ‘What does a linguistic structure X mean?
Can I open the window
→ meaning: Individual words all have a meaning -> does not say much about what the whole thing means / why it is used
→ job: an announcement / request for permission to let air inside (likely not a question regarding ability)
Types of functions?
external: overall, global functions of language (Bühler: referential, expressive, appellative)(Jakobson: poetic, metalinguistic, phatic)
internal:
the specific function of individual linguistic means of expression in one or (universally) in all languages (for instance quantity-indicating devices such as numerals)
- the assignment of various conceptual categories such as reference, tense, aspect, given vs. new information, etc. to certain linguistic means of expression
differences structuralism, formalism, functionalism?
Structuralist: will describe the grammar in each construction
Formalists: will formulate rules to generate these constructions
Functionalists: will ask/describe in which contexts these are used, the choice is not random → there is motivation, are not concerned with correctness but with appropriateness
Iconic principle of complexity
the more complex an issue is more complex and transparent the structures are
e.g. subordinators: simple relations are morphologically also simpler, the more complex the more morphemes:
e.g. while / when (simulataneous fairly simple)
but never-the-less , although (“concession” more complex “Einräumung”)
Iconic principle of distance
the closer related two issues are cognitively or semantically, the closer they will be in a phrase construction:
a. I sat him in the armchair near the window. → cause-effect is most tightly coded; “I” is the cause for him to “sit” in an arm chair; “I” made it happen themself physically with their hands
b. I made him sit in the armchair near the window. → less tightly coded
c. I caused him to sit in the armchair near the window. → least tightly coded
Post structuralism?
- linguistic description moves from just structure/system/langue to language use: Sociolinguistics, Pragmatics, Cognitive Linguistics,
- pure synchrony is insufficient, diachrony more relevant: e.g. current language changes, language variation
- arbitrariness questioned: iconicity in grammar described e.g. in metaphors
- pure / absolute dichotomies are challenged: now more interest in fuzzy boundaries, less prototypical cases
Sign model: Odgen & Richards
Semiotic triangle between SYMBOL (the word), THOUGHT (meaning, psychological) and REFERENT (object)
line between symbol and referent “broken” -> no direct relation
excluded are speaker and hearer
Sign model: Bühler’s organon model
Is more of a communication model
language as a tool
sign as triangle in middle links speaker and addressee, on top is broken line to real world objects
Sender uses the sign for three functions:
as a symptom for self-expression
as a symbol connecting to the outer world
as a signal to appeal to the hearer
What are distinctive features of human language
Reflexivity
Displacement
Productivity
Duality (Double articulation)
Arbitrariness
Cultural transmission
