Linguistics vs. Traditional grammar

Lecture 1

LINGUISTICS AS THE STUDY OF LANGUAGE:

A GENERAL SURVEY

Plan

1. GENERAL LINGUISTICS

1.1. General linguistics and its basic questions

1.2. Linguistics vs. traditional grammar

1.3. Scope of linguistics

2. LANGUAGE AS THE SYSTEM OF SIGNS

2.1. Signs in semiotics

2.1.1. Constituents of semiosis

2.1.2. Types of signs

2.2. Specificity of language as the system of signs

2.3. Human language vs. animal communication

2.4. Functions of language

2.5. Origin of language

Cognitive map

1. GENERAL LINGUISTICS

General linguistics and its basic questions

Linguisticsis the scientific study oflanguage, or the discipline that describes language in all its aspects and formulates theories as to how it works. While the studies of individual languages (English, Ukrainian, Chinese, etc.) focus on their particular characteristics, general / theoretical linguistics aims to determine the characteristics of human language as a phenomenon, and to establish universal principles for the analysis of all languages.

General linguistics considers such basic questions:

· What is language? How is it organized?

· What do all languages have in common?

· What are the differences between languages?

· Why do humans talk, or what is the origin of language? How does a child learn to speak?

· What are the differences between human language and animal communication?

· In what forms did languages exist before? How do languages change through time? Why do languages change?

· How does one write down the spoken language?

· How is language used for successful interaction?

· How is language related to thought?

· How does language reflect social and cultural differences?

· How can we simulate language and its workings in computers?

A person who studies linguistics, or a linguistics expert, is called a linguist. A more accurate term is a ‘linguistician’, as the word ‘linguist’ has one more meaning – a person proficient in more than one language. Linguists need not be fluent in languages, though they must be knowledgeable about the systems of languages, and capable of explaining various linguistic phenomena.

(+ Aitchison, p. 3-4)

Linguistics vs. traditional grammar

Linguistics differs from traditional grammar in three principal aspects:

(1) Linguistics describes language; it does not prescribe the rules of its ‘correctness’, which is the task of traditional grammar. The notion of absolute and unchanging ‘correctness’ is quite foreign to linguists. They are interested in any linguistic form, be it ‘standard’ or ‘non-standard’.

(2) Linguists regard the spoken language as primary and therefore more important than the written language. Traditional grammar over-stresses the importance of the written word, which is ‘permanent’ and recorded in the classical works of the ‘best authors’.

(3) Traditional grammarians tend to consider Latin grammar as a universal framework into which the descriptions of all languages fit. To linguists, it is unthinkable to judge one language by the standards of another. Linguists try to expose a universal framework which is shared by all languages, but which does not belong to a particular language.

(+ Aitchison, p. 4-7)

The scope of linguistics

Linguistics as a science is represented by a number of its branches (Fig. 1.1). The central ones are phonetics/phonology, syntax, semantics, and pragmatics.

· Phonetics studies characteristics of actual physical sounds of speech, the raw material out of which language is made. Phonetics overlaps with physics (acoustics), and human physiology. Phonology, being a branch of linguistics proper, analyses patterns of speech sounds. In phonology, sounds are considered as sound types or abstract generalizations inherent in the system of language.

· Syntax, in its broad sense, studies the arrangement of linguistic sound forms into words, phrases, and sentences. Syntax links together the sound patterns and the meaning.

· Semanticsis the study of meanings manifested by various linguistic forms.

Together, phonetics, syntax, and semantics constitute the grammar of language broadly understood as the system of language.

· Pragmaticsdeals with how speakers use language in speech in ways which cannot be predicted from their knowledge about to the system of language alone.

The studies of language as a system (phonetics, syntax, and semantics), and the studies of speech (pragmatics) form the ‘inner circle’ of linguistics. Its ‘outer’ circle emerges at the intersection of linguistics and other disciplines.

· Philosophical linguistics / philosophy of language,which borders on philosophy and logic,attempts to discern the logical structure of reality through discerning the formal linguistic structures (perceived and mental) in which we represent or think reality. The particular concern is with the truth or falsity of sentences that describe the world. Philosophical linguistics also defines the philosophical status of linguistic theories, methods, and observations, i.e. their contribution to explaining the basic laws of nature, society, and thought.

· Cognitive linguistics and psycholinguistics overlap with psychology, and focus on the problem ‘language and the mind’.

· Neurolinguistics, which is close to neuroscience, studies the problem ‘language and the brain’.

· Computational linguistics, a discipline between computer science and linguistics, focuses on the computational aspects of human language. These are aspects that can be put into the form of a sequence of instructions that a computer can understand.

· Applied linguistics applies linguistic findings to solving practical problems (compiling dictionaries, language teaching, translation, etc.). Therefore, it interacts with a number of disciplines, primarily methods of language teaching and translation studies.

· Stylistics overlaps with literature studies, since it is concerned with language in its relation to literature.

· Anthropological linguisticsand ethnolinguistics, which border on anthropology and culture studies, consider general evolution of the human mind reflected in the respective evolution of language, as well as the use of language in particular cultural and cross-cultural settings.

· Sociolinguistics, overlapping with sociology, is the study of language as a societal factor.

Fig. 1.1.The scope of linguistics

The issues relevant for different branches of linguistics may be considered as existing at a particular point in time (synchronically) or through time (diachronically). The respective approaches are called synchronic linguistics and diachronic / historical linguistics. The latter, due to the focus on language change, overlaps with linguistic typologywhich establishes language types with regard to different criteria – kinship of languages, their geographic proximity, and their structural characteristics.

(+ Aitchison, p. 7-10)

2. LANGUAGE AS THE SYSTEM OF SIGNS

Signs in semiotics

Language is a system of signs. Signs are diverse; they are not restricted to language only; e.g. snow is a sign of winter; a portrait of a person is a sign of this person; music is a sign of emotions. Various signs and sign systems are studied by semiotics. The studies of particular systems of signs are known as biosemiotics (deals with all kinds of sign-based processes in living systems), ethnosemiotics (semiotics of culture), semiotics of movies, semiotics of music, semiotics of literature, etc. The study of linguistic signs is defined as linguistic semiotics.

What is a sign? It is a form that stands for something else – an entity in the experienced physical or non-physical (fictitious) world. Information about this entity becomes the sign’s meaning, which is retained in the mind as a concept or mental construct. When created, a sign intends to manifest this meaning; when applied, a sign intends to evoke this meaning in the mind. The process of creating and using a sign is termed semiosis. It is represented by interaction of several constituents, the basic ones being a sign, the experienced entity for which this sign stands, and the sign user.

Constituents of semiosis

In semiotics, the entity for which a sign stands is called the designatum,and the sign itself is known as the designator. A sign as the designator is a bilateral unity of the meaning (a concept in the mind), and the material form (a vehicle) in which the sign appears. The meaning of a sign is the signified, and the material form of a sign is the signifier. Language has sound, written, and gesture material forms.

The relations between the designatum, designator, signifier and signified is conventionally demonstrated with the ‘semiotic triangle’ model proposed by Charles Ogden and Ivor Richards in 1923. This model, which develops the earlier ideas of Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913) and Charles Pierce (1839-1914), the founders of semiotics, exists in its various versions, all of which attempt to show how a sign is related to the experienced entity which it represents. Later, the model was supplied with one more constituent – ‘the interpreter’ (concepualizer) described in detail by Charles Morris (1901-1979) who applied this term to an organism for which something is a sign. Below, is one more version of the ‘semiotic triangle’ (Fig. 1.2) which helps to account for the interaction between the constituents of semiosis.

The relation between the SIGN and its DESIGNATUM is called designation. The designatum may be of two kinds: (1) the referent as an individual entity; e.g. William Shakespeare, (2) the denotatum as a class of similar entities; e.g. poets (Sic! In semiotics, the term denotatum also means ‘the actually existing entity’, as opposed to the designatum as ‘any object or class of objects, whether existing or not’).

While presenting the designatum, signsperform either a deictic function or a representational function. Respectively, such signs are termed deictic and representational. Deictic signs (like a finger or an arrow showing direction) just ‘point’ to things in one’s scope of attention. Such things may be different in different situations, i.e. a deictic sign does not designate one and the same thing. Since deictic signs used in isolation evoke a minimal scope of invariable information, their meanings depend on the context and position of the sign user. In language, deictic signs are exemplified by pronouns (this, that, I, you, he, here, there, etc.), and non-precedential (non-paragon) proper names (Jack, William, Mary, etc.). Representational signsstand for an invariable designatum (an individual or a class) the information about which constitutes a more or less permanent meaning of such signs. In language, representational signs are exemplified by precedential (paragon) proper names (William Shakespeare, London, the Thames, etc.) and common names, such as a poet, to run, blue, five, etc.

The relation between the DESIGNATUM and the SIGNIFIED (meaning of a sign) is construal. The signified is not a mirrored image of the designatum. The signified, as a concept in the mind, is construed, i.e. it is a subjective image of the experienced entity. For instance, the conceptual system of humans is created by both nature and nurture: its biologically inborn principles of information processing are further elaborated due to manipulations with objects and due to socializing – communication with others, education and exposure to culture. Differences in individual and societal perceptions and conceptions account for differences in mental construal of one and the same experienced object.

The signified as a mental representation of the denotatum is more abstract, or schematic: it retains information about the properties which are shared by the members of a class. Such signified becomes the systemic meaning of a sign. The signified as a mental representation of the referent is more specific: besides information about the properties of a class to which the referent belongs, it retains information about its own individual properties. Such signified is the referential meaning of a sign.

The relation between the SIGNIFIER (form) and the SIGNIFIED (meaning) of a sign is defined as signification. The signified, as the meaning manifested or evoked by some form, may be constituted by information that belongs to several conceptual domains: ontological (information about the world), axiological (assessment of this information as positive or negative, approximate or exact, sufficient or insufficient, true or false, etc.), modal (attitude to this information – one’s wishes, abilities, obligations, etc. that may determine one’s prospective behavior), and pragmatic (knowledge about the norms of social interaction in different communicative settings). E. g. the word trash lit. ‘rubbish’, when used figuratively, has the meaning ‘worthless people’ (ontology), ‘bad’ (axiology), ‘should be avoided’ (modality), ‘an obscene word which may be used in informal interaction (pragmatics). Therefore, the signified (meaning) may be a synthetic concept. As a constituent of the conceptual system, a concept – be it an image, gestalt, notion or event schema – becomes an operational unit that is retained in the memory and employed holistically for information processing.

The scope of information retained in the meaning of a sign depends on the sign’s form, or the signifier. More form is associated with more meaning. In language, concepts evoked by different linguistic forms – morphemes, lexemes, texts, etc. – evoke gradually increasing amounts of information. They are respectively called morphological, lexical, textual, etc. concepts.

The relation between the DESIGNATOR (a sign) and the INTERPRETER (conceptualizer) is called interpretation. Besides the concept retained in the mind, a sign (its material vehicle) evokes interpretation of this concept by the sign user. This interpretation is the user’s reaction to the meaning of a sign. Charles Morris illustrates interpretation with a situation, when a traveler, ready to go to a specific geographical area, receives a letter from a friend describing that region. The traveler then packs his luggage in accordance with the information provided by his friend in the letter. Here, the letter is the sign, the geographic conditions are the designatum of the sign, the traveler’s preparations regarding what to pack are the interpretation of the sign (the effect that the sign produces in the interpreter), and the traveler is the interpreter. In this example, there is one more important element – the traveler’s being ready to go to the described geographical region, or his intention (predisposition). In Roman Jacobson’s works it is called ‘interpretanta’ (інтерпретанта, установка). Interpretation of a sign also depends on the context, which is considered to be an additional constituent of semiosis.

Interpretation, as the result of semiosis, is influenced by its other constituents (the signified, signifier, interpreter, and his/her intention): their change may cause change of interpretation. E.g.

(a) UNIVERSITY (context): the bell rings (signifier) à end of the class (signified, meaning) à students (interpreter) à ready to stop working (intention) à rest (interpretation);

(b) UNIVERSITY (context): the bell rings (signifier) à end of the class (signified, meaning) à students (interpreter) à ready to do the assignment not prepared at home (intention) à no rest (interpretation);

(b) UNIVERSITY (the context): the bell rings (signifier) à end of the class (signified, meaning) à cafeteria staff (interpreter) à ready to start working (intention) à work (interpretation);

(c) PARTY AT HOME (context): the bell rings (signifier) à somebody has come (signified, meaning) à students (interpreters) à suspect that these are the hosts’ parents who went away for the weekend and who are unaware of th party (intention) à displeased by their unexpected arrival (interpretation).

In semiotics, the relations ‘designator – designatum’ and ‘signifier – signified’ underlie classifications of signs.

Types of signs

The conventional classification of signs is grounded on designation, or the character of link between the sign and its designatum. The focus is on the physical aspect of a sign, or its material ‘vehicle’. According to the nature of their relation to the designatum, signs are classified into indexes, icons and symbols (Fig. 1.3).

· Indexes (indexical signs) are physically linked to the designatum, being its part or property; the type of relation is contiguity. E.g. yellow leaves as a sign of autumn, high temperature as a sign of some disease.

· Icons (iconic signs) have physical resemblance to the designatum; the type of relation is similarity / iconicity. Icons can be natural (e.g. a white line in the sky which marks the trajectory of a jet-plane’s flight) and artificial (e.g. road signs, pictures, photographs, movies, etc.). Natural icons may be also treated like indexes. Artificial icons happen to be rather sophisticated (cf. abstract paintings) and not easily interpreted.

· Symbols are linked to the designatum arbitrarily; the type of relation is convention based on an agreement within the society. E.g. an owl stands for wisdom, a bell stands for a break, a road sign stands for some instruction to the driver, etc. All linguistic signs are symbolic. Symbolic signs allow the human mind to go beyond the limitations of contiguity and similarity and establish symbolic links between any form and its designatum.

Material vehicles of signs may be complex, combing two and more signs that belong to the same type or different types. E.g. road signs, all of which are symbolic, may include icons (Fig. 1.4a), other symbols (Fig. 1.4b) or both (Fig. 1.4c). Linguistics signs – derived words, phrases, sentences and texts – are complex symbols, where one symbol hierarchically includes other symbols, thus creating symbolic ensembles.

Another classification of signs is grounded on signification, or the character of link between the signifier (the form of a sign) and the signified (its meaning). The signifier may evoke the meaning either directly, without involving any subsidiary associations, or indirectly, i.e. by means of involving such associations. In the latter case, the signifier becomes a ‘vehicle’ for two kinds of form: (a) the outer / external form which is the physical ‘body’ of a sign, and (b) the inner / internal form which is a concept immediately linked to the outer form (Fig. 1.5). The outer or inner form of the signifier serves as a ‘cue’ that facilitates an access to the signified as the sign’s meaning proper. Such ‘cues’ are primarily provided by linguistic symbols.

Linguistic forms are called non-motivated (e.g. a man, to run, blue) if the signified evokes the meaning directly (Fig. 1.5a), and they are called motivated if the meaning is ‘prompted’ by the outer or inner form of the signified. Motivated signs are classified into those with iconic, metonymical, metaphorical / analogical, generalizing and specifying motivation.

· Signs with iconic motivation (Fig. 1.5b) ‘prompt’ their meaning via the outer, physical body of a sign which imitates a fragment of meaning. In language, an example is onomatopoeic words; e.g. a cuckoo, to hiss, to buzz, etc.). Iconic motivation for syntactic units is exhibited in the sequential order, distance and quantity of their elements. E.g. cause and effect (sequential order); He made her leave / He wanted her to leave / He hoped that she would leave (distance); Don’t smoke / Don’t smoke, will you? (quantity: more form, more meaning).

The signs with other types of motivation ‘prompt’ their meaning via their inner form which is a fragment of meaning (Fig. 1.5c).

· Signs with metonymic motivation have the inner form which is contiguous with the meaning (here, motivation demonstrates ‘indexical’ principle). E.g. a four-wheeler ‘a car’, the yellow ‘the central part of an egg’.

· Signs with metaphorical / analogical motivationhave the inner form which exhibits likeness (a metaphoric link) or similarity (an analogical link) with the meaning; E.g. a lion ‘a strong and brave person’ (metaphor), a second Einstein ‘a bright scholar’ (analogy).

· Signs with generalizing motivationhave the inner form which is a kind that ‘prompts’ the type represented in the meaning, i.e. the meaning is more schematic than the inner form of a sign. E.g. a picture ‘something pained’ > ‘something vivid: a painting, a drawing, a photograph, a landscape view, a motion picture, etc’; ME dogge ‘a dog of a particular breed’ > a dog ‘any dog’.

· Signs with specifying motivationhave the inner form which is the type that ‘prompts’ a kind represented in the meaning, i.e. the meaning is more specific than the inner form of a sign. E.g. OE mete ‘food’ > meat ‘edible flesh’, OE hound ‘any dog’ > a hound ‘a hunting dog of a particular breed’; corn ‘seeds of serial grasses’ > AE ‘maze’, BE ‘wheat’, in Ireland and Scotland – ‘oats’.

The inner form of signs may trigger a chain of derived meanings, which accounts for the phenomenon of polysemy. E.g. a chair ‘a piece of furniture’ (direct meaning / the inner form) > ‘a person presiding at the meeting’ (metonymy) > ‘the position of this person’ (metonymy) > ‘high position (generalization) > ‘position of the head of a university department’ (specification) > ‘a person who occupies this position’ (metonymy) > ‘professorship’ (metonymy).