Preview only show first 10 pages with watermark. For full document please download

Linguistics Index




KMC Linguistics Wiki

PDF generated using the open source mwlib toolkit. See for more information. PDF generated at: Wed, 06 Feb 2013 21:02:26 UTC

Linguistics Theoretical linguistics Cognitive linguistics Generative linguistics Functional theories of grammar Quantitative linguistics Phonology Morphophonology Syntax Lexis (linguistics) Semantics Pragmatics Orthography Semiotics Linguistic description Anthropological linguistics Comparative linguistics Historical linguistics Etymology Graphetics Phonetics Applied linguistics Sociolinguistics Computational linguistics Forensic linguistics Language acquisition Evolutionary linguistics Internet linguistics Language assessment Language development Language education Linguistic anthropology Neurolinguistics Psycholinguistics 1 10 13 16 17 19 23 29 32 36 40 45 53 55 66 67 69 73 77 81 82 85 88 94 101 109 118 123 136 138 144 153 158 168

History of linguistics Linguistic prescription List of linguists List of unsolved problems in linguistics Philology Outline of linguistics Index of linguistics articles Index of cognitive science articles Speech-language pathology

173 179 185 200 201 204 210 213 215

Article Sources and Contributors Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors 221 226

Article Licenses
License 227



Linguistics is the scientific study of human language.[1][2][3][4][5] Linguistics can be broadly broken into three categories or subfields of study: language form, language meaning, and language in context. The earliest known activities in descriptive linguistics have been attributed to Panini, India around 500 BCE, with his analysis of Sanskrit in Ashtadhyayi.[6] The first subfield of linguistics is the study of language structure, or grammar. This focuses on the system of rules followed by the users of a language. It includes the study of morphology (the formation and composition of words), syntax (the formation and composition of phrases and sentences from these words), and phonology (sound systems). Phonetics is a related branch of linguistics concerned with the actual properties of speech sounds and nonspeech sounds, and how they are produced and perceived. The study of language meaning is concerned with how languages employ logical structures and real-world references to convey, process, and assign meaning, as well as to manage and resolve ambiguity. This category includes the study of semantics (how meaning is inferred from words and concepts) and pragmatics (how meaning is inferred from context). Linguistics also looks at the broader context in which language is influenced by social, cultural, historical and political factors. This includes the study of evolutionary linguistics, which investigates into questions related to the origins and growth of languages; historical linguistics, which explores language change; sociolinguistics, which looks at the relation between linguistic variation and social structures; psycholinguistics, which explores the representation and function of language in the mind; neurolinguistics, which looks at language processing in the brain; language acquisition, on how children or adults acquire language; and discourse analysis, which involves the structure of texts and conversations. Although linguistics is the scientific study of language, a number of other intellectual disciplines are relevant to language and intersect with it. Semiotics, for example, is the general study of signs and symbols both within language and without. Literary theorists study the use of language in literature. Linguistics additionally draws on and informs work from such diverse fields as acoustics, anthropology, biology, computer science, human anatomy, informatics, neuroscience, philosophy, psychology, sociology, and speech-language pathology.

Before the 20th century, the term philology, first attested in 1716,[7] was commonly used to refer to the science of language, which was then predominantly historical in focus.[8] Since Ferdinand de Saussure's insistence on the importance of synchronic analysis, however, this focus has shifted[9] and the term "philology" is now generally used for the "study of a language's grammar, history, and literary tradition", especially in the United States,[10] where it was never as popular as it was elsewhere (in the sense of the "science of language").[7] Although the term "linguist" in the sense of "a student of language" dates from 1641,[11] the term "linguistics" is first attested in 1847.[11] It is now the usual academic term in English for the scientific study of language. The term linguist applies within the field to someone who studies language, or specific languages. Outside the field, this term is commonly used to refer to people who speak many languages fluently.[12]



Fundamental questions
Linguistics concerns itself with describing and explaining the nature of human language. Fundamental questions include what is universal to language, how language can vary, and how human beings come to know languages. Linguistic research can broadly be divided into the descriptive analysis of structure and grammar on the one hand and the study of non-linguistic influences on language on the other.

Formal and functional approaches
One major debate in linguistics concerns how language should be defined and understood. One prominent group of linguists use the term "language" primarily to refer to a hypothesised, innate module in the human brain that allows people to undertake linguistic behaviour. This "Universal grammar" is considered to guide children when they learn languages and to constrain what sentences are considered grammatical in any language. Proponents of this view, which is predominant in those schools of linguistics that are based on the generative theory of Noam Chomsky, do not necessarily consider that language evolved for communication in particular. They consider instead that it has more to do with the process of structuring human thought (see also formal grammar). Another group of linguists, by contrast, use the term "language" to refer to a communication system that developed to support cooperative activity and extend cooperative networks. Such functional theories of grammar view language as a tool that is adapted to the communicative needs of its users, and the role of cultural evolutionary processes are often emphasised over that of biological evolution.

Variation and universality
While some theories on linguistics focus on the different varieties that language produces, among different sections of society, others focus on the universal properties that are common to all given languages at one given time on the planet. The theory of variation therefore would elaborate on the different usages of popular languages like French and English across the globe, as well as its smaller dialects and regional permutations within their national boundaries. The theory of variation looks at the cultural stages that a particular language undergoes, and these include the following. The first stage is pidgin, or that phase in the creation of a language's variation when new, non-native speakers undertake a mainstream language and use its phrases and words in a broken manner that often attempts to be overly literal in meaning. At this junction, many of the linguistic characteristics of the native speakers' own language or mother tongue influence their use of the mainstream language, and that is when it arrives at the stage of being called a creole. Hence, this process in the creation of dialects and varieties of languages as globally popular as English and French, as well as others like Spanish, for instance, is one that is rooted in the changing evolution and growth of each language. These variating factors are studied in order to understand the different usages and dialects that a language develops over time. Universality, on the other hand, looks at formal structures and features that are common to all languages, and the template of which pre-exists in the mind of an infant child. This idea is based on the theory of generative grammar and the formal school of linguistics, whose proponents include Noam Chomsky and those who follow his theory and work.



Schools of thought
Early grammarians
The formal study of language began in India with Pāṇini, the 5th century BC grammarian who formulated 3,959 rules of Sanskrit morphology. Pāṇini’s systematic classification of the sounds of Sanskrit into consonants and vowels, and word classes, such as nouns and verbs, was the first known instance of its kind. In the Middle East Sibawayh (‫ )ﺳﯿﺒﻮﯾﻪ‬made a detailed description of Arabic in 760 AD in his monumental work, Al-kitab fi al-nahw (‫ ,ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺎﺏ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﺤﻮ‬The Book on Grammar), the first known author to distinguish between sounds and phonemes (sounds as units of a linguistic system).
Ancient Tamil inscription at Thanjavur

Western interest in the study of languages began as early as in the East,[13] but the grammarians of the classical languages did not use the same methods or reach the same conclusions as their contemporaries in the Indic world. Early interest in language in the West was a part of philosophy, not of grammatical description. The first insights into semantic theory were made by Plato in his Cratylus dialogue, where he argues that words denote concepts that are eternal and exist in the world of ideas. This work is the first to use the word etymology to describe the history of a word's meaning. Around 280 BC one of Alexander the Great’s successors founded a university (see Musaeum) in Alexandria, where a school of philologists studied the ancient texts in and taught Greek to speakers of other languages. While this school was the first to use the word "grammar" in its modern sense, Plato had used the word in its original meaning as "téchnē grammatikḗ" (Τέχνη Γραμματική), the "art of writing," which is also the title of one of the most important works of the Alexandrine school by Dionysius Thrax.[14] Throughout the Middle Ages the study of language was subsumed under the topic of philology, the study of ancient languages and texts, practiced by such educators as Roger Ascham, Wolfgang Ratke and John Amos Comenius.[15]

In the 18th century, the first use of the comparative method by William Jones sparked the rise of comparative linguistics.[16] Bloomfield attributes "the first great scientific linguistic work of the world" to Jacob Grimm, who wrote Deutsche Grammatik.[17] It was soon followed by other authors writing similar comparative studies on other language groups of Europe. The scientific study of language was broadened from Indo-European to language in general by Wilhelm von Humboldt, of whom Bloomfield asserts:[17] "This study received its foundation at the hands of the Prussian statesman and scholar Wilhelm von Humboldt (1767—1835), especially in the first volume of his work on Kavi, the literary language of Java, entitled Über die Verschiedenheit des menschlichen Sprachbaues und ihren Einfluß auf die geistige Entwickelung des Menschengeschlechts (‘On the Variety of the Structure of Human Language and its Influence upon the Mental Development of the Human Race’)."

Early in the 20th century, Saussure introduced the idea of language as a static system of interconnected units, defined through the oppositions between them. By introducing a distinction between diachronic to synchronic analyses of language, he laid the foundation of the modern discipline of linguistics. Saussure also introduced several basic dimensions of linguistic analysis that are still foundational in many contemporary linguistic theories, such as the distinctions between syntagm and paradigm, and the langue- parole distinction, distinguishing language as an abstract system (langue) from language as a concrete manifestation of this system (parole).[18] Substantial additional

Linguistics contributions following Saussure's definition of a structural approach to language came from The Prague school, Leonard Bloomfield, Charles F. Hockett, Louis Hjelmslev, Émile Benveniste and Roman Jakobson.[19]


During the last half of the 20th century, following the work of Noam Chomsky, linguistics was dominated by the generativist school. While formulated by Chomsky in part as a way to explain how human beings acquire language and the biological constraints on this acquisition, in practice it has largely been concerned with giving formal accounts of specific phenomena in natural languages. Generative theory is modularist and formalist in character. Chomsky built on earlier work of Zellig Harris to formulate the generative theory of language. According to this theory the most basic form of language is a set of syntactic rules universal for all humans and underlying the grammars of all human languages. This set of rules is called Universal Grammar, and for Chomsky describing it is the primary objective of the discipline of linguistics. For this reason the grammars of individual languages are of importance to linguistics only in so far as they allow us to discern the universal underlying rules from which the observable linguistic variability is generated. In the classic formalization of generative grammars first proposed by Noam Chomsky in the 1950s,[20][21] a grammar G consists of the following components: • A finite set N of nonterminal symbols, none of which appear in strings formed from G. • A finite set of terminal symbols that is disjoint from N. • A finite set P of production rules, that map from one string of symbols to another. A formal description of language attempts to replicate a speaker's knowledge of the rules of their language, and the aim is to produce a set of rules that is minimally sufficient to successfully model valid linguistic forms.

Functional theories of language propose that since language is fundamentally a tool, it is reasonable to assume that its structures are best analyzed and understood with reference to the functions they carry out. Functional theories of grammar differ from formal theories of grammar, in that the latter seeks to define the different elements of language and describe the way they relate to each other as systems of formal rules or operations, whereas the former defines the functions performed by language and then relates these functions to the linguistic elements that carry them out. This means that functional theories of grammar tend to pay attention to the way language is actually used, and not just to the formal relations between linguistic elements.[22] Functional theories then describe language in term of functions existing on all levels of language. • Phonological function: the function of the phoneme is to distinguish between different lexical material. • Semantic function: (Agent, Patient, Recipient, etc.), describing the role of participants in states of affairs or actions expressed. • Syntactic functions: (e.g. subject and Object), defining different perspectives in the presentation of a linguistic expression • Pragmatic functions: (Theme and Rheme, Topic and Focus, Predicate), defining the informational status of constituents, determined by the pragmatic context of the verbal interaction. Functional descriptions of grammar strive to explain how linguistic functions are performed in communication through the use of linguistic forms.



Cognitive linguistics
In the 1970s and 1980s, a new school of thought known as cognitive linguistics emerged as a reaction to generativist theory. Led by theorists such as Ronald Langacker and George Lakoff, linguists working within the realm of cognitive linguistics propose that language is an emergent property of basic, general-purpose cognitive processes. In contrast to the generativist school of linguistics, cognitive linguistics is non-modularist and functionalist in character. Important developments in cognitive linguistics include cognitive grammar, frame semantics, and conceptual metaphor, all of which are based on the idea that form-function correspondences based on representations derived from embodied experience constitute the basic units of language. Cognitive linguistics interprets language in terms of the concepts, sometimes universal, sometimes specific to a particular tongue, which underlie its forms. It is thus closely associated with semantics but is distinct from psycholinguistics, which draws upon empirical findings from cognitive psychology in order to explain the mental processes that underlie the acquisition, storage, production and understanding of speech and writing. Cognitive linguistics denies that there is an autonomous linguistic faculty in the mind; it understands grammar in terms of conceptualization; and it claims that knowledge of language arises out of language use.[23] Because of its conviction that knowledge of language is learned through use, cognitive linguistics is sometimes considered to be a functional approach, but it differs from other functional approaches in that it is primarily concerned with how the mind creates meaning through language, and not with the use of language as a tool of communication.

Linguistic structures
Linguistic structures are pairings of meaning and form. Any particular pairing of meaning and form is a Saussurean sign. For instance, the meaning "cat" is represented worldwide with a wide variety of different sound patterns (in oral languages), movements of the hands and face (in sign languages), and written symbols (in written languages). Linguists focusing on structure attempt to understand the rules regarding language use that native speakers know (not always consciously). All linguistic structures can be broken down into component parts that are combined according to (sub)conscious rules, over multiple levels of analysis. For instance, consider the structure of the word "tenth" on two different levels of analysis. On the level of internal word structure (known as morphology), the word "tenth" is made up of one linguistic form indicating a number and another form indicating ordinality. The rule governing the combination of these forms ensures that the ordinality marker "th" follows the number "ten." On the level of sound structure (known as phonology), structural analysis shows that the "n" sound in "tenth" is made differently from the "n" sound in "ten" spoken alone. Although most speakers of English are consciously aware of the rules governing internal structure of the word pieces of "tenth", they are less often aware of the rule governing its sound structure. Linguists focused on structure find and analyze rules such as these, which govern how native speakers use language. Linguistics has many sub-fields concerned with particular aspects of linguistic structure. These sub-fields range from those focused primarily on form to those focused primarily on meaning. They also run the gamut of level of analysis of language, from individual sounds, to words, to phrases, up to discourse. Sub-fields that focus on a structure-focused study of language: • Phonetics, the study of the physical properties of speech (or signed) production and perception. • Phonology, the study of sounds (or signs) as discrete, abstract elements in the speaker's mind that distinguish meaning (phonemes). • Morphology, the study of morphemes, or the internal structures of words and how they can be modified • Syntax, the study of how words combine to form grammatical sentences • Semantics, the study of the meaning of words (lexical semantics) and fixed word combinations (phraseology), and how these combine to form the meanings of sentences

Historical linguistics was among the first linguistic disciplines to emerge and was the most widely practised form of linguistics in the late 19th century. the study of signs and sign processes (semiosis). • Developmental linguistics. Sub-fields Historical linguistics Historical linguists study the history of specific languages as well as general characteristics of language change. the study of the origin and subsequent development of language by the human species. diction. planning. the study of the geographical distribution of languages and linguistic features. particularly the acquisition of language in childhood. designation. the study of language change over time. so that the linguistic theories devised can be shown to exhibit certain desirable computational properties implementations. the study of the development of linguistic ability in individuals. the study of linguistic issues in a way that is 'computationally responsible'. Regardless of any particular linguist's position. the study of a given language at a given moment in time without regard to its previous stages. • Historical linguistics or diachronic linguistics. properties that may. the study of the common properties of diverse unrelated languages. Some historical linguists. and the role played by context and non-linguistic knowledge in the transmission of meaning • Discourse analysis.) • Biolinguistics.e. have also employed such tools as computational phylogenetics. • Psycholinguistics. the study of how utterances are used in communicative acts. • Clinical linguistics. metaphor. the analysis of language use in texts (spoken. be assumed to be innate to human language capacity. i. • Evolutionary linguistics. • Applied linguistics. the study of language-related issues applied in everyday life. This involves comparison of elements in different languages to detect possible cognates in order to be able to reconstruct how different languages have changed over time. The study of language change is also referred to as "diachronic linguistics". indication. symbolism. the study of the structures in the human brain that underlie grammar and communication. each area has core concepts that foster significant scholarly inquiry and research. the application of linguistic theory to the field of Speech-Language Pathology. with the world as its representation. However. • Computational linguistics. Many linguists would agree that these divisions overlap considerably. written. From the perspective of semiotics. along with non-linguists interested in language change. compared to human language. analogy. (Constructed language fits under Applied linguistics. and communication. the study of linguistic factors (rhetoric. • Language geography. or signed) • Stylistics. given sufficient attestation. language can be seen as a sign or symbol. and the independent significance of each of these areas is not universally acknowledged. • Semiotics. notably language policies. which can be distinguished from "synchronic linguistics". the study of natural as well as human-taught communication systems in animals. One aim of historical linguistics is to classify languages in language families descending from a common ancestor. an enterprise that relies primarily on the comparative method. the study of variation in language and its relationship with social factors. Semiotics is a larger discipline that investigates the relationship between signs and what they signify more broadly. • Sociolinguistics. and education. signification.Linguistics • Pragmatics. likeness. stress) that place a discourse in context. taking careful note of computational consideration of algorithmic specification and computational complexity. • Linguistic typology. 6 Inter-disciplinary factors Alongside the structurally motivated domains of study.. the study of the cognitive processes and representations underlying language use. These fields are often distinguished by external factors that influence the study of language. are other fields within the domain of linguistics. a shift in focus to the synchronic . • Neurolinguistics.

and the idea of subjective usage. signs. consisting of texts and recordings. and natural language processing are areas of applied linguistics that have come to the forefront. These theories emphasise the role of language variation. with the documentation of rapidly dying indigenous languages becoming a primary focus in many university programs in linguistics. Starting with Franz Boas in the early 1900s. The emphasis on linguistic description and documentation has also gained prominence outside North America. Linguistic research is commonly applied to areas such as language education. Mikhail Bakhtin. text linguistics. anthropological linguistics. since applied linguists focus on making sense of and engineering solutions for real-world linguistic problems. linguists have been concerned with describing and analysing previously undocumented languages. Language description is a work-intensive endeavour. is the study of the relationship between language and culture. the task of documentation requires the linguist to collect a substantial corpus in the language in question. Nonetheless. Speech synthesis and speech recognition use phonetic and phonemic knowledge to provide voice interfaces to computers. which investigate the relations between language. and others. both sound and video. Historically. "Applied linguistics" has been argued to be something of a misnomer. within the linguistics paradigm. usually requiring years of field work in the language concerned. they commonly apply technical knowledge from multiple sources. Michel Foucault. this became the main focus of American linguistics until the rise of formal structural linguistics in the mid-20th century. so as to equip the linguist to write a sufficiently accurate reference grammar. Further. Semiotics. Their influence has had an effect on theories of syntax and semantics. Edward Sapir and Ferdinand De Saussure's structuralist theories influenced the study of signs extensively until the late part of the 20th century. and symbols. culture.. . as modeling syntactic and semantic theories on computers constraints. Semioticians often do not restrict themselves to linguistic communication when studying the use of signs but extend the meaning of "sign" to cover all kinds of cultural symbols. The ethnographic dimension of the Boasian approach to language description played a role in the development of disciplines such as sociolinguistics. through language philosophers including Jacques Derrida. have also been a considerable influence on the discipline in the late part of the 20th century and early 21st century . but later. both individually and grouped into sign systems. including the study of how meaning is constructed and understood.g. conversation analysis) and anthropology. which can be stored in an accessible format within open repositories. and translation. depending on external elements like social and cultural factors. post-modern and post-structural thought. This focus on language documentation was partly motivated by a concern to document the rapidly disappearing languages of indigenous peoples. and used for further research. and society. computers are widely used in many areas of applied linguistics. lexicography. rather than merely on the interplay of formal elements. such as sociology (e.Linguistics perspective began in the early twentieth century with Saussure and became predominant in western linguistics through the work of Noam Chomsky. not simply "applying" existing technical knowledge from linguistics. moreover.[24] Applied linguistics Linguists are largely concerned with finding and describing the generalities and varieties both within particular languages and among all languages. discourse analysis. and linguistic anthropology. computer-assisted translation. Language documentation Since the inception of the discipline of linguistics. semiotic disciplines closely related to linguistics are literary studies. and philosophy of language. Applications of computational linguistics in machine translation. Applied linguistics takes the results of those findings and "applies" them to other areas. 7 Semiotics Semiotics is the study of sign processes (semiosis). or signification and communication. Today.

who attempt to eradicate words and structures that they consider to be destructive to society. is an attempt to promote particular linguistic usages over others. This is because: • Speech appears to be universal to all human beings capable of producing and hearing it.[25] Tape recordings of the interview then undergo language analysis. Speech and writing Most contemporary linguists work under the assumption that spoken language is more fundamental than written language. on the other hand. however. which can aid communication over large geographical areas. For research that relies on corpus linguistics and computational linguistics. Translators are also employed to work within computational linguistics setups like Google Translate for example. In addition. The reported findings of the linguistic analysis can play a critical role in the government's decision on the refugee status of the asylum seeker. while there have been many cultures and speech communities that lack written communication • Speech evolved before human beings invented writing • People learn to speak and process spoken language more easily and much earlier than writing. Large corpora of spoken language are difficult to create and hard to find. programmed facility to translate words and phrases between any two or more given languages. This may have the aim of establishing a linguistic standard. linguists have turned to text-based discourse occurring in various formats of computer-mediated communication as a viable site for linguistic inquiry. the Netherlands uses either method depending on the languages involved. such as travel agencies as well as governmental embassies to facilitate communication between two speakers who do not know each other's language. In this analysis.[25] This often takes the form of an interview by personnel in an immigration department.[25] 8 Translation The sub-field of translation includes the translation of written and spoken texts across mediums. Nonetheless. linguists agree that the study of written language can be worthwhile and valuable. and are typically transcribed and written. linguists describe and explain features of language without making subjective judgments on whether a particular feature is "right" or "wrong". . this interview is conducted either in the asylum seeker's native language through an interpreter or in an international lingua franca like English. from digital to print and spoken. This is analogous to practice in other sciences: A zoologist studies the animal kingdom without making subjective judgments on whether a particular animal is better or worse than another. which is an automated. while Germany employs the latter. Translators are often employed by organisations. Translation is also conducted by publishing houses. Description and prescription Linguistics is descriptive. linguistic features of the asylum seeker are used by analysts to make a determination about the speaker's nationality. To translate literally means to transmute the meaning from one language into another. often favouring a particular dialect or "acrolect". An extreme version of prescriptivism can be found among censors. written language is often much more convenient for processing large amounts of linguistic data. who convert works of writing from one language to another in order to reach varied audiences.[25] Australia uses the former method. It may also. Prescription.Linguistics Linguistic analysis is a sub-discipline of applied linguistics used by many governments to verify the claimed nationality of people seeking asylum who do not hold the necessary documentation to prove their claim. which can be done either by private contractors or within a department of the government. be an attempt by speakers of one language or dialect to exert influence over speakers of other languages or dialects (see Linguistic imperialism). Depending on the country.

The MIT Press. asp?ttype=2& tid=12240) (6th ed. Ann. (2006) Essentials of Language [13] Bloomfield 1914. Demers. A. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 4: 140–47. Richard. 2000. The Hague: Mouton. 9 References [1] Linguistics (http:/ / mitpress. Sources of semiotic: readings with commentary from antiquity to the present. ISBN 0-262-51370-6. [16] Bloomfield 1914.). London: Faber. [19] Holquist 1981. com/ index. html). Cambridge. 307. 308. A. 15. Understanding Language Change. ISBN 0-8264-8824-2. vol. Joseph (1948). ISBN 9788120804098. differs from formala nd structural grammar in that it purports not to model but to explain. "Three Models for the Description of Language". Bibliography • Akmajian. [11] Online Etymological Dictionary: linguist (http:/ / www. M. Farmer. Syntactic Structures. i. Elisabeth Palmer (Studies in General Linguistics. in any case.) (http:/ / www. ISBN 978-0-395-82517-4. php?term=linguist) [12] "Linguist".upenn. as do formal and structural grammar. David Michael A.1093/applin/ami021. [18] Clarke. pp. pdf). S. a linguistics blog maintained by prominent linguists • Glottopedia (http://www. vedicbooks. M.100184. Cambridge University Press. Jost. On Language and Linguistics. Harnish.1956. Functional grammar.Linguistics The study of writing systems themselves is. googlepages. Robert (2010). (1994). Cognitive Linguistics. [24] Himmelman. Western linguistics: An historical introduction. Annual Review of Anthropology 13: 97. Nikolaus Language documentation: What is it and what is it good for? in P. [20] Chomsky. .an. a global online linguistics community with news and information updated daily • Glossary of linguistic terms (http://www. Noam (1957).sil. Alan Cruse (2004). Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. com/ 503. Adrian. net/ ashtadhyayi-panini-vols-p-2313. 143–144.. MediaWiki-based encyclopedia of linguistics. php?term=philology) [8] McMahon. "Applied Linguistics and Language Analysis in Asylum Seeker Cases" (http:/ / songchau. edu/ catalog/ item/ examrequest. p. considered a branch of linguistics. its discourse context. Nikolaus P Himmelmann & Ulrike Mosel. Functionalists maintain that the communicative situation motivates. Vedic Books. Pieter A. doi:10. (1996). pp. p. ISBN 0-262-51370-6. com/ index. doi:10. "Linguistics and ethnology".C." [23] Croft.1109/TIT. "Functional Theories of Grammar". 310.glottopedia. pp. p. Morpurgo Davies Hist.). and the explanation is grounded in the communicative situation. 2–24. K. Berlin & New York.1056813. Johanna (1984). constrains. ISBN 0-521-44665-1 [9] McMahon. [25] Eades. IRE Transactions on Information Theory 2 (2): 113–123. (1994). Jonathan Webster (2006). Linguistics (1998) 4 I. 19. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. or otherwise determines grammatical structure. Wiley-blackwell. [22] Nichols. p. [6] Vasu. p. [4] Halliday. its participants. p. . [15] Bloomfield 1914. (1990). and that a structural or formal approaches not merely limited to an artificially restricted data base. under construction . etymonline. Understanding Language Change. [17] Bloomfield 1914. ISBN 0-521-44665-1 [10] A. Linguistics: An Introduction to Language and Communication. Gippert. 2010. explains. [14] Seuren. 1. but is inadequate ven as a structurala ccount. Mouton de Gruyter. xvii-xviii. M. External links • The Linguist List (http://linguistlist. The Ashtadhyayi of Panini (2 Vols. p. (1998). S. . Diana (2005). [7] Online Etymological Dictionary: philology (http:/ / www. ISBN 0-262-51370-6. Continuum International Publishing Group. p. 22. MA: The MIT Press. Noam (1956). S. Cambridge University Press. mit. [21] Chomsky. Applied Linguistics 26 (4): 503–526.ldc.000525. Tr. 311. then. [2] . "[Functional grammar] analyzes grammatical structure. André (1960). but it also analyzes the entire communicative situation: the purpose of the speech event. William and D. [3] Martinet. doi:10.htm) • Language Log (http://languagelog. Elements of General Linguistics. vii. [5] Greenberg. 9. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. Retrieved 25 July 2012. ISBN 0-631-20891-7.13.

com/forum) Forum • Linguistics (http://www. the suffix -s can represent either /s/.html) – A Bibliography of Literary Theory. and semantics.scholarpedia. frequency etc. how the human brain analyses them. along with psycholinguistics and sociolinguistics.dmoz. Spain) • An Academic Linguistics (http://www. • Acoustic features : physical characteristics of speech sounds such as color.Linguistics • Linguistic sub-fields (http://www. Major fields Phonetics Phonetics is the study of speech sounds with concentration on three main points : • Articulation : the production of speech sounds in human speech organs. Accompanied by vowels or consonants. amplitude. Language) and Citizendium ( García Landa (University of Zaragoza. • Perception : the way human ears respond to speech signals. phonetics can also be called linguistic analysis of human speech at the surface level. J. it is often excluded from the purview of theoretical at the Open Directory Project 10 Theoretical linguistics Theoretical linguistics is the branch of linguistics that is most concerned with developing models of linguistic knowledge. [z]. properties all languages have in common. Ø Perception through the ear: high frequency sounds accompanied by a hissing • "Linguistics" section (http://www.lsadc. s Phonetic features: Phonetic representations: [s]. morphology. which concerns the structure and organisation of speech sounds in natural languages. /z/.unizar. One example can be made to illustrate this distinction: In English. or can be silent (written Ø) depending on context. Orthographic representation : S. Distinguishes meanings of words depending on context: s''low ≠ g''low . Criticism and Philology. Theoretical linguistics also involves the search for an explanation of linguistic universals. That is one obvious difference from phonology. phonology. and furthermore has a theoretical and abstract nature. The fields that are generally considered the core of theoretical linguistics are syntax. middle or end of words. that is.lingforum. ed. Phonological characteristics : Occurrence : beginning.cfm) – according to the Linguistic Society of America • Linguistics and language-related wiki articles on Scholarpedia (http://www. Acoustic features: Frequency : 8000 – 11000 Hz Color : similar to the hissing noise made by snakes. Although phonetics often informs phonology. According to this definition.

the English word 'tie' sounds different from the word 'die': the sounds that differentiate the words are [t] and [d].[2] Phonemics studies how the sounds are used. Acoustic phonetics investigates properties like the mean squared amplitude of a waveform.g. its fundamental frequency. Auditory phonetics Auditory phonetics is a branch of phonetics concerned with the hearing. and the relationship of these properties to other branches of phonetics (e.Theoretical linguistics Articulatory phonetics The field of articulatory phonetics is a subfield of phonetics. Languages differ with respect to their morphological structure. "A phoneme is a sound that functions to distinguish one word from another in a language. and are added neatly one after another. As articulatory phonetics explores the methods of sound production. Adding this suffix to a nominal stem gives plural forms. and to abstract linguistic concepts like phones. what sounds exactly are coming from the person speaking. phoneticians attempt to document how humans produce speech sounds (vowels and consonants). and those processes. its duration. This is what describes the actual sounds in detail."[4] For example. It calls attention to the smallest details in language sounds. umlaut. we may distinguish analytic languages. For example. . It is also known as descriptive phonetics. phrases. auditory phonetics explores the methods of reception—the ear to the brain. Some morphological theories operate with two distinct suffixes -s. interact to create the specific sounds. palate. the word forms runs and dogs have an affix -s added. with few or no affixes or other morphological processes from synthetic languages with many affixes. and articulatory phonetics. Along another axis. called the articulators (tongue. In studying articulation. acquisition and comprehension of phonetic sounds of words of a language. phonetics and phonemics.) and/or with less clear-cut affix boundaries. exactly what the person hearing the sounds is perceiving. or utterances. Acoustic phonetics Acoustic phonetics is a subfield of phonetics which deals with acoustic aspects of speech sounds. in the sentences The dog runs and The dogs run. auditory phonetics. lips.[1] Phonology is divided into two separate studies. jaw. There are three kinds of phonetics: acoustic phonetics. respectively. Along one axis. from fusional languages.[3] The unit of analysis for phonemics is called phonemes. where affixes express one grammatical property each. Auditory phonetics deals with how the sounds are perceived. distinguishing them from the base forms dog and run. ablaut. Phonetics is what depicts the sounds we hear. with non-concatenative morphological processes (infixation. articulatory phoneticians are interested in how the different structures of the vocal tract. teeth etc. 11 Phonology Phonology is the study of language sounds. adding it to verbal stems restricts the subject to third person singular. Acoustic phonetics deals with the physical properties of sound. called allomorphs of the morphemes Plural and Third person singular. It analyzes the way sounds are arranged in languages and helps you to hear what sounds are important in a language.). we may distinguish agglutinative languages. Finally.[4] Morphology Morphology is the study of word structure. articulatory phonetics studies how the speech sounds are produced. or other properties of its frequency spectrum. That is. etc. articulatory or auditory phonetics).

Thus. predicate and modal logics to express their ideas about word meaning. Semantics Semantics is the study of intension. 47 . 36-37 Ottenheimer. Much of the work in the field of philosophy of language is concerned with the relation between meanings and the world.Theoretical linguistics 12 Syntax Syntax is the study of language structure and phrasal hierarchies. 46-47 Ottenheimer. (2006). The Anthropology of Language: An Introduction to Linguistic Anthropology. 34 Ottenheimer. and this concern cross-cuts formal semantics in several ways. that is. Abstract syntax trees are often used to illustrate the hierarchical structures that are posited. They argue that there must be a formal computational component contained within the language faculty of normal speakers of a language and seek to describe it. using native speaker intuition. References • Ottenheimer. It is concerned with the relationship between units at the level of words or morphology. For example. what Frege termed 'sense'. depicted in parse tree format. H. both philosophers of language and semanticists make use of propositional. [1] [2] [3] [4] Ottenheimer. This order of elements is crucial to its correct interpretation and it is exactly this which syntacticians try to capture. the intrinsic meanings of words and phrases. Syntax uses principles of formal logic and Set Theory to formalize and represent accurately the hierarchical relationship between elements in a sentence. Syntax seeks to describe formally exactly how structural relations between elements (lexical items/words and operators) in a sentence contribute to its interpretation. Syntax seeks to delineate exactly all and only those sentences which make up a given language.J.Canada: Thomas Wadsworth. in active declarative sentences in English the subject is followed by the main verb which in turn is followed by the object (SVO).

which underlie its forms. Instead of viewing meaning in terms of models of the world. Metonymy. phonemes. in that language and cognition mutually influence one another. and third.[1] Cognitive linguists deny that the mind has any module for language-acquisition that is unique and autonomous.e. Related work that interfaces with many of the above themes: • Computational models of metaphor and language acquisition. Cognitive linguistics is characterized by adherence to three central positions. Finally. sometimes specific to a particular tongue. and are both embedded in the experiences and environments of its users. Conceptual organization: Categorization. they deny that it is separate from the rest of cognition. This can be considered a moderate offshoot of the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis. and that use of language in understanding employs similar cognitive abilities to those used in other non-linguistic tasks. morphemes. First. storage. Departing from the tradition of truth-conditional semantics. They argue that knowledge of linguistic phenomena — i.. Linguistic relativity. Although cognitive linguists do not necessarily deny that part of the human linguistic ability is innate. Cultural linguistics. separating semantics (meaning) into meaning-construction and knowledge representation. This stands in contrast to the stance adopted in the field of generative grammar. and Iconicity. Construal and Subjectivity. second. cognitive linguists view meaning in terms of conceptualization. They thus reject a body of opinion in cognitive science suggesting that there is evidence for the modularity of language. it understands grammar in terms of conceptualization. dealing with classification of various correspondences between morphemes and phonetic sequences. Image schemas and force dynamics. sometimes universal. cognitive linguistics argues that language is both embodied and situated in a specific environment. it claims that knowledge of language arises out of language use. Areas of study Cognitive linguistics is divided into three main areas of study: • Cognitive semantics. • Cognitive approaches to grammar. cognitive linguistics (CL) refers to the branch of linguistics that interprets language in terms of the concepts. It is thus closely associated with semantics but is distinct from psycholinguistics. which draws upon empirical findings from cognitive psychology in order to explain the mental processes that underlie the acquisition. they view it in terms of mental spaces.Cognitive linguistics 13 Cognitive linguistics In linguistics. • Cognitive phonology. it denies that there is an autonomous linguistic faculty in the mind. and syntax — is essentially conceptual in nature. they assert that the storage and retrieval of linguistic data is not significantly different from the storage and retrieval of other knowledge. production and understanding of speech and writing. Conceptual metaphor and conceptual blending. Gesture and sign language. Frame semantics. . However. Aspects of cognition that are of interest to cognitive linguists include: • • • • • • • • Construction grammar and cognitive grammar. morphology and other traditionally more grammar-oriented areas. dealing mainly with lexical semantics. dealing mainly with syntax.

Alan Cruse (2004). A Glossary of Cognitive Linguistics. Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction. Bergen and Jörg Zinken (Eds).net/CLoverview. Vyvyan (2007). (2006). 1. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. seeks to mesh together these findings into a coherent whole. has become an important part of modern stylistics. Vyvyan & Melanie Green (2006). • Evans. • Geeraerts. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Bergen and Jörg Zinken. 2006. Vyvyan. A further complication arises because the terminology of cognitive linguistics is not entirely stable. Benjamin K. ISBN 978 0 19 514378 2. The Cognitive Linguistics Reader. Insights and developments from cognitive linguistics are becoming accepted ways of analysing literary texts. pursued by generative linguist Ray Jackendoff is related because of its active psychological realism and the incorporation of prototype structure and images. References Notes [1] Croft. D. • Evans. Cognitive Poetics. The Cognitive Linguistics Enterprise: An Overview (http:/ /www. Benjamin Bergen & Joerg Zinken (2007). as it has become known.pdf). Vyvyan & Melanie Green (2006). A Glossary of Cognitive Linguistics. On one hand it is asserted that idiom variation needs to be explained with regard to general and autonomous syntactic rules. more than generative linguistics. The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics.Cognitive linguistics • Dynamical models of language acquisition • Conceptual semantics. • Gibbs (1996) in Casad ED. Benjamin K. Cognitive Linguistics: Basic Readings. General references • Evans. They suggest that cognitive linguists should provide cognitive re-analyses of topics in syntax and phonology that are understood in terms of autonomous knowledge (Gibbs 1996). • Geeraerts. Cognitive Linguistics in the Redwoods: The Expansion of a New Paradigm in Linguistics (Cognitive Linguistic Research) Mouton De Gruyter (June 1996) ISBN 9783110143584 • Langlotz.vyvevans. Vyvyan. too. . Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter. William and D. Further reading • Evans. ed. Andreas. both because it is a relatively new field and because it interfaces with a number of other disciplines. Equinox Publishing Co. D.. 14 Controversy There is significant peer review and debate within the field of linguistics regarding cognitive linguistics. Vyvyan (2007). • Evans. eds. (2007). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. In Vyvyan Evans. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Cognitive linguistics. Another view says such idioms do not constitute semantic units and can be processed compositionally (Langlotz 2006). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Critics of cognitive linguistics have argued that most of the evidence from the cognitive view comes from the research in pragmatics and semantics on research into metaphor and preposition choice. London: Equinox. p. There is also controversy and debate within the field concerning the representation and status of idioms in grammar and the actual mental grammar of speakers. • Evans. Cuyckens. Cognitive Linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Idiomatic Creativity: A Cognitive-linguistic Model of Idiom-representation And Idiom Variation in English. Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction. & H. The Cognitive Linguistics Reader.

2009. Oxford University Press. Dirk Geeraerts and Herbert Cuyckens. which compares it to mainstream. The Hague: Mouton De fileadmin/linglit/teich/lg-science/herget. html)) • Schmid.. D. Pages 347–378. • Annotated Cognitive Linguistics Reading List (http://www. Constructing a Language: A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition. in Bert Botma. Cognitive Linguistics (includes Cognitive Linguistic Bibliography). Palgrave-MacMillan. & D. DOI: 10. Redeker (Eds) (1999). In Metaphor in cognitive linguistics. Scope and Foundations of Cognitive deals with the relationship between Gestalt theory and cognitive linguistics. et al.html). Cognitive Linguistics: Current Applications and Future Perspectives. (1997). Mouton De Gruyter.. (1996). Philadelphia: John Benjamins. J. and Coulson (1999).1515/cogl.chrisdb. comparing it to traditional Chomskyan linguistics.gestalttheory. (2002).org. Chomsky-inspired linguistics. LOUIS. • Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis: Charteris-Black.pdf) • GOOSSENS. Pages 323–342. Longman. Berlin. . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Vyv Evans) JohnQPublik's Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics (http://www. G. • The Cognitive Linguistics Bibliography. • Gilles Fauconnier has written a brief. Mappings in Thought and Language. Cruse (2004) Cognitive Gilles and Mark Turner (2003). ( online version (http://cogweb. Daniel (2011). Oct. ISSN (Print) 0936-5907. Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Issue 3. In the Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. • Taylor. See "Introduction to Methods and Generalizations" in T. J.. manifesto-like introduction to Cognitive linguistics.A. ISSN (Online) 1613-3641. Embodiment and Experientialism in Cognitive Linguistics. • Silverman. An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics. W. New York. Oct. ISBN 0 226 46804 6. php?id=cognitive_linguistics) is an overview of the field. • Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics (http://markturner. Metaphtonymy: the interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic action. Harvard University Press. 2009. Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 2001.3. eds.linglit.html) (Mark Turner). Oakley. J.1. Lee. eds. • Croft. 2006. Cognitive Linguistics (includes Cognitive Linguistic Bibliography). ISSN (Print) 0936-5907 15 External links • • • • International Cognitive Linguistics Association (http://www. Steen and Gibbs (eds. Fire. Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction 1st ed. Women. ISBN 1403932921 • The cognitive psychological reality of image schemas and their transformations. M.tu-darmstadt. Cognitive Linguistics Research Series. T. "Usage-based phonology".Cognitive linguistics • Kristiansen et Volume 6.vyvevans. New York: Basic Books. Janssen and G. "Blending and Metaphor". Volume 1. Nancy C. (2006).org) UK Cognitive Linguistics Association (http://www. (2003).ucla. George (1987). • Tomasello. • Rohrer. ISSN (Online) A.).edu/CogSci/ • Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction. Oxford University Press. • Fauconnier. R. • Conceptual semantics and Cognitive linguistics.cogling. Wolf et al. The Way We Think (http://markturner. Continuum Companion to Phonology. Cognitive Grammar. and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About the Mind University of Chicago Press. H. Kula. Online Version (http://www. ( on-line version (http://cogweb. forthcoming. Oxford. • Fauconnier. Continuum. • The Gestalt Theory and Linguistics Page (http://www. Issue 4. and Kuniya Nasukawa. (2004) Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis.1990. html)) • Grady.

[2] The term generative grammar is also used to label the approach to linguistics taken by Chomsky and his followers.[1] and by most dictionaries of linguistics. a generative grammar is defined as one that is fully explicit.htm) is a collection of numerous formative articles in the fields of conceptual metaphor and conceptual integration. Chomsky's approach is characterised by the use of transformational grammar – a theory that has changed greatly since it was first promulgated by Chomsky in his 1957 book Syntactic Structures – and by the assertion of a strong linguistic nativism (and therefore an assertion that some set of fundamental characteristics of all human languages must be the same). who invented the term. infinite in number) that are grammatical in a given language. but not necessarily. MIT Press. and the term "generative linguistics" therefore has a range of different. Mouton de Gruyter.ucsd. Formally. though metaphor. 13. This is the definition that is offered by Noam Chomsky. p. References [1] Chomsky. To say that a grammar generates a sentence means that the grammar "assigns a structural description" to the sentence. which was associated with a distinction between the "deep structure" and "surface structure" of sentences. The term "ge(ne)rative linguistics" is often applied to the earliest version of Chomsky's transformational grammar.Cognitive linguistics • The Center for the Cognitive Science of Metaphor Online (http://zakros. Noam (1965). It is a finite set of rules that can be applied to generate all those and only those sentences (often. meanings. . Syntactic Structures. The term "generative grammar" is used in different ways by different people.2002). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. [2] Chomsky. Noam (1957. Generate is being used as a technical term with a particular sense. 16 Generative linguistics Generative linguistics is a school of thought within linguistics that makes use of the concept of a generative grammar.

[11][12] • Danish functional grammar combines Saussurean/Hjelmslevian structuralism with a focus on pragmatics and discourse. and not just to the formal relations between linguistic elements. Within this paradigm one attempts to reveal the instrumentality of language with respect to what people do and achieve with it in social interaction. developed by Robert Van Valin employs functional analytical framework with a somewhat formal mode of description. A natural language. originally developed in the 1970s and 80s. Functional theories of language propose that since language is fundamentally a tool. that see the functions of language and its elements to be the key to understanding linguistic processes and structures. used with the intention of establishing communicative relationships. it is reasonable to assume that its structures are best analyzed and understood with reference to the functions they carry out. is a type of phrase structure grammar. the description of a sentence in a particular language is formulated in terms of its semantic structure and communicative functions. This means that functional theories of grammar tend to pay attention to the way language is actually used in communicative context. functional grammar differs significantly from other linguistic theories which stress purely formal approaches to grammar.[9] [10] Halliday draws on the work of Bühler and Malinowski.[7][8] • Michael Halliday's systemic functional grammar argues that the explanation of how language works "needed to be grounded in a functional analysis. 'eco-social' environment". in other words. developed by Joan Bresnan and Ronald Kaplan in the 1970s. Functional theories of grammar differ from formal theories of grammar.[2] Frameworks There are several distinct grammatical theories that employ a functional approach. including its relation with morphology and semantics.[14][15] Dik characterises functional grammar as follows: In the functional paradigm a language is in the first place conceptualized as an instrument of social interaction among human beings. (2. p.[3][4] • Simon Dik's Functional discourse grammar.. whereas the former defines the functions performed by language and then relates these functions to the linguistic elements that carry them out. in that the latter seeks to define the different elements of language and describe the way they relate to each other as systems of formal rules or operations. In RRG. as opposed to a dependency grammar. Functional grammar is strongly associated with the school of linguistic typology that takes its lead from the work of Joseph Greenberg.[13] • Lexical functional grammar. communicative function. is seen as an integrated part of the communicative competence of the natural language user. It mainly focuses on syntax. since language had evolved in the process of carrying out certain critical functions as human beings interacted with their .[1] In a broad sense the theories implicit in most work within descriptive linguistics and linguistic typology fit within the category of functional linguistics. 3) Because of its emphasis on usage. was the earliest functionalist framework developed in the 1920s.[5][6] It has also been continuously developed by Linguists such as Kees Hengeveld. • Role and reference grammar. notably Chomskyan generative grammar.Functional theories of grammar 17 Functional theories of grammar Functional theories of grammar are those approaches to the study of language. as well as the grammatical procedures used to express these meanings. • The structuralist functionalism of the Prague school. has been influential and inspired many other functional theories. and the social context of language.[16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23] ..

Lachlan. J. Functional Discourse Grammar.. 1981. J: Foris. 1980. 173. or otherwise determines grammatical structure. MacWhinney. No. Topic and Focus) Predicate). its participants. Oxford: Oxford University Press.g. 1. Pages: 249-278 [22] Newmeyer. Robert D. In: Bernd Heine and Heiko Narrog eds. Language Form and Language Function. Sgall. Functional Grammar. and O'Grady. J. Bartlett. Wanner.. Amsterdam: Benjamins. `year=2006. The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis. L. Evolution of Communication Volume: 2. J.104 [19] Heath. Dordrecht/CinnaminsonN. determined by the pragmatic context of the verbal interaction. On the Prague functional approach. explains. W. Frederick.). Annual Review of Anthropology 13. its discourse context. References [1] Nichols. Mary (2001). theories. Gleitman. Joan (2001). (Ed. E. [7] Hengeveld. 1984. [10] Halliday. but is inadequate ven as a structurala ccount. MA: MIT Press. 1984. 1975. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. K.126 [4] Novak. using the term in a broad sense that includes most work in typology and work by descriptive linguists4. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Crucial Readings in Functional Grammar. which for the purposes of this paper can be characterized as the view that functional or grammar-external principles play a central role in explaining why languages are the way they are." [3] Newmeyer. Matthew S. defining different perspectives in the presentation of a linguistic expression 3. Issue: 2. and the explanation is grounded in the communicative situation. Catching Language: Issues in Grammar Writing. Functional universals. Patient. Lexical Functional Grammar. ISBN 0-12-613534-7 [16] Bates. L. Some functional relationships in grammar. "Descriptive theories. [8] Hengeveld.). then. R. 367-400. ISBN 0-631-20973-5 [15] Dalrymple. and even in phonology.. M.218. 1978. 2005. Oxford: Oxford University Press. "This paper is primarily directed at linguists who can be construed as functionalist.. Prague 3:291-97. 37. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. E. [9] Halliday. Lars Heltoft. Cambridge University Press. eds. R. edu/ people/ faculty/ dryer/ dryer/ desc. as do formal and structural grammar. Fried. [14] Bresnan. . Systemic Functional Linguistics: Exploring Choice. Syntactic functions: (e. Johanna (1984). pdf). Lachlan (2008). (1996) Content. Jr.Mouton. Semantic function: (Agent. Pragmatic functions: (Theme and Rheme. R. Press [17] Dirven.. ed. 1974. J. C. Functionalist approaches to grammar. Frederick. 1984. John Benjamins Publishing Company. P. p1. Kees & Mackenzie. . New York: Academic Press. where the function of the phoneme is to distinguish between lexical material. Functionalists maintain that the communicative situation motivates. 1982. Trav. forthcoming. 1968. C. Blackwell. A. Matthew P.Functional theories of grammar 18 Grammatical Functions Functions exist on all levels of grammar. Meaning as Choice. S. G. pp. J. [13] Engberg-Pedersen. Lisbeth Falster Jakobsen (eds. Michael Fortescue. and basic linguistic theory" (http:/ / linguistics. Language 51:89. if one adopts a functionalist view of language. explanatory theories. Journal of Linguistics vol.. Ling. 42 in Syntax and Semantics Series. Lachlan (2010). Kees & Mackenzie. subject and Object). M. Functional Discourse Grammar: A typologically-based theory of language structure. differs from formala nd structural grammar in that it purports not to model but to explain. Recipient. "[Functional grammar] analyzes grammatical structure. Van Valin. Functional Syntax and Universal Grammar. In Fontaine. A.). S. In Language Acquisition: The State of the Art. & Mackenzie. pp. Advances in Role and Reference Grammar. BLS 4:86-95 [20] Langacker. buffalo. and that a structural or formal approaches not merely limited to an artificially restricted data base. Studies in Functional Grammar. Lexical Functional Syntax. 101 . 1998." [2] Dryer. Alabama Press [5] Dik. defining the informational status of constituents. Movement rules in functional perspective. London: Academic [6] Dik. In Felix Ameka. (1993). Functionalism in Linguistics.A. Press [12] Van Valin. Elisabeth. etc. Joan L. Jr. T. Functional grammar. De Gruyter .K. P. Tuscaloosa: Univ. D. but it also analyzes the entire communicative situation: the purpose of the speech event. A Short Introduction to Functional Grammar. constrains. Cambridge. The Prague School and North American functionalist approaches to syntax. The central issue discussed in this paper is what sort of theory we need for linguistic description. expression and structure: studies in Danish functional grammar. (1998) A functionalist approach to grammar and its evolution. [23] Anstey. 2. Amsterdam: Benjamins [18] Heath. "Functional Theories of Grammar". 207-234. describing the role of participants in states of affairs or actions expressed. W. (2001). W. B. London: Arnold [11] Foley. Language 50(4):630-64 [21] Bybee. Peter Harder. expl.

the lengths of the so-called hrebs and of speech acts.“[5] Some linguistic laws There exist quite a number of proposed language laws. and have sufficiently and successfully been tested on empirical data. The investigation of text or dictionary frequencies of units of any kind with regard to their lengths yields regularly a number of distributions. more specifically. The same holds for the distributions of sounds (phones) of different . the following units have been studied: • • • • • Law of the distribution of morph lengths.g. language change. letters (characters) of different complexities. Other linguistic units which also abide by this law are e. they rather determine the probabilities of the events or proportions under study. Law of the distribution of sentence lengths. Law of the distribution of word lengths. • Length (or more generally. which could not be refuted in spite of much effort to do so. complexity) distributions. they are not observed in every single case (this would be neither necessary nor possible). This situation does not differ from that in the natural sciences..e. By now. of a general theory of language in the sense of a set of interrelated languages laws[1] Synergetic linguistics was from its very beginning specifically designed for this purpose. these cases do not violate the corresponding laws as variations around the statistical mean are not only admissible but even essential.Quantitative linguistics 19 Quantitative linguistics Quantitative linguistics is a sub-discipline of general linguistics and. which have since long abandoned the old deterministic and causal views of the world and replaced them by statistical/probabilistic models. which can be found under the header colometry and stichometry. and application as well as structure of natural languages. Corpus linguistics and computational linguistics are other fields which contribute important empirical evidence. One has to bear in mind in this context that these laws are of stochastic nature.[4] Language laws in quantitative linguistics In QL. History The earliest QL approaches date back in the ancient Greek and Indian world. Law of the distribution of syllable lengths. of mathematical linguistics. ultimately. It is easy to find counterexamples to each of the above-mentioned examples. depending on the given kind of the unit under study. This field is not necessarily connected to substantial theoretical ambitions. Law of the distribution of the lengths of rhythmical units. Köhler writes about QL laws: “Moreover. are mathematically formulated. among them are[6]: • Law of diversification: If linguistic categories such as parts-of-speech or inflectional endings appear in various forms it can be shown that the frequencies of their occurrences in texts are controlled by laws. its most demanding objective is the formulation of language laws and. One of the historical sources consists of applications of combinatorics to linguistic matters. they are themselves quantitatively exactly determined by the corresponding laws. i. are interrelated with other laws in the field.[2] QL is empirically based on the results of language statistics. a field which can be interpreted as statistics of languages or as statistics of any linguistic object. it can be shown that these properties of linguistic elements and of the relations among them abide by universal laws which can be formulated strictly mathematically in the same way as common in the natural sciences. the concept of law is understood as the class of law hypotheses which have been deduced from theoretical assumptions. Quantitative Linguistics (QL) deals with language learning. QL investigates languages using statistical methods. nevertheless.[3] another one is based on elementary statistical studies.

QL supports research into stylistics: One of the overall aims is evidence as objective as possible also in at least part of the domain of stylistic phenomena by referring to language laws.[7] 20 Stylistics The study of poetic and also non-poetic styles can be based on statistical methods. Among the levels of this kind of hierarchy. letters. logistic equation). in particular in linguistics. the dispersion of foreign or loan words. One of the central assumptions of QL is that some laws (e. • Rank-frequency laws: Virtually any kind of linguistic units abides by these relations. abide by a law known in QL as Piotrowski law. Menzerath-Altmann law): This law states that the sizes of the constituents of a construction decrease with increasing size of the construction under study. at least different parameter values of the laws (distributions or functions) depending on the text sort a text belongs to. If poetic texts are under study QL methods form a sub-discipline of Quantitative Study of Literature (stylometrics). and letters can be observed. • Law of language change: Growth processes in language such as vocabulary growth. words.g. language acquisition law).[8] Important authors • • • • • • • • Gabriel Altmann (1931)[9][10] Otto Behaghel (1854-1936]. moreover.g. Behaghel's laws Karl-Heinz Best[11][12] Sergej Grigor'evič Čebanov (1897–1966)[13] William Palin Elderton (1877–1962)[14] Sheila Embleton. • Martin's law: This law concerns lexical chains which are obtained by looking up the definition of a word in a dictionary. cf. • Word associations: Rank and frequency of associations subjects react with on a (word) stimulus. • Menzerath's law (also. We will give here only a few illustrative examples: • The words of a text are arranged according their text frequency and assigned a rank number and the corresponding frequency. The Piotrowski law is a case of the so-called logistic model (cf. it is possible to conduct corresponding investigations on the basis of the specific forms (parameters) language laws take in texts of different styles. a sentence (measured in terms of the number of clauses) the shorter the clauses (measured in terms of the number of words). the distribution of word lengths) require different models. • A similar distribution between rank and frequency of sounds. • Zipf's law: The frequency of words is inversely proportional to their rank in frequency lists. The longer. whereby the number of definitions decreases with increasing generality. and corresponds to growth models in other scientific disciplines. It was shown that it covers also languages acquisition processes (cf. e. there exists a number of lawful relations.g. Finally. syntactic functions and constructions) show a specific frequency distribution in equally large text blocks. Since George Kingsley Zipf (the well-known “Zipf’s Law”). a large number of mathematical models of the relation between rank and frequency has been proposed. changes in the inflectional system etc. or: the longer a word (in syllables or morphs) the shorter the syllables or words in sounds). then looking up the definition of the definition just obtained etc. In such cases. all these definitions form a hierarchy of more and more general meanings.Quantitative linguistics durations. Toronto[15] Gertraud Fenk-Oczlon[16] Ernst Wilhelm Förstemann (1822–1906)[17] • Wilhelm Fucks (1902–1990)[18] • Peter Grzybek[19] • Pierre Guiraud . phonemes. • Text block law: Linguistic units (e.

S. 2008. wikipedia. cf. Altmann. ISBN 3-11-015578-8. Peter. de Gruyter. 339-340. 2012,43(2):178-192.): Quantitative Linguistik . Piotrowski[31][32] L. Berlin/ New York 2005. Berlin/ New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Gabriel Altmann. Berlin/ New York 2005. V. esp. Sherman Juhan Tuldava (1922–2003)[33] Andrew Wilson. • Reinhard Köhler with the assistance of Christiane Hoffmann: Bibliography of Quantitative Linguistics. • Haitao Liu & Wei Huang.L. Journal of Zhejiang University (Humanities and Social Science). Reinhard (eds. Gabriel Altmann: Anleitung zu quantitativen Textanalysen. Piotrowski (Hrsg. Arapov (eds. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia 1995. Rajmund G. 760-774. Dedicated to Gabriel Altmann on the Occasion of his 75th Birthday. Ein internationales Handbuch. Benjamins. [8] Alexander Mehler: Eigenschaften der textuellen Einheiten und Systeme. Methoden und Anwendungen. Rajmund G. Greek Antiquity. In: Reinhard Köhler. Rajmund G. Bochum: Brockmeyer 1982. Gabriel Altmann.): Quantitative Linguistik . Zipf's law • Eberhard Zwirner (1899–1984). references: Köhler. Gabriel Altmann. S. Phonometry[36] References • Karl-Heinz Best: Quantitative Linguistik. note 1. ISBN 3-933043-17-4. In: Historia Mathematica 6. In: Reinhard Köhler. Berlin/ New York 2005. 1979. _Karl-Heinz_Best . de Gruyter. p. [4] Adam Pawłowski: Prolegomena to the History of Corpus and Quantitative Linguistics.Quantitative Linguistics. Piotrowski (eds. [6] cf.[28] cf.): Quantitative Linguistik . Ein internationales Handbuch – An International Handbook. ISBN 3-11-015578-8. p. M. org/ wiki/ Benutzer:Dr. Piotrowski (Hrsg.) (2005) [7] H. 48-54. stark überarbeitete und ergänzte Auflage. wikipedia. 325-348. Lancaster[34] Albert Thumb (1865–1915)[35] 21 • George Kingsley Zipf (1902–1950). In: Glottotheory 1. Eine Annäherung. 1-2. [3] N. Charles Muller. wikipedia. In: Reinhard Köhler. http:/ / de.) (2007): Exact Methods in the Study of Language and Text.Quantitative linguistics • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Gustav Herdan (1897–1968). Rajmund G. Berlin/ New York 2005. Ein internationales Handbuch. ISBN 3-11-015578-8. Guiter. p. 3. de Gruyter. [5] cf. ISBN 3-11-015578-8. in Chinese.A.): Quantitative Linguistik Quantitative Linguistics. Ein internationales Handbuch. Lüdenscheid: RAM-Verlag 2008.Quantitative Linguistics. Quantitative Stilistik. Gabriel. S. [2] Reinhard Köhler: Synergetic linguistics. Piotrowski (Hrsg. Theories and Methods [37]. Straßburg [30] Raijmund G. & Köhler.. Peust & Gutschmidt. Notes [1] Reinhard Köhler: Gegenstand und Arbeitsweise der Quantitativen Linguistik. Vivien Altmann. Quantitative Linguistics:State of the Art. ISBN 90-272-3751-4. ISBN 3-88339-244-8. Menzerath's law Sizuo Mizutani (1926) [29] Augustus de Morgan (1806–1871). [9] http:/ / de. org/ wiki/ Gabriel_Altmann [10] Grzybek. S. 1-16. Gabriel Altmann. ISBN 978-3-9802659-5-9.Quantitative Linguistics. • Reinhard Köhler. Biggs: The Roots of Combinatorics.): Studies on Zipf's Law. org/ wiki/ Gabriel_Altmann [11] http:/ / de. de Gruyter. 109-136. Piotrowski (eds. Göttingen 2006.[20][21] Luděk Hřebíček (1934)[22] Friedrich Wilhelm Kaeding (1843–1928)[23] Reinhard Köhler[24] Werner Lehfeldt (1943) [25] Viktor Vasil'evič Levickij (1938-2012) [26] Haitao Liu[27] Helmut Meier (1897–1973) Paul Menzerath (1883–1954).

R. wikipedia. 152-158. html [16] http:/ / wwwu. 99-101. Piotrowski's law: http:/ / lql. Rajmund G. uni-trier. 2008. p. 77-86 [18] Dieter Aichele: Das Werk von W. Nr. In: Reinhard Köhler. Dr.) Levickij dedicated: Glottometrics. Geburtstag von Prof. Berlin/ New York 2005. edu. php?id=11131 [25] http:/ / www. at/ gfenk/ [17] http:/ / de. wikipedia.iqla. org/ wiki/ Sergei_Grigorjewitsch_Tschebanow [14] Best. ISBN 3-11-015578-8 [19] http:/ / www. php/ Herdan_dimension [22] http:/ / de. Tuldava) [34] http:/ / www.): Quantitative Linguistik Quantitative Linguistics. cn/ soc/ CN/ abstract/ abstract10497. ling. 2008. about Mizutani: Naoko Maruyama: Sizuo Mizutani (1926). gwdg. ac. Piotrovskij. Glottometrics 19. uni-graz. Piotrowski ( . Ein internationales Handbuch. wikipedia. 99-107.G. org/ wiki/ Piotrowski-Gesetz [33] Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 4. Gabriel Altmann. de/ index. wikipedia. 2006. org/ wiki/ Albert_Thumb [36] http:/ / de. p. 1997 (= Festschrift in Honour of Juh. php/ Change_in_language [32] http:/ / de. Books. Paris: Larousse 1968. ca/ linguistics/ People/ sheila. In: Glottometrics 12. cf. de/ index. Heft 16. Karl-Heinz Best: Ernst Wilhelm Förstemann (1822-1906). uni-trier. de/ ~kbest/ [13] http:/ / de. at/ peter. 3-10. Germanic and Slavic Linguistics. 86-98 [29] = Shizuo Mizutani. journals. ac. p. zju.International Quantitative Linguistics Association http://www. edu. uni-klu. 1. yorku. cn/ en/ lht [28] Karl-Heinz Best: Paul Menzerath (1883-1954). Portrait on the occasion of his 80. php?show=1 [20] http:/ / de. Hueber. lancs. p. org/ wiki/ Gustav_Herdan [21] http:/ / lql. The Founder of Japanese Quantitative Linguistics. In: Naukovyj Visnyk Černivec’koho Universytetu: Hermans’ka filolohija. wikipedia. München 1972. Herausgegeben von Gabriel Altmann. Papers for 70-th Anniversary of Professor V. In: Glottometrics 14. 2006. de/ de/ 51122. [15] http:/ / dlll. [31] = Rajmund G. anniversary: Problems of General. wikipedia. p. shtml 22 External links • IQLA . German: Einführung in die Sprachstatistik. org/ wiki/ Ernst_F%C3%B6rstemann. org/ wiki/ Lud%C4%9Bk_H%C5%99eb%C3%AD%C4%8Dek [23] http:/ / de. Chernivtsi 2008. wikipedia. uni-trier. anniversary in: Glottometrics 12. grzybek/ site. [27] http:/ / mypage. Levickij. html [26] Festschrift on the occasion of the 70. wikipedia. org/ wiki/ Friedrich_Wilhelm_Kaeding [24] http:/ / www. Emmerich Kelih: Der Czernowitzer Beitrag zur Quantitativen Linguistik: Zum 70. Iryna Zadoroshna. uk/ profiles/ Andrew-Wilson/ [35] http:/ / de. zju. Piotrowski. Yuliya Matskulyak. Karl-Heinz (2009): William Palin Elderton (1877-1962).Quantitative linguistics [12] http:/ / wwwuser. 2007. Vypusk 407. Fucks. Levickij. de Gruyter. org/ wiki/ Eberhard_Zwirner [37] http:/ / www. de/ index. [30] Charles Muller: Initiation à la statistique linguistique. (No ISBN. In: Glottometrics 10. 2005. Habil. p. uni-goettingen. Viktor V.

. like its syntax and its vocabulary. The Polish scholar Jan Baudouin de Courtenay (together with his former student Mikołaj Kruszewski) introduced the concept of the phoneme in 1876. and phonology to theoretical linguistics. It has traditionally focused largely on study of the systems of phonemes in particular languages. Some subfields of modern phonology have a crossover with phonetics in descriptive disciplines such as psycholinguistics and speech perception.[1] According to Clark et al. syntax and semantics. acoustic transmission and perception of the sounds of speech. The word phonology (as in the phonology of English) can also refer to the phonological system (sound system) of a given language. particularly before the development of the modern concept of phoneme in the mid 20th century. which is "the study of sound pertaining to the act of speech" (the distinction between language and speech being basically Saussure's distinction between langue and parole). and had a significant influence on the work of Ferdinand de Saussure. an auxiliary text to the Ashtadhyayi. Note that this distinction was not always made.[4] Development of phonology The history of phonology may be traced back to the Ashtadhyayi. Derivation and definitions The word phonology comes from Greek φωνή. with a notational system for them that is used throughout the main text. as opposed to phonetics. Nikolai Trubetzkoy in Grundzüge der Phonologie (1939) defines phonology as "the study of sound pertaining to the system of language". He also worked on the theory of phonetic alternations (what is now called allophony and morphophonology). or the field of linguistics studying this use. sound". lógos. behaviour and organization of sounds as linguistic items". phōnḗ. Phonology also includes the study of equivalent organizational systems in sign languages. etc.[1][2] phonology describes the way sounds function within a given language or across languages to encode meaning. articulatory gestures. the Sanskrit grammar composed by Pāṇini in the 4th century BC. In other words. introduces what can be considered a list of the phonemes of the Sanskrit language. is considered to be the starting point of modern phonology. In particular the Shiva Sutras. resulting in specific areas like articulatory phonology or laboratory phonology. and his work. This is one of the fundamental systems which a language is considered to comprise. (2007) it means the systematic use of sound to encode meaning in any spoken human language. "voice. but it may also cover any linguistic analysis either at a level beneath the word (including syllable. "phonology proper is concerned with the function. which deals with matters of morphology. subject of discussion"). phonetics belongs to descriptive linguistics. onset and rhyme. and the suffix -logy (which is from Greek λόγος. Definitions of the term vary. Lass (1998) writes that phonology refers broadly to the subdiscipline of linguistics concerned with the sounds of language. though often unacknowledged. "word. While phonetics concerns the physical production. Phonology is often distinguished from phonetics. mora. while in more narrow terms.Phonology 23 Phonology Phonology is a branch of linguistics concerned with the systematic organization of sounds in languages.) or at all levels of language where sound is considered to be structured for conveying linguistic meaning.[3] More recently. articulatory features. speech.

One of its leading members was Prince Nikolai Trubetzkoy. Phonological processes are unordered with respect to each other and apply simultaneously (though the output of one process may be the input to another). the Generativists folded morphophonology into phonology. phonological representations are sequences of segments made up of distinctive features. Dressler. In this view. phonology is based on a set of universal phonological processes which interact with one another. In 1968 Noam Chomsky and Morris Halle published The Sound Pattern of English (SPE). Rather than acting on segments. whose Grundzüge der Phonologie (Principles of Phonology). is among the most important works in the field from this period. The features describe aspects of articulation and perception. there are many Natural Phonologists in Europe. and many others. such as Geoffrey Nathan. Jean Lowenstamm. Trubetzkoy also developed the concept of the archiphoneme. Though this usually goes . all languages' phonological structures are essentially the same. Natural Phonology was a theory based on the publications of its proponent David Stampe in 1969 and (more explicitly) in 1979. Gunnar Fant. The principles of Natural Phonology were extended to morphology by Wolfgang U. Government Phonology. In this view. That is. John Harris.S. 1920s. which both solved and created problems. Phonological phenomena are no longer seen as operating on one linear sequence of segments. Prosodic groups can be as small as a part of a syllable or as large as an entire utterance. Autosegmental phonology later evolved into Feature Geometry.Phonology 24 An influential school of phonology in the interwar period was the Prague School. but rather as involving some parallel sequences of features which reside on multiple tiers. which originated in the early 1980s as an attempt to unify theoretical notions of syntactic and phonological structures. In 1976 John Goldsmith introduced autosegmental phonology. are from a universally fixed set. The second-most prominent Natural Phonologist is Stampe's wife. Directly influenced by Baudouin de Courtenay. called phonemes or feature combinations. Furthermore. Prominent figures include Jonathan Kaye. the basis for Generative Phonology. The approach was soon extended to morphology by John McCarthy and Alan Prince. who was one of the most prominent linguists of the 20th century. Principles are held to be inviolable. and Morris Halle. There are at least two levels of representation: underlying representation and surface phonetic representation. Monik Charette. and has become a dominant trend in phonology. is based on the notion that all languages necessarily follow a small set of principles and vary according to their selection of certain binary parameters. In a course at the LSA summer institute in 1991. Ordered phonological rules govern how underlying representation is transformed into the actual pronunciation (the so-called surface form). Trubetzkoy is considered the founder of morphophonology. though also a few others in the U.[3] published posthumously in 1939. These features were an expansion of earlier work by Nikolai Trubetzkoy. which became the standard theory of representation for the theories of the organization of phonology as different as Lexical Phonology and Optimality Theory. phonological processes act on distinctive features within prosodic groups. although this concept had also been recognized by de Courtenay. and have the binary values + or −. An important consequence of the influence SPE had on phonological theory was the downplaying of the syllable and the emphasis on segments. who founded Natural Morphology. though parameters may sometimes come into conflict. Roman Jakobson.. which ones are active and which are suppressed are language-specific. Patricia Donegan. Jean-Roger Vergnaud. but there is restricted variation that accounts for differences in surface realizations. Another important figure in the Prague School was Roman Jakobson. Alan Prince and Paul Smolensky developed Optimality Theory — an overall architecture for phonology according to which languages choose a pronunciation of a word that best satisfies a list of constraints which is ordered by importance: a lower-ranked constraint can be violated when the violation is necessary in order to obey a higher-ranked constraint.

these two sounds are perceived as different. there are minimal pairs of words for which aspiration is the only contrasting feature (two words with different meanings that are identical except that one has an aspirated sound where the other has an unaspirated one). The appeal to phonetic grounding of constraints in various approaches has been criticized by proponents of 'substance-free phonology'. but Arabic lacks the mid articulation of short vowels. [f] and [v] were allophones in English. that is. (Traditionally. English speakers intuitively treat both sounds as variations (allophones) of the same phonological category. both view phonology in terms of constraints on speakers and their production. native speakers of English would still hear the same words. schools of phonology is studying which sounds can be grouped into distinctive units within a language. of the phoneme /p/. First. so it is problematic to expect to be able to splice words into simple segments without affecting speech perception. Strict-CV Phonology) has a greater following in the United Kingdom. the two sounds are perceived as "the same" /p/. Hindi. the "p" sound in pot is aspirated (pronounced [pʰ]). but these later changed into separate phonemes. however. is highly co-articulated. it would be argued that if a word-initial aspirated [pʰ] were interchanged with the unaspirated [p] in spot. The particular sounds which are phonemic in a language can change over time. while that in spot is not aspirated (pronounced [p]). For example. .) In some other languages. and they are consequently assigned to different phonemes in those languages.[5] Broadly speaking Government Phonology (or its descendant. actual speech. that is. The vowels of modern (Standard) Arabic and (Israeli) Hebrew from the phonemic point of view. i and u is made by both speakers. For example. pre-generative. Part of the phonological study of a language therefore involves looking at data (phonetic transcriptions of the speech of native speakers) and trying to deduce what the underlying phonemes are and what the sound inventory of the language is. is a frequently used criterion for deciding whether two sounds should be assigned to the same phoneme. Second. these units are known as phonemes. in English. The presence or absence of minimal pairs. and Quechua. However other considerations often need to be taken into account as well. The findings and insights of speech perception and articulation research complicates the traditional and somewhat intuitive idea of interchangeable allophones being perceived as the same phoneme. 25 Analysis of phonemes An important part of traditional. Optimality Theory was strongly influenced by Natural Phonology. interchanged allophones of the same phoneme can result in unrecognizable words. However. even at a word level. in Thai. At one time. This is one of the main factors of historical change of languages as described in historical linguistics. though these constraints are formalized in very different ways. as mentioned above. Note the intersection of the two circles—the distinction between short a.Phonology unacknowledged. whereas Optimality Theory is predominant in North America. while Hebrew lacks the distinction of vowel length.

Colin. phonology studies how sounds alternate. p. Germany: Blackwell Publishing. Charles (2008). Phonology also includes topics such as phonotactics (the phonological constraints on what sounds can appear in what positions in a given language) and phonological alternation (how the pronunciation of a sound changes through the application of phonological rules. as a component of morphemes. ISBN 0-19-953397-0. The principles of phonological analysis can be applied independently of modality because they are designed to serve as general analytical tools. One modern theory is that Israeli Hebrew's phonology reflects Yiddish elements. theoretical linguists have moved away from the traditional concept of a phoneme. ISBN 978-1-4051-3083-7. as well as. Note that the two circles are totally separate—none of the vowel-sounds made by speakers of one language is made by speakers of the other. replace one another in different forms of the same morpheme (allomorphs). sometimes in a given order which can be feeding or bleeding. google. Since the early 1960s. [6] Goldsmith 1995:1. .[6]) as well as prosody. English Phonetics and Phonology: An Introduction (http:/ / books. . UK. Australia: Blackwell Publishing. Cambridge. Victoria. Mark. The Phonological Enterprise. 1. translated by C. google. Oxford. and analysis using this approach is called morphophonology. . UK: Oxford University Press. An Introduction to Phonetics and Phonology (http:/ / books. The vowels of modern (Standard) Arabic and (Israeli) Hebrew from the phonetic point of view. google. Philip (2003). pl/ books?id=Ej6ENdUGS-UC& dq="Grundzüge+ der+ Phonologie"& hl=pl& source=gbs_navlinks_s).Phonology 26 Different linguists therefore take different approaches to the problem of assigning sounds to phonemes. Notes [1] Lass.e. Phonology: An Introduction to Basic Concepts (http:/ / books. Baltaxe as Principles of Phonology (http:/ / books. Oxford. For example. Reiss. University of California Press. com/ books?id=dX5P5mxtYYIC& printsec=frontcover& dq=introduction+ phonetics+ phonology#v=onepage& q& f=false) (3rd ed. Australia. com/ books?id=p5a7mmpqbt0C& printsec=frontcover& dq=introduction+ phonetics+ phonology#v=onepage& q& f=false). Yallop. even though the sub-lexical units are not instantiated as speech sounds.). USA. com/ books?id=aTsAt3D6H58C& printsec=frontcover& dq=phonology#v=onepage& q& f=false). these units can be called morphophonemes. ISBN 0-521-23728-9. the study of suprasegmentals and topics such as stress and intonation. for example. Massachusetts. Janet (2007). Victoria. Retrieved 8 January 2011  Alternative ISBN 1-4051-3083-0 [5] Hale.. Melbourne. . Oxford. preferring to consider basic units at a more abstract level. Retrieved 8 January 2011  Paperback ISBN 0-631-19776-1 [3] Trubetzkoy N. New York. accent. Australia: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved 8 January 2011  Paperback ISBN 0-521-28183-0 [2] Carr. they differ in the extent to which they require allophones to be phonetically similar. Other topics in phonology In addition to the minimal units that can serve the purpose of differentiating meaning (the phonemes). and intonation. google. stress. not language-specific ones. i. UK. Grundzüge der Phonologie (published 1939). Massachusetts. The same principles have been applied to the analysis of sign languages (see Phonemes in sign languages). 1969 [4] Clark. John. USA. There are also differing ideas as to whether this grouping of sounds is purely a tool for linguistic analysis. syllable structure. ISBN 0-631-19775-3. Berlin. Digitized 2000). Fletcher. Roger (1998. or reflects an actual process in the way the human brain processes a language. UK. not Semitic ones.

(1985). The Phonological Enterprise. "On the identification of phonemic entities". Chicago: Chicago University Press. R. Phonology Yearbook 2: 225–252. (1985). and ?id=7sxLaeZAhOAC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Cambridge+Handbook+of+Phonology#v=onepage&q& f=false). (1933). A course in phonetics (2nd ed. (1951). Autosegmental and metrical phonology: A new synthesis. memoirs II. (1949). Keyser. Morris.). Dicky. doi:10. 202–222). ed. 9). The structure of language: Readings in the philosophy language (pp. Charles (2008). Indiana University publications in anthropology and linguistics. Linguistic inquiry monographs (No. Lingua 104: 1–12.). Roman. Peter. • Brentari. "The strategy of phonemics". (1964). (1983). and Samuel J. 1998. Word 10: 197–209. • Hale. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. ISBN 0-19-953397-0. A. JSTOR 486567. On the Natural Phonology of Vowels. (1989). John A. Blackwell Handbooks in Linguistics.1017/S0952675700000440. de Hoop. (1987). John M. In E. • Hockett. Dinnsen (Ed. Colin J. Preliminaries to speech analysis: The distinctive features and their correlates. • Gussenhoven. The sound pattern of English. • Bloch. In John A. • Hooper. A manual of phonology. . Patricia A. doi:10. • Clements.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. NJ: Prentice-Hall. and Ewen. Reiss. J. Transactions of the Philological Society 47 (1): 127–152. Phonology as functional phonetics. (1968). The Hague: Mouton. • Kenstowicz. André. Principles of dependency phonology. • Halle. 1–30). • Chomsky. "The geometry of phonological features". Gunnar. Joan B. ISBN 1-4051-5768-2. Helen (1998).. • Bloomfield. Cambridge. and Halle. • Jakobson. On the theory of lexical phonology. • Clements. Current approaches to phonological theory (pp. Cambridge University Press.. (Revised version of Bloomfield's 1914 An introduction to the study of language). • Goldsmith. (1979).x. New York: Garland.Phonology 27 Bibliography • Anderson. Language. • Gilbers. Englewood Cliffs. UK: Oxford University Press. Paul. Fant. Cambridge. John A. Phonology Yearbook 2 (pp. • Chomsky.1111/j. George N. Cambridge. An introduction to natural generative phonology. London: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. • de Lacy. John A (1995). Blackwell Publishers. (1948). Charles F. ISBN 0-8240-5424-5. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Noam. • Martinet. Carlos & (1952). New York: Academic Press. CV phonology: A generative theory of the syllable. Phonology in generative grammar. (1959). "Sounds and prosodies". "Phonological Theory".1016/S0024-3841(97)00021-1. MA: MIT Press. "Conflicting constraints: An introduction to optimality theory". • Kaisse. Methods in structural linguistics. • Ladefoged. New York: H. Leonard. Fodor and J. Morris. (1976). ISBN 0-262-03098-5 (hbk). George N.1948. Retrieved 8 January 2011 • Donegan. • Firth. Diane (1998). • Halle. Zellig. A prosodic model of sign language phonology. Bernard (1941). Noam. Katz (Eds. (1985). • Goldsmith. "Phonemic overlapping". Current issues in linguistic theory. The aims of autosegmental phonology. Anderson (Eds. The Cambridge Handbook of Phonology (http://books. Holt and Company. New York: Harper & Row. The Handbook of Phonological Theory. (2007). Oxford. 91–112). J.). MA: MIT Press. • Goldsmith. (1955). ISBN 0-262-53047-3 (pbk). and Shaw. doi:10. doi:10. 2nd edition 2005. The sound pattern of Russian. American Speech 16 (4): 278–284. A. In J. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Ellen M. (1982). Michael. Morris (1954). In D.2307/486567. Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Copenhague 5: 205–213. Morris. Roman (1949). Colin and J. • Jakobson.). ISBN 0-521-84879-2 (hbk).tb00556. Baltimore: Waverley Press. Patricia. Goldsmith. Oxford: Blackwell.1467-968X. MA: MIT Press. "Understanding Phonology". Mark. • Harris. Haike. Hodder & Arnold.

2307/409004. Phonemics: A technique for reducing languages to writing. • de Saussure.A. doi:10. Paris: Payot. (1979). New York: Garland. Cours de linguistique générale. "La réalité psychologique des phonémes". "Sound patterns in language".dmoz. Sign language and linguistic universals. Berne: A. Francke S. On defining the phoneme. David. doi:10. Économie des changements phonétiques: Traité de phonologie diachronique. 16. Language 10 (2): 117–129. • Napoli. JSTOR 409004. Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague 7. JSTOR 409603. Ferdinand. 28 External links • Phonetics and phonology (http://www. • Twaddell. Nikolai. (1939). (1955). (1935). Donna Jo (1996. Bernard (1941). • Trager. • Sandler.Phonology • Martinet. Morris (1934).2307/409203. Bloch. George L. • Swadesh. "The phonemic principle". Journal de Psychologie Normale et Pathologique 30: 247–265. • Stampe. (1916). Edward (1925). André. "The syllabic phonemes of English". Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. A dissertation on natural phonology. • Sapir. (1947). • Pike. William F. • Trubetzkoy. Edward (1933). Language 17 (3): 223–246. Language monograph no. Linguistics: An Introduction. Grundzüge der Phonologie. 2006. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press • Sapir. Language 1 (2): 37–51. New York: Oxford University Press. Kenneth. doi:10. Language.2307/409603.. Wendy and Phonetics_and_Phonology//) at the Open Directory Project . JSTOR 409203. Diane.

Its pronunciation alternates between [s]. Morphophonology attempts to analyze these processes. • Vowel harmony. Northern Sámi. as in hoped. Types of morphophonological changes Inflected and agglutinating languages may have extremely complicated systems of morphophonemics. but have [v] in the plural (leaves. [d] or [ɪd]. Estonian. as in cats. ideally. as in the case of the words leaf and knife. This rule may be written symbolically as: /F/ -> [αvoice] / __ [αvoice]. The different forms it takes are dependent on the segment at the end of the morpheme to which it attaches – these dependencies are described by morphophonological rules. the phenomenon behind the English examples of plural and past tense above. as above. In the International Phonetic Alphabet. resulting in different variant pronunciations for the same morpheme. sung. Another common convention is double slashes (// //). which is a morphophoneme. and Nganasan. /z/. found in English and other Germanic languages. they influence each other's sound structure (whether analyzed at a phonetic or phonemic level). Morphophonological analysis often involves an attempt to give a series of formal rules that successfully predict the regular sound changes occurring in the morphemes of a given language. [z]. On a morphophonological level. a morphophonemic alternation. is found in virtually all languages to some degree.Morphophonology 29 Morphophonology Morphophonology (also morphophonemics. bobbed and added. nonetheless displays tone sandhi.) Note that the plural suffix "-s" can also influence the form taken by the preceding morpheme. which becomes voiced when a voiced consonant (in this case the //z// of the plural ending) is attached to it. and horses respectively. which occurs in varying degrees in languages all around the world. sang. . On a morphophonological level these morphemes may be analyzed as ending in a morphophoneme //F//. A purely phonological analysis would most likely assign to these three endings the phonemic representations /s/. they may all be considered to be forms of the underlying object //z//. which end with [f] in the singular. A language's morphophonological structure is generally described with a series of rules which. which is sometimes said to display no morphology. Morphophonemes and morphophonological rules When morphemes combine. The units of which the underlying representations of morphemes are composed are sometimes called morphophonemes. Its chief focus is the sound changes that take place in morphemes (minimal meaningful units) when they combine to form words. found in some Uralic languages such as Finnish. knives). implying that the transcription is 'more phonemic than simply phonemic'. Examples of complex morphophonological systems include: • Sandhi. written as "-s" or "-es". notably Turkic languages. An example of a morphophonological alternation in English is provided by the plural morpheme. Other conventions sometimes seen are double pipes (|| ||) and curly brackets ({ }). The surface form produced by the morphophonological rules may consist of phonemes (which are then subject to ordinary phonological rules to produce speech sounds or phones). /ɪz/. Such a series of rules converts a theoretical underlying representation into a surface form that is actually heard. or else the morphophonological analysis may bypass the phoneme stage and produce the phones itself. morphonology) is a branch of linguistics which studies the interaction between morphological and phonological or phonetic processes. can predict every morphophonological alternation that takes place in the language. Ablaut is the phenomenon wherein stem vowels change form depending on context. and [ɪz]. however. • Ablaut. • Consonant gradation. dogs. pipes (| |) are often used to indicate a morphophonemic rather than phonemic representation. (The behaviour of the English past tense ending "-ed" is similar – it can be pronounced [t]. Even Mandarin. as in English sing.

plant is pronounced [plænt]. if CR applies before A) then they are said to be in counter-feeding order. This means that the application of one rule may sometimes either prevent or enable the application of another rule. although in certain derived forms (such as the feminine petite) the [t] is heard. If the rules are ordered such as to avoid possible feeding (in this case. it will generally not be possible to identify an isolation form. then CR can apply). such as the English past tense ending "-ed". if rules are ordered such that the application of the first rule can have the effect of preventing application of the second. the French word petit ("small") is pronounced in isolation without the final [t] sound. In purely phonemic analysis the data is just a set of words in a language. leaving /-rp/. where neutralizing rules were developed to derive phonemes from morphophonemes. since the consonant cluster is not final. If the ordering of two rules is such that the application of the first rule can have the effect of making it possible to apply the second. This is not always the case. since such a morpheme does not occur in isolation. since rules can be set up to derive the reduced form [plæn] from this (while it would be difficult or impossible to set up rules that would derive the isolation form [plænt] from an underlying //plæn//). so as to produce surface forms consistent with the linguistic data. The analyst attempts to present as completely as possible a system of underlying units (morphophonemes) and a series of rules that act on them. It is postulated that morphemes are recorded in the speaker's "lexicon" in an invariant (morphophonemic) form. then the rules are said to be in bleeding order. sometimes the isolation form itself is subject to neutralization that does not apply to some other instances of the morpheme. corresponding to the isolation form. For example. Rule ordering Morphophonological rules are generally considered to apply in a set order. which. Since the 1960s (in particular with the work of the generative school. however. For example. then the rules are in feeding order if A precedes CR. a word ending /-rpa/ is not itself subject to CR. and it would be hard to explain the appearance of the "t" in the inflected forms. instead regarding the surface phones as being derived from the underlying morphophonemes (which may be referred to using various terminology) through a single system of (morpho)phonological rules. where phones were derived from the phonemes. while planting is [ˈplænɪŋ]. On the other hand. if a language has an . It is often reasonable to assume that the isolation form of a morpheme provides its underlying representation. Thus phonological analysis was split into two parts: a morphophonological part.Morphophonology 30 Relation between phonology and morphophonology Until the 1950s. if a language has an apocope rule (A) which deletes a final vowel. the information that there is a final "t" would be lost. provided the rules are appropriately ordered. and a purely phonological part. such as Chomsky and Halle's The Sound Pattern of English) many linguists have moved away from making such a split. is converted by rules into a surface form. in a given environment. many phonologists assumed that neutralizing rules generally applied before allophonic rules. and a cluster reduction rule (CR) that reduces a final consonant cluster. For example. Isolation forms The isolation form of a morpheme is the form in which that morpheme appears in isolation (when not subject to the effects of any other morpheme). since the application of A can enable application of CR (for example. The purpose of both phonemic and morphophonemic analysis is to produce simpler underlying descriptions for what appear on the surface to be complicated patterns. If the isolation form were adopted as the underlying form. In the case of a bound morpheme. in some American English. while for the purposes of morphophonemic analysis the words must be considered in grammatical paradigms to take account of the underlying morphemes. For example. where the morpheme "plant-" appears in the form [plæn]. Here rule A is said to feed rule CR. then the rules are said to be in feeding order. Here the underlying form can be assumed to be //plænt//. but if A is applied to it first.

 161–185. see Phonemic orthography. nationalism /næ/. such as those of historical sound changes. unconscious /ʃ/. pp. However in many orthographies based on such systems the correspondences between graphemes and phonemes are not exact. Bruce (2009). Blackwell . References • Hayes. "Morphophonemic Analysis" Introductory Phonology. Here rule E is said to bleed rule D. then D can no longer apply). and morphophonemic spellings are common in this context in many languages. For more detail on this topic. since the application of E can prevent application of D (for example. prequel /priː/. prejudice /prɛ/ vs. a word containing /-iu-/ would be subject to D. Such spellings are particularly common in English. if D applies before E) then they are said to be in counter-bleeding order. and it is sometimes the case that certain spellings better represent a word's morphophonological structure rather than the purely phonological. sign /saɪn/ signature /sɪɡn/. then the rules are in bleeding order if E precedes D. Another type of spelling that can be described as morphophonemic is the kind that reflects the etymology of words. in particular the section on Morphophonemic features. examples include science /saɪ/ vs. but if E is applied to it first. not dogz. If the rules are ordered such as to avoid possible bleeding (in this case. leaving /-iwu-/. The above example involves active morphology (inflection).Morphophonology epenthesis rule (E) that inserts a /w/ before certain vowels. An example of this is that the English plural morpheme is written -s regardless of whether it is pronounced as /s/ or /z/. and special /spɛ/ vs. species /spiː/. nation /neɪ/ vs. and a vowel deletion rule (D) that deletes one of two consecutive vowels. The terminology of feeding and bleeding is also applied to other linguistic rules. 31 Morphophonology and orthography The principle behind alphabetic writing systems is that the letters (graphemes) represent phonemes. we write cats and dogs.

The Port-Royal grammar modeled the study of syntax upon that of logic (indeed.[5] sees syntax as a branch of biology.) However. and all sentences were analyzed in terms of "Subject – Copula – Predicate". One school of thought.g. such as formal languages used in logic. since it conceives of syntax as the study of linguistic knowledge as embodied in the human mind. first expounded in 1660 by Antoine Arnauld in a book of the same title. The term syntax is also used to refer to the rules governing the behavior of mathematical systems. Gerald Gazdar) take a more Platonistic view. see the monumental work by Giorgio Graffi (2001). Initially. and τάξις táxis. in the 19th century. For centuries. and therefore logic could no longer be relied upon as a basis for studying the structure of language.[4] Modern theories There are a number of theoretical approaches to the discipline of syntax." Modern research in syntax attempts to describe languages in terms of such rules. and to question fundamental assumptions about the relationship between language and logic. . with the development of historical-comparative linguistics. the term syntax is also used to refer directly to the rules and principles that govern the sentence structure of any individual language. most natural way to express a thought. Syntactic categories were identified with logical ones. For a detailed and critical survey of the history of syntax in the last two centuries. was exactly the way it was expressed in French. (That natural way. work in syntax was dominated by a framework known as grammaire générale.[2] In the West. "together". for example in "the syntax of Modern Irish. Early history Works on grammar were written long before modern syntax came about. founded in the works of Derek Bickerton. since they regard syntax to be the study of an abstract formal system. large parts of the Port-Royal Logic were copied or adapted from the Grammaire générale[3]). the school of thought that came to be known as "traditional grammar" began with the work of Dionysius Thrax. It became apparent that there was no such thing as the most natural way to express a thought. this view was adopted even by the early comparative linguists such as Franz Bopp. "an ordering") is "the study of the principles and processes by which sentences are constructed in particular languages". the Aṣṭādhyāyī of Pāṇini is often cited as an example of a premodern work that approaches the sophistication of a modern syntactic theory. which could reasonably be called the "century of syntactic theory" as far as linguistics is concerned. linguists began to realize the sheer diversity of human language.[1] In addition to referring to the overarching discipline. Joseph Greenberg) consider grammar a taxonomical device to reach broad generalizations across languages. The central role of syntax within theoretical linguistics became clear only in the 20th century. Many professionals in this discipline attempt to find general rules that apply to all natural languages. syntax (from Ancient Greek σύνταξις "arrangement" from σύν syn.[6] Yet others (e. This system took as its basic premise the assumption that language is a direct reflection of thought processes and therefore there is a single. (See Logical syntax).g. Other linguists (e. coincidentally.Syntax 32 Syntax In linguistics.

which in turn represents a function that searches to the left for an NP and produces a sentence). the Chomskyan theories are: • Transformational grammar (TG) (Original theory of generative syntax laid out by Chomsky in Syntactic Structures in 1957)[7] • Government and binding theory (GB) (revised theory in the tradition of TG developed mainly by Chomsky in the 1970s and 1980s)[8] • Minimalist program (MP) (a reworking of the theory out of the GB framework published by Chomsky in 1995)[9] Other theories that find their origin in the generative paradigm are: • Generative semantics (now largely out of date) • • • • • • Relational grammar (RG) (now largely out of date) Arc pair grammar Generalized phrase structure grammar (GPSG. This is notated as (NP/(NP\S)) which means "a category that searches to the right (indicated by /) for an NP (the object). So the syntactic category for an intransitive verb is a complex formula representing the fact that the verb acts as a function word requiring an NP as an input and produces a sentence level structure as an output. in categorial grammar. and generates a function (equivalent to the VP) which is (NP\S). rather than its communicative function. This model could be used to describe all human language and to predict the grammaticality of any given utterance (that is. to predict whether the utterance would sound correct to native speakers of the language). but to the properties of the syntactic categories themselves. Generative grammars are among the theories that focus primarily on the form of a sentence. NP\S is read as "a category that searches to the left (indicated by \) for a NP (the element on the left) and outputs a sentence (the element on the right)". Among the many generative theories of linguistics. This approach to language was pioneered by Noam Chomsky. now largely out of date) Head-driven phrase structure grammar (HPSG) Lexical functional grammar (LFG) Nanosyntax Categorial grammar Categorial grammar is an approach that attributes the syntactic structure not to rules of grammar. such principles are embedded in the category of the head word itself. This complex category is notated as (NP\S) instead of V. For example. Most generative theories (although not all of them) assume that syntax is based upon the constituent structure of sentences.Syntax 33 Generative grammar The hypothesis of generative grammar is that language is a structure of the human mind. the phrase structure rule S → NP VP).g. . rather than asserting that sentences are constructed by a rule that combines a noun phrase (NP) and a verb phrase (VP) (e. The goal of generative grammar is to make a complete model of this inner language (known as i-language). Tree-adjoining grammar is a categorial grammar that adds in partial tree structures to the categories. The category of transitive verb is defined as an element that requires two NPs (its subject and its direct object) to form a sentence.

e. pp. "200 Years of Syntax: A Critical Survey" (http:/ / books. [5] See Bickerton. (2004). Syntactic Structures. The Hague/Paris: Mouton. Some prominent dependency-based theories of syntax: • • • • • Algebraic syntax Word grammar Operator grammar Meaning–text theory Functional generative description Lucien Tesnière (1893–1954) is widely seen as the father of modern dependency-based theories of syntax and grammar. 137. ISBN 978-0-262-01356-7. and. its communicative function). He argued vehemently against the binary division of the clause into subject and predicate that is associated with the grammars of his day (S → NP VP) and which remains at the core of all phrase structure grammars. John Benjamins Publishing.[10] Stochastic/probabilistic grammars/network theories Theoretical approaches to syntax that are based upon probability theory are known as stochastic grammars. [6] Ted Briscoe. MIT Press. bnf. and in the place of this division. Noam (2002) [1957]. 1-4051-0316-7 (pb). Some theories based within this approach are: • Optimality theory • Stochastic context-free grammar Functionalist grammars Functionalist theories. p. html#SECTION00040000000000000000). he positioned the verb as the root of all clause structure. "[The Aṣṭādhyāyī] is a highly precise and thorough description of the structure of Sanskrit somewhat resembling modern generative grammar…[it] remained the most advanced linguistic analysis of any kind until the twentieth century. . 15. Noam. susx. (2009). Eörs Szathmáry. Biological foundations and origin of syntax. Antoine (1683).Syntax 34 Dependency grammar Dependency grammar is an approach to sentence structure where syntactic units are arranged according to the dependency relation. . as opposed to the constituency relation of phrase structure grammars. html?id=mydolrE-PPkC) (googlebook preview). Retrieved 2008-06-04. Graffi (2001). ISBN 0-226-04610-9. Language and Species. Some typical functionalist theories include: • • • • • • • Functional discourse grammar (Dik) Prague linguistic circle Systemic functional grammar Cognitive grammar Construction grammar (CxG) Role and reference grammar (RRG) Emergent grammar Notes [1] Chomsky. Benjamin W. p. informatics. Syntactic Structures. [2] Fortson IV. University of Chicago Press. fr/ Visualiseur?Destination=Gallica& O=NUMM-57444) (5th ed. co. Paris: G. google.  11 (http:/ / books." [3] Arnauld. although focused upon form. 2 May 2001. are driven by explanation based upon the function of a sentence (i. uk/ research/ nlp/ gazdar/ briscoe/ gpsg. 186. ed. uk/ books?id=SNeHkMXHcd8C& pg=PA11& dq="syntax+ is+ the+ study+ of+ the+ principles+ and+ processes+ by+ which+ sentences+ are+ constructed+ in+ particular+ languages"). com/ books/ about/ 200_Years_of_Syntax. The (finite) verb is seen as the root of all clause structure and all the other words in the clause are either directly or indirectly dependent on this root. ac. ISBN 1-4051-0315-9 (hb). "Nous avons emprunté…ce que nous avons dit…d'un petit Livre…sous le titre de Grammaire générale. Indo-European Language and Culture: An Introduction. Derek Bickerton. Dependencies are directed links between words. 1957. . Blackwell." [4] Giorgio. Interview with Gerald Gazdar (http:/ / www. One common implementation of such an approach makes use of a neural network or connectionism. p. for more recent advances. Derek (1990). La logique (http:/ / visualiseur.). Desprez. [7] Chomsky. google.

edu/ ~beatrice/syntax-textbook)—Beatrice Santorini & Anthony Kroch. MIT Press. • Mieszko Talasiewicz (2009). University of Pennsylvania. Concise Encyclopedia of Syntactic Theories. Noam (1981/1993). Rob Goedemans and Bart Hollebrandse. The Minimalist Program. Syntax. • Isac. 77 case studies of syntactic phenomena. Noam (1995). [9] Chomsky. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 2007 . • Carnie. A Critical Survey. An interdisciplinary essay on the interplay between logic and linguistics on syntactic theories. Keith. Henk Van Riemsdijk.) (1996). 35 References • Brown. Moravcsik (2006). Studies in the History of the Language Sciences 98. • Brian Roark. • Freidin. • Edith A. [10] Concerning Tesnière's rejection of the binary division of the clause into subject and predicate and in favor of the verb as the root of all structure. ISBN 978-0-8264-8943-2. An introduction to syntax: fundamentals of syntactic analysis. New York: Elsevier Science. ISBN 978-1-4051-1485-1. Paris: Klincksieck. (2006). Further reading • Martin Everaert. Critical Concepts in Linguistics. Jointly reviewed in The Canadian Journal of Linguistics 54(1). ISBN 978-90-481-3287-4. 2nd edition.hewson.jhu. see Tesnière (1969:103–105). Oxford University Press. ed.html) External links • The syntax of natural language: An online introduction using the Trees program (http://www. 200 Years of Syntax. 172–175 (http://muse. • Graffi. ISBN 978-0-19-953420-3. part II: Computational approaches to syntax. The Blackwell companion to syntax. Computational approaches to morphology and syntax. Springer. Syntax: A Generative Introduction (2nd ed.Syntax [8] Chomsky. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. • Tesnière.1. New York: Routledge. Daniela.concordia.ling. I-language: An Introduction to Linguistics as Cognitive Science (http:// linguistics. An introduction to syntactic theory. The companion Edith A. Philosophy of Syntax—Foundational Topics.upenn. Howard Lasnik (eds. Andrew (2006). ISBN pp. Giorgio (2001).edu/login?uri=/journals/ canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v054/54. Lucien 1969. Blackwell. ISBN 0-08-042711-1. Mouton de Gruyter.). 5 Volumes. Robert. Moravcsik (2006). Lectures on Government and Binding: The Pisa Lectures. ISBN 0-415-24672-5. Continuum International Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-8264-8945-6. Éleménts de syntaxe structurale. ISBN 1-4051-3384-8. Attempts to be a theory-neutral introduction. Charles Reiss (2008). surveys the major theories. March 2009. Jim Miller (eds. Oxford University Press.) (2006). Richard William Sproat (2007). Continuum International Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-19-927477-2.

a new sentence is about to be formed and must be analyzed for correctness.. Valuable principles with which KWICs can be analyzed include: • Collocation: words and their co-occurrences (examples include "fulfill needs" and "fall-back position") • Semantic prosody: the connotation words carry ("pay attention" can be neutral or remonstrative. allowing them to determine the viability of new sentences. systems and water all share a large portion of the same vocabulary • Grammatical: it uses rules based on sampling of the Lexicon • Register-specific: it uses the same word differently and/or less frequently in different contexts A major area of study. the compilation of language databases using real samples from speech and writing has enabled researchers to take a fresh look at the composition of languages. these KWICs can be sorted and analyzed for their co-text. a useful place to start is with high frequency context words. rather than grammatical. in other words. on the other hand.. Among other things. the verb "vow" is most likely . business and sex. statistical research methods offer reliable insight into the ways in which words interact. Context and co-text When analyzing the structure of language statistically. Language use shows which occurrences of words and their partners are most probable. the lexicon is: • Formulaic: it relies on partially fixed expressions and highly probable word combinations • Idiomatic: it follows conventions and patterns for usage • Metaphoric: concepts such as time and money." or "Recent research shows that. the cohort model seeks to describe lexical retrieval in terms of segment-by-segment activation of competing lexical entries. This eliminates the need for the speaker to analyse each sentence grammatically. "I hope that you are suited by that" does not)." Language usage. as when a teacher says to a pupil: "Pay attention!" (or else) • Colligation: the grammar that words use (while "I hope that suits you" sounds natural. Typical examples include "I see what you mean" or "Could you please hand me the. is what takes place when the ready-made chunks do not fulfill the speaker's immediate needs. or so-called Key Word in Context (KWICs). in speech. For example. yet deals with a situation effectively. meaning.Lexis (linguistics) 36 Lexis (linguistics) In linguistics. which can be easily combined to form sentences. • Register: the text style in which a word is used ("President vows to support allies" is most likely found in news headlines. Lexicon In short. The major finding of this research is that language users rely to a very high extent on ready-made language "lexical chunks". Grammar rules have been internalised by native speakers. psycholinguistics and neurolinguistics. After millions of samples of spoken and written language have been stored in a database. The most interesting findings have taken place in the dichotomy between language use (how language is used) and language usage (how language could be used). Language usage might be defined as a fall-back position when all other options have been exhausted. involves the question of how words are retrieved from the mental lexicon in online language processing and production.. or words which commonly co-occur with them.[1][2] Formulaic language In recent years.. a lexis (from the Greek: λέξις "word") is the total word-stock or lexicon having items of lexical. whereas "vows" in speech most likely refer to "marriages".

every other that we can. including speeches by outside possibility. Another a people reject violence and the the French vote and now enjoy the immediately investigate the Sri Lankan sources say that the Sheikhdoms too there might be the the twelve member states on the Marie had already looked into the a function of dependency. Early in the century. This is done by means of a t-score. the co-occurrences of other words with the KWIC can be analyzed. the PLF possibility as well. but the were almost defenceless. a t-score . when possible. a refused even to entertain the has a long history. that we use every could be let separately. Cheap terminals possibility of genetic testing brings that possibility. there is a good living must be made. If we take for example the word "stranger" (comparative adjective and noun). (Knowing that there is no who was openly cynical about the so that they can perceive the poisoning and fire. possibility of their threatening to possibility of persuading the [f] possibility of capitalist development. is that the jaunt possibility of economic reform and requires possibility of attempting coitus takes the possibility of achieving socialism 5 possibility of being citizens engaged in possibility of their own death just to be possibility of using the agency to gather possibility replacing that. 37 Concordance for possibility About to be put on looks a real Hiett. and I don't foresee any a genetic factor at work here.[3] Once data has been collected. That's a Severe pain was always a that. it can be sorted to determine the probability of co-occurrences. One common and well-known way is with a concordance: the KWIC is centered and shown with dozens of examples of it in use. both possibility. The oddly and are worried about the was first convened to discuss the in the mi5 line and in the reasons behind the move was the be assessed individually. including every possibility of possibility is `constructive vandalism' possibility of violence can the possibility possibility of winning two seats in the possibility of criminal charges and that her possibility of negotiating with the Tamil possibility of encouraging agitation. there is the Police are investigating the any doctors who think there is a are in a store." Whitlock admitted. The other All this undermines the get. Tell them possibility of a coup d'état to return the possibility of the state being used to smear possibility of a new market. possibility. of course. says that remains a real Graham added. The car we possibility supported by at least a few possibility that any of the nations of the possibility that the recent upsurge in possibility that she was seen a short time possibility that they may have been infected possibility that you are wearing moisturizer possibility that a young adult will be possibility that there was a drug-smuggling possibility that so-called ancient peoples Once such a concordance has been created.Lexis (linguistics) used as "promise"). possibility of an invasion had been apparent possibility of drug use. as with the example for "possibility" below. facing the hearing yesterday that the in 1903. Now that Benn is no longer possibility: As part of the PLO. The given the privilege. The he'd completed his account of the has been devoted to exploring the possibility. say so.

The NOA theory of Lexicon acquisition argues that the metaphoric sorting filter helps to simplify language storage and avoid overload. and discuss "relationship management". Even a cursory observation of examples reveals how commonplace they are in all forms of language use. flow of traffic. "handsome". attract customers. however. as it does not mean "a stranger who is perfect" as we should expect. such as "I'm not sure" + "if they're" + "they're going" to form "I'm not sure if they're going". two examples include "do you want me to". we store separately as unique items to be memorized. as the listener does not need to break down an utterance into its constituent parts. in the sense of its ability to create entirely new language. Intuitively this makes sense: it is a natural short-cut to alleviate the burden of having to "re-invent the wheel" every time we speak. the "‑ed" ending for past tense verbs allows us to decline the neologism "to google" into "googled"). the collocation is considered strong. if the word combination occurs significantly more often than would be expected by its frequency alone. Put together in speech. on their own. "no stranger to" is a very frequent collocation.Lexis (linguistics) analysis will provide us with information such as word frequency in the corpus: words such as "no" and "to" are not surprisingly very frequent. whereby the brain links together ready-made chunks. Grammar Computer research has revealed that grammar.[4] 38 Metaphor as an organizational principle for lexis Another method of effective language storage in the Lexicon includes the use of metaphor as a storage principle. and "dark". or "there was no significant" found in academic registers. If so. overflowing with people. Such a word combination could not be predicted on its own. The study of corpus linguistics provides us with many insights into the real nature of language. Research suggests that language is heavily peppered with such bundles in all registers. In Words and Rules. is avoided as far as possible. ("Storage" and "files" are good examples of how human memory and computer memory have been linked to the same vocabulary. lack meaning. commonly found in speech. using well-known expressions conveys loads of information rapidly. are water: a flood of information.[5] One example is quite common: "time is money". Business is also war: launch an ad campaign. this was not always the case). Perhaps the most interesting example. George Lakoff's work is usually cited as the cornerstone to studies of metaphor in the language. Systems. the irregular verbs. Additionally. and is worth paying closer attention to. as shown above. Its unusually high frequency shows that the two words collocate strongly and as an expression are highly idiomatic. Steven Pinker shows this process at work with regular and irregular verbs: we collect the former. is "no stranger to controversy". on the other hand. Such a sentence eases the burden on the Lexicon as it requires no grammatical analysis whatsoever. which provide us with rules we can apply to unknown words (for example. a word such as "controversy" much less. yet we are hardly aware of their existence. the lexicon seems to be built on the premise that language use is best approached as an assembly process. In this example. In essence. Other patterns. Biber and his team working at the University of Arizona on the Cobuild GSWE noted an unusually high frequency of word bundles that. More interesting. spend and waste both time and money. It then calculates the occurrences of that word together with the KWIC ("joint frequency") to determine if that combination is unusually common. gain a foothold (already a climbing metaphor in military usage) in the market. though. is the idiomatic "perfect stranger". This comes as no surprise. But a sample of one or two quickly suggests their function: they can be inserted as grammatical glue without any prior analysis of form. We can save. they can create comprehensible sentences. so are words such as "mysterious". suffer losses. in other words.[6] . Another interesting example comes from business and sex: businesses penetrate the market.

Clevedon.Lexis (linguistics) 39 Register British linguist Michael K. just as the grammar of speech can be incredibly complicated. are grammatically simple. M (1980). "Spoken and Written Modes of Meaning". Longman." is most likely to be found in conversation. working on the LGSWE worked with four (these are not exhaustive. who. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. conversational anecdotes are full of lexical repetition. K. (1997). One is more communicative (spoken).. news.M. [7] Halliday. [4] Pinker. Words and Rules. pp. however. Oxford: Oxford University Press. These four registers clearly highlight distinctions within language use which would not be clear through a "grammatical" approach. and thus precedes the written language). England. Multilingual Matters and Open University. pp. 65–83. would be a typical news headline. and how we (eventually) find them. comes naturally. M (1999).[7] In other words. . Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. S. not as a newspaper headline. merely exemplary): conversation.. (1987). M (1997). a sentence such as "a cousin of mine. M. and Understanding. Jerome L (2000). "Words. Implementing the Lexical Approach. Mind. the Ingredients of Language and life. D et al. [5] Lakoff. The lexis of the news. literature. Halliday's work suggests something radically different: language behaves in registers. Biber et al. academic. Metaphors we live by. each register favors the use of different words and structures: whereas news headline stories. 284–309. Language Teaching Publications. the other is more a recording tool (written). (1999). He claims that speech is grammatically complex while writing is lexically dense. can be quite dense. Halliday states they are two entirely different entities. Gerry T. [3] Lewis. Not surprisingly.. Hove. G and Johnson. the one who I was talking about the other day—the one who lives in Houston." The Ascent of Babel: An Exploration of Language. University of Chicago Press. Media Texts: Authors and Readers. or the written over the spoken (for the same reasons: the written language being the highest form of rudimentary speech). not the one in Dallas—called me up yesterday to tell me the very same story about Mary. for example. on the other hand. [2] Packard. A. "Prime Minister vows conciliation". References [1] Altmann. Halliday proposes a useful dichotomy of spoken and written language which actually entails a shift in paradigm: while linguistic theory posits the superiority of spoken language over written language (as the former is the origin. The Morphology of Chinese: A Linguistic and Cognitive Approach. [6] Biber. "Chinese words and the lexicon". Basic Books.

most notably in the field of formal semantics. signs. holonymy. etymology and others.[3] Within this view. Despite its elegance. The basic area of study is the meaning of signs.[3] The formal study of semantics intersects with many other fields of inquiry. In these terms. and larger units of discourse (termed texts). over a long period of time. truth conditions. Richard Montague proposed a system for defining semantic entries in the lexicon in terms of the lambda calculus. sounds. such as: • Situation semantics (1980s): truth-values are incomplete. they get assigned based on context • Generative lexicon (1990s): categories (types) are incomplete. it is the study of interpretation of signs or symbols used in agents or communities within particular circumstances and contexts. and led to several attempts at incorporating context. Other forms of semantics include the semantics of programming languages. using truth theory models. the study of the combinatorics of units of a language (without reference to their meaning). which ultimately relate meanings to a set of Tarskiian universals. and proxemics have semantic (meaningful) content. In written language. and the users of the language. The logical predicate thus obtained would be elaborated further. hyponymy. Further related fields include philology. and semiotics. including lexicology. and pragmatics. paronyms. sentences.g. semantics has included the study of sense and denotative reference. antonymy. and each comprises several branches of study. This problem of understanding has been the subject of many formal enquiries. formal logics. as inherent at the levels of words. and get assigned based on context . like words.[5] In international scientific vocabulary semantics is also called semasiology. Linguistics In linguistics. other forms of language bear other semantic content. the syntactic parse of the sentence John ate every bagel would consist of a subject (John) and a predicate (ate every bagel). and symbols. discourse analysis. argument structure. It is often used in ordinary language for denoting a problem of understanding that comes down to word selection or connotation. Montague demonstrated that the meaning of the sentence altogether could be decomposed in to the meanings of its parts and in to relatively few rules of combination. A key concern is how meaning attaches to larger chunks of text. and what they stand for. things like paragraph structure and punctuation bear semantic content. hypernymy. possibly as a result of the composition from smaller units of meaning. communication. although semantics is a well-defined field in its own right. syntax. pragmatics. meronymy. Traditionally.Semantics 40 Semantics Semantics (from Greek: sēmantikós)[1][2] is the study of meaning. In linguistics. thematic roles. the study of the relationships between the symbols of a language. often with synthetic properties.[4] In philosophy of language. phrases. their meaning. Semantics contrasts with syntax. their denotata. synonymy. semantics and reference are closely connected. phrases. The notion of such meaning atoms or primitives is basic to the language of thought hypothesis from the 1970s. facial expressions. It focuses on the relation between signifiers. and the linkage of all of these to syntax. e. semantics is the subfield that is devoted to the study of meaning. metonymy. which may lie outside the logic. body language. and the study of relations between different linguistic units and compounds: homonymy. from the popular to the highly technical. Montague grammar was limited by the context-dependent variability in word sense. and semiotics. The formal study of semantics is therefore complex. Linguistic semantics is the study of meaning that is used for understanding human expression through language. Montague grammar In the late 1960s. The word semantics itself denotes a range of ideas.

even novel concepts were proposed to have been dormant in some sense. such as the problem of resolving indexical or anaphora (e. the interpretation is necessarily dynamic and the meaning of sentences is viewed as context change potentials instead of propositions. based on finite context. so it is also the output. and qualia or subjective experience. Here are some examples from Bangla fuzzy words [12][13] Systems of categories are not objectively out there in the world but are rooted in people's experience. in mental rotation. avoir peur ('to be afraid') has its particular value only because they stand in contrast with one another. where meanings within a linguistic community change over time.[14] A corollary of this is that the conceptual categories (i. following Nietzsche. this x. Some post-structuralists are against the fixed or static meaning of the words. In these situations context serves as the input.Semantics 41 Dynamic turn in semantics In Chomskyan linguistics there was no mechanism for the learning of semantic relations. e. A concrete example of the latter phenomenon is semantic underspecification – meanings are not complete without some elements of context. and language arises out of the "grounding of our conceptual systems in shared embodiment and bodily experience". Davidson. and others.g. i. Indeed. Thus. but are graded (fuzzy at their boundaries) and inconsistent as to the status of their constituent members. red. talked about slippages in fixed meanings. who extends contextual operations (based on type shifting) into the lexicon."[8] This view reflects the position of the later Wittgenstein and his famous game example.[11] An attempt to defend a system based on propositional meaning for semantic underspecification can be found in the generative lexicon model of James Pustejovsky. and the nativist view considered all semantic notions as inborn.[9] However. Derrida. the importance of whose elements lie in the way they function rather than their attachments to things. This view was also thought unable to address many issues such as metaphor or associative meanings. The work of Eleanor Rosch in the 1970s led to a view that natural categories are not characterizable in terms of necessary and sufficient conditions. These categories evolve as learned concepts of the world – meaning is not an objective truth. No word has a value that can be identified independently of what else is in its vicinity. but the interpreted utterance also modifies the context. is now being fiercely debated in the emerging domain of cognitive linguistics[7] and also in the non-Fodorian camp in philosophy of language. but a subjective construct.e. Thus. and semantic change.[6] This view of semantics. language is not a set of labels stuck on things. and is related to the positions of Quine.e. its meaning in a phrase such as red book is similar to many other usages.g. Another issue not addressed by the nativist model was how perceptual cues are combined in thought. craindre ('to fear'). these colours by themselves would not be called red by native speakers. To take an example of one word. the colours implied in phrases such as red wine (very dark). especially the Nyaya view of words as indicators and not carriers of meaning. Prototype theory Another set of concepts related to fuzziness in semantics is based on prototypes. though the concept of archetype sticks to static concept.[10] and may go back to earlier Indian views on language. These instances are contrastive. One may compare it with Jung's archetype. him. or red skin are very different. and can be viewed as compositional. as an innate finite meaning inherent in a lexical unit that can be composed to generate meanings for larger chunks of discourse. learned from experience. last week).[8] The challenge is motivated by: • factors internal to language. the lexicon) will not be identical . so red wine is so called only in comparison with the other kind of wine (which also is not white for the same reasons). and red hair (coppery). but "a toolbox. This view goes back to de Saussure: Each of a set of synonyms like redouter ('to dread'). • factors external to language. Thus meanings are generated "on the fly" (as you go). or red soil.

they differ in that truth-conditional semantics seeks to connect language with statements about the real world (in the form of meta-language statements). the term semantics refers to the meaning of languages.[17] In order to accomplish this distinction any part of a sentence that bears a meaning and combines with the meanings of other constituents is labeled as a semantic constituent. truth values. This theory understands that the meaning of a word is fully reflected by its context. Formal (or truth-conditional) semantics Pioneered by the philosopher Donald Davidson. Semantic constituents that cannot be broken down into more elementary constituents are labeled minimal semantic constituents. rather than with abstract models. or functions from one of these to another. 42 Theories in semantics Model theoretic semantics Originates from Montague's work (see above). This leads to another debate (see the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis or Eskimo words for snow). Lexical and conceptual semantics This theory is an effort to explain properties of argument structure. Here.[18] Computer science In computer science. semantics is about interpretation of an expression. The assumption behind this theory is that syntactic properties of phrases reflect the meanings of the words that head them.[17] Therefore. linguists can better deal with the fact that subtle differences in word meaning correlate with other differences in the syntactic structure that the word appears in. which aims to associate each natural language sentence with a meta-language description of the conditions under which it is true.[15] With this theory. the term is applied to certain types of data structures specifically designed and used for representing information content. In practice. another formalized theory. and more interestingly. A highly formalized theory of natural language semantics in which expressions are assigned denotations (meanings) such as individuals. Additionally. According to Euzenat.[17] Computational semantics Computational semantics is focused on the processing of linguistic meaning. conceptually. for example: `Snow is white' is true if and only if snow is white. semantics "provides the rules for interpreting the syntax which do not provide the meaning directly but constrains the possible interpretations of what is declared. time/space complexity. a distinction between degrees of participation as well as modes of participation are made. The truth of a sentence."[19] In other words. the meaning of a word is constituted by its contextual relations. its logical relation to other sentences. however. . Within this framework the algorithms and architectures are also analyzed in terms of decidability. data structures they require and communication protocols. In order to do this concrete algorithms and architectures are described. truth-conditional semantics is similar to model-theoretic semantics.[15] The way this is gone about is by looking at the internal structure of words. for every individual in the same culture. or indeed. is then evaluated relative to a model. The challenge is to arrive at the truth conditions for any sentences from fixed meanings assigned to the individual words and fixed rules for how to combine them. as opposed to their form (syntax).Semantics for different cultures.[16] These small parts that make up the internal structure of words are termed semantic primitives.[16] Lexical semantics A linguistic theory that investigates word meaning.

using semantic data modelling techniques such as Resource Description Framework (RDF) and Web Ontology Language (OWL). BCPL. Semantic models Terms such as semantic network and semantic data model are used to describe particular types of data models characterized by the use of directed graphs in which the vertices denote concepts or entities in the world. The memories may be transferred intergenerationally or isolated in one generation due to a cultural disruption. In particular. Perl. • Axiomatic semantics: Specific properties of the effect of executing the constructs are expressed as assertions. Like the syntax of a language. but cause the same instructions to be executed: Statement x += y x := x + y ADD x. of remembered experience – while episodic memory is memory for the ephemeral details – the individual features. ALGOL. Python. Thus there may be aspects of the executions that are ignored. y LET X = X + Y x = x + y Set x = x + y ADD Y TO X GIVING X (incf x y) Programming languages C. etc.Semantics 43 Programming languages The semantics of programming languages and other languages is an important issue and area of study in computer science. Thus only the effect is of interest. Standard ML. VHDL. the relationships among words themselves in a semantic network. Ruby. it is of interest how the effect of a computation is produced. Fortran. Different generations may have different experiences at similar points in their own time-lines. ALGOL 68. C++. Dylan. SETL. the general significance. • Denotational semantics: Meanings are modelled by mathematical objects that represent the effect of executing the constructs. Simula. OCaml. Various ways have been developed to describe the semantics of programming languages formally. and the arcs denote relationships between them. not how it is obtained. For instance. building on mathematical logic:[20] • Operational semantics: The meaning of a construct is specified by the computation it induces when it is executed on a machine.e. Ada. Modula-2. This may then create a vertically heterogeneous semantic net for certain words in an otherwise homogeneous culture. Oberon.[21] In a network created by people analyzing their understanding of the word (such as Wordnet) the links and decomposition structures of the network are few in . i. Object Pascal (Delphi). Word meaning is measured by the company they keep. its semantics can be defined exactly. MATLAB Caché ObjectScript COBOL Common Lisp Generally these operations would all perform an arithmetical addition of 'y' to 'x' and store the result in a variable called 'x'. etc. Assembly languages: Intel 8086 BASIC: early BASIC: most dialects. Psychology In psychology. Pascal. Java. Smalltalk. or the unique particulars of experience. Eiffel. The Semantic Web refers to the extension of the World Wide Web via embedding added semantic metadata. the aspect of memory that preserves only the gist. semantic memory is memory for meaning – in other words. PHP. C#. the following statements use different syntaxes.

MIT Press/Bradford Books. html). 04. ISBN 978-0-585-22837-2. Chapter 1. Cambridge.htm) Chomsky.. token. [5] Kitcher. sign. 1990 [17] Cruse. Activation of a concept ( Teaching page for A-level semantics (http://www. Peregrin. 0057:entry=shmantiko/ s)]]. related to meaning. 2010 External links • • • • semanticsarchive. 1991 [16] Jackendoff. Philosophy in the Flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. 2004. which was in the neuter plural in Ancient Greek and meant "things relating to nature". and include part of. Mark (1999). 2007. Philip. Hanne Riis. Jerome. The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory (ed. Palgrave MacMillan 2000. Pinker. On Referring.inf. [6] [7] [8] [9] Barsalou. Semantic Structures. neural networks and predicate calculus techniques. A. Grammar and Conceptualization. Ferdinand (1916). [10] de Saussure. Noam.. Minneapolis. MA. (1989). 13 November 2007(video) (http://blip. Gardenfors/ Abstracts/ conceptualspaces. Blackwell Publishing. Oxford. A Formal Introduction (1st ed. Ronald W. (1999). Peter (2000). significant. MA. or whether word meanings are obtained through analysis of sentences where they appear. Ontology Matching. J. Beth. Harvard University. (Chapter 8). 22(4). A. England: John Wiley & Sons. which are primary. Otto. mark. Jackendoff.. Conceptual Semantics. 8. Lexical & Conceptual Semantics.). to indicate.). A Greek–English Lexicon at Perseus Project [2] The word is derived from the Ancient Greek word σημαντικός (semantikos).revel. ISBN 0-471-92980-8. lu. [12] Bangla Numerals and Problems of Computability (http:/ / linguistlist. IL: University of Chicago Press. Bimal Krishna (1990). Rudolf. and similar links. Semiotic and Semantic Implications of "Authenticity". org/ pubs/ papers/ browse-papers-action.. 30 October 2007 (video) (http://blip. OCLC 93961754. Conceptual Spaces: The Geometry of Thought (http:/ / www. Carnap. Gärdenfors. Wesley (http://www.g. Kate. MN: University of Minnesota Press.g.pdf). 36 [20] Nielson. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyer. Cambridge University Press. 1996 [19] Euzenat. Salmon. Charles F.universalteacher. The Nyaya and Mimamsa schools in Indian vyākaraṇa tradition conducted a centuries-long debate on whether sentence meaning arises through composition on word meanings. Nielson. cfm?PaperID=7802) [13] Computational Linguistics: A Dissenter's Voice (http:/ / ssrn. S. Lappin. Lexical Semantics. The plural is used in analogy with words similar to physics. George. Jaroslav (2003). Psychological Reports. Robert. Chicester. of red color). p. 35. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. ISBN 3-11-016603-8. Kearns. Chapter 1. Chicago. [3] Neurath. D. International Encyclopedia of Unified Science. Cruse. Cambridge. which is from σῆμα (sema). Ray. MA. Lexical Semantics. MA. Oxford Textbooks in Linguistics. D. ReVEL. n. Cambridge. [15] Levin. perseus. Cambridge. Cambridge. Morris. The Course of General Linguistics (Cours de linguistique générale). from σημαίνω (semaino). L. Scientific Explanation. Ideasthesia is a rare psychological phenomenon that in certain individuals associates semantic and sensory representations. edu/ hopper/ text? Semantics with 509192) • Semantics: an interview with Jerry Fodor (http://www.semanticsarchive.. (Editors) (1955). Scott. p. vol. to signify. MIT Press. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. that of the letter A) evokes sensory-like experiences (e. W. . Steven. Meaning and Language: An introduction to Semantics and Pragmatics. 44 References [1] σημαντικός[[Category:Articles containing Ancient Greek language text (http:/ / www. [4] Cruse. Flemming (1995). se/ people/ London: Elsevier.. NY: Basic Books. [11] Matilal. MA. Semantics.Semantics number and revel_8_interview_jerry_fodor. [21] Giannini. Ray. 1986. kind of. Perceptual Symbol Systems. Alan. tufts. com/ abstract=2015944) [14] Lakoff. lucs. The Word and the World: India's Contribution to the Study of Language. Henry George. 106(2):611–612. Various automated technologies are being developed to compute the meaning of words: latent semantic indexing and support vector machines as well as natural language processing. Meaning: The Dynamic Turn. Harvard University. Liddell. J.. Current Research in the Semantics/Pragmatics Interface. New York. 1986 [18] Nerbonne. 2007 . In automated ontologies the links are computed vectors without explicit meaning. 5. Blackwell. 1999 Langacker.

sociology. • • • • It could mean that you have a green light while driving your car. but also on the context of the utterance. The ambiguity with words shows that the descriptive power of any human language is limited. is inferred based on linguistic knowledge and knowledge of the non-linguistic context of the utterance (which may or may not be sufficient to resolve ambiguity). Without knowing the context. The meaning of an utterance. Pragmatics encompasses speech act theory. pragmatics studies how the transmission of meaning depends not only on structural and linguistic knowledge (e. etc. It could mean that you can go ahead with the project. "The cat sat on the mat. grammar. any pre-existing knowledge about those involved. pragmatics explains how language users are able to overcome apparent ambiguity. The cat sat on the mat is a sentence in English. talk in interaction and other approaches to language behavior in philosophy. Similarly.) of the speaker and listener. which is a concrete example of a speech act in a specific context. For example: • It could mean that you have green ambient lighting. This suggests that sentences do not have meaning intrinsically. It could mean that your body has a green glow. and other factors." this is an example of an utterance.[3][4][5] Structural ambiguity The sentence "You have a green light" is ambiguous. it is underspecified (which cat sat on which mat?) and potentially ambiguous.[6] The meaning of the sentence depends on an understanding of the context and the speaker's intent. the inferred intent of the speaker. on the other hand. Thus.Pragmatics 45 Pragmatics Pragmatics is a subfield of linguistics which studies the ways in which context contributes to meaning. there is no such thing as a sentence. if you say to your sister on Tuesday afternoon.[2] In this respect. there is not a meaning associated with a sentence or word. the sentence "Sherlock saw the man with binoculars" could mean that Sherlock observed the man by using binoculars. since meaning relies on the manner. . term. conversational implicature.[1] The ability to understand another speaker's intended meaning is called pragmatic competence. and topics. of an utterance. As defined in linguistics. The closer conscious subjects stick to common words. idioms. time etc. which examines meaning that is conventional or "coded" in a given language. lexicon. expression or word symbolically representing a single true meaning. they can only symbolically represent an idea. place. a sentence is an abstract entity — a string of words divorced from non-linguistic context — as opposed to an utterance. the further they stray from common expressions and topics. In mathematics with Berry's paradox there arose a systematic ambiguity with the word "definable"..[1] Unlike semantics. phrasings. it is difficult to infer the meaning with confidence. and his or her intent. or it could mean that Sherlock observed a man who was holding binoculars.g. the wider the variations in interpretations. the more easily others can surmise their meaning. the identity of the speaker. linguistics and anthropology. It could mean that you possess a light bulb that is tinted green.

• Information Structure. i. the proposition is describing that Santa Claus eats cookies. Without the context. This relationship can be further explained by considering what we mean by "meaning. The meaning of this proposition does not rely on whether or not Santa Claus is eating cookies at the time of its utterance. it expanded upon his idea that language has an analyzable structure. composed of parts that can be defined in relation to others. • The study of the meaning in context. "to pass over. both social and physical. The signified is some entity or concept in the world. • The study of implicatures. Below is an explanation of." In this case. Pragmatics first engaged only in synchronic study. Areas of interest • The study of the speaker's meaning. In many cases. Semantico-referential meaning refers to the aspect of meaning.[7] which comes from πρᾶγμα (pragma). not focusing on the phonetic or grammatical form of an utterance. It requires knowledge of the speaker's identities. how meanings are accomplished through its usage. second." In pragmatics. the study of those aspects of meaning and use.[9] Origins Pragmatics was a reaction to structuralist linguistics as outlined by Ferdinand de Saussure. • Metapragmatics means to understand the context in which the speech event took place. as opposed to examining the historical development of language. Santa Claus could be eating cookies at . by using the methods and goals of formal semantics. it rejected the notion that all meaning comes from signs existing purely in the abstract space of langue. Referential uses of language When we speak of the referential uses of language we are talking about how we use signs to refer to certain items. between speakers in order to understand what determines the choice of what is said and what is not said. for which context of use is an important factor.e. first. to practise. • The study of what is not meant. pure referential meanings elide the complexities of the any speech utterance.[8] and that from πράσσω (prassō). and the influence that a given context can have on the message. An example would be: Signified: the concept cat Signifier: the word "cat" The relationship between the two gives the sign meaning. However. the things that are communicated even though they are not explicitly expressed. A sign is the link or relationship between a signified and the signifier as defined by Saussure and Huguenin. act". meaning amongst others "fit for action". "deed.e. but instead on what the speaker's intentions and beliefs are. there are two different types of meaning to consider: semantico-referential meaning and indexical meaning. historical pragmatics has also come into being. that which is unsaid and unintended. An example would be propositions such as: "Santa Claus eats cookies. to achieve". or unintentional. which describes events in the world that are independent of the circumstance they are uttered in. Meanwhile.Pragmatics 46 Etymology The word pragmatics derives via Latin pragmaticus from the Greek πραγματικός (pragmatikos). what a sign is. as opposed to the intended meaning. • The study of relative distance. and the place and time of the utterance. The signifier represents the signified. i. the study of how utterances are marked in order to efficiently manage the common ground of referred entities between speaker and hearer • Formal Pragmatics.

" describes events that are happening at the time the proposition is uttered. on the other hand. Another example would be: "This" Referential: singular count Indexical: Close by A pure indexical sign does not contribute to the meaning of the propositions at all. By rules of use. which does not change in either circumstance. 47 . Index: the signified and signifier are linked by proximity or the signifier has meaning only because it is pointing to the signified 3. The components of the trichotomy are the following: 1. The referential aspect of its meaning would be '1st person singular' while the indexical aspect would be the person who is speaking (refer above for definitions of semantico-referential and indexical meaning). In contrast. also called "shifters. the proposition. a mammal If someone were to say that a tiger is an omnivorous animal in one context and a mammal in another. As mentioned. is dependent on the context of the utterance and has rules of use. "Santa Claus is eating a cookie right now. Icon: the signified resembles the signifier (signified: a dog's barking noise. meaning the concept chair. signifier: bow-wow) 2. It is an example of a ""non-referential use of language. Peirce's Peircean Trichotomy."" A second way to define the signified and signifier relationship is C. but not what they actually mean. Referential indexical signs are signs where the meaning shifts depending on the context hence the nickname "shifters. Indexical meaning." The former relies on context (indexical and referential meaning) by referring to a chair specifically in the room at that moment while the latter is independent of the context (semantico-referential meaning)." 'I' would be considered a referential indexical sign. The meaning is simply describing something that is the case in the world. Semantico-referential meaning is also present in meta-semantical statements such as: Tiger: omnivorous. the definition of tiger would still be the same. Symbol: the signified and signifier are arbitrarily linked (signified: a cat. signifier: the word cat) These relationships allow us to use signs to convey what we want to say." and pure indexical signs. If two people were in a room and one of them wanted to refer to a characteristic of a chair in the room he would say "this chair has four legs" instead of "a chair has four legs.Pragmatics any time and the meaning of the proposition would remain the same. One way to define the relationship is by placing signs in two categories: referential indexical signs. The meaning of the sign tiger is describing some animal in the world.S. Example: "I" Whom "I" refers to depends on the context and the person uttering it. it is meant that indexicals can tell you when they are used. these meanings are brought about through the relationship between the signified and the signifier.

L. Honorifics are another common form of deference index and demonstrate the speaker's respect or esteem for the addressee via special forms of address and/or self-humbling first-person pronouns. Austin introduced the concept of the performative. a Dyirbal speaker has to switch to a completely separate lexicon reserved for that purpose.Pragmatics 48 Non-referential uses of language Silverstein's "pure" indexes Michael Silverstein has argued that "nonreferential" or "pure" indices do not contribute to an utterance's referential meaning but instead "signal some particular value of one or more contextual variables. as seen in the Aboriginal Dyirbal language of Australia. it is neither true nor false) • Its uttering performs an action rather than simply describing one However. the verb forms of female Koasati speakers take the suffix "-s". Speech act theory J. but the pragmatic meaning is vastly different. If any of those relatives are present. child-in-law."[10] Although nonreferential indexes are devoid of semantico-referential meaning. The performative Main articles: Performative utterance. e.g. The most common example of a deference index is the V form in a language with a T-V distinction. In this language and some others. The sorts of contexts that such indexes can mark are varied." • "This meeting is now adjourned. Examples: • "I hereby pronounce you man and wife.e.e. there is a social taboo against the use of the everyday lexicon in the presence of certain relatives (mother-in-law. descriptive) utterances. Examples include: • Sex indexes are affixes or inflections that index the sex of the speaker." . the widespread phenomenon in which there are multiple second-person pronouns that correspond to the addressee's relative status or familiarity to the speaker." • "I accept your apology. and maternal uncle's child). contrasted in his writing with "constative" (i. they do encode "pragmatic" meaning. • Deference indexes are words that signal social differences (usually related to status or age) between the speaker and the addressee. • An Affinal taboo index is an example of avoidance speech that produces and reinforces sociological distance. a performative utterance must also conform to a set of felicity conditions. a performative is a type of utterance characterized by two distinctive features: • It is not truth-evaluable (i. paternal aunt's child. the semantico-referential meaning of the utterances is unchanged from that of the other possible (but often impermissible) forms. According to Austin's original formulation. In all of these cases.

since a switch in code effects a shift in pragmatic force. it thus pervades the field of linguistic anthropology. "Wow. particularly with strangers.Pragmatics 49 Jakobson's six functions of language Roman Jakobson. sociolinguists tend to be more interested in variations in language within such communities.[12] . Because pragmatics describes generally the forces in play for a given utterance. • The Metalingual (alternatively called "metalinguistic" or "reflexive") Function is the use of language (what Jakobson calls "Code") to discuss or describe itself.g. and only one of which is the referential (which corresponds to the context of the speech event). "The autumn leaves have all fallen now. For example. The Phatic Function can be observed in greetings and casual discussions of the weather." • The Expressive (alternatively called "emotive" or "affective") Function relates to the Addresser and is best exemplified by interjections and other sound changes that do not alter the denotative meaning of an utterance but do add information about the Addresser's (speaker's) internal state. e. e. Related fields There is considerable overlap between pragmatics and sociolinguistics. The six factors of an effective verbal communication. identity. the study of code switching directly relates to pragmatics. • The Phatic Function is language for the sake of interaction and is therefore associated with the Contact factor. expanding on the work of Karl Bühler. The descriptive statements of the referential function can consist of both definite descriptions and deictic words. Pragmatics helps anthropologists relate elements of language to broader social phenomena. object or mental state. it includes the study of power. The six constitutive factors of a speech event Context Message Addresser---------------------Addressee Contact Code The six functions of language Referential Poetic Emotive-----------------------Conative Phatic Metalingual • The Referential Function corresponds to the factor of Context and describes a situation. "Tom! Come inside and eat!" • The Poetic Function focuses on "the message for its own sake"[12] and is the operative function in poetry as well as slogans. To each one corresponds a communication function (not displayed in this [11] picture). described six "constitutive factors" of a speech event. and their interactions with individual speech acts. However. each of which represents the privileging of a corresponding function. what a view!" • The Conative Function engages the Addressee directly and is best illustrated by vocatives and imperatives. since both share an interest in linguistic meaning as determined by usage in a speech community. race.g. gender. e.g. The six constitutive factors and their corresponding functions are diagrammed below.

Pragmatics According to Charles W. Morris, pragmatics tries to understand the relationship between signs and their users, while semantics tends to focus on the actual objects or ideas to which a word refers, and syntax (or "syntactics") examines relationships among signs or symbols. Semantics is the literal meaning of an idea whereas pragmatics is the implied meaning of the given idea. Speech Act Theory, pioneered by J.L. Austin and further developed by John Searle, centers around the idea of the performative, a type of utterance that performs the very action it describes. Speech Act Theory's examination of Illocutionary Acts has many of the same goals as pragmatics, as outlined above.


Pragmatics in literary theory
Pragmatics (more specifically, Speech Act Theory's notion of the performative) underpins Judith Butler's theory of gender performativity. In Gender Trouble, she claims that gender and sex are not natural categories, but socially constructed roles produced by "reiterative acting." In Excitable Speech she extends her theory of performativity to hate speech and censorship, arguing that censorship necessarily strengthens any discourse it tries to suppress and therefore, since the state has sole power to define hate speech legally, it is the state that makes hate speech performative. Jaques Derrida remarked that some work done under Pragmatics aligned well with the program he outlined in his book Of Grammatology. Émile Benveniste argued that the pronouns "I" and "you" are fundamentally distinct from other pronouns because of their role in creating the subject. Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari discuss linguistic pragmatics in the fourth chapter of A Thousand Plateaus ("November 20, 1923--Postulates of Linguistics"). They draw three conclusions from Austin: (1) A performative utterance does not communicate information about an act second-hand—it is the act; (2) Every aspect of language ("semantics, syntactics, or even phonematics") functionally interacts with pragmatics; (3) There is no distinction between language and speech. This last conclusion attempts to refute Saussure's division between langue and parole and Chomsky's distinction between surface structure and deep structure simultaneously. [13]

Significant works
• • • • • • • • J. L. Austin's How To Do Things With Words Paul Grice's cooperative principle and conversational maxims Brown & Levinson's Politeness Theory Geoffrey Leech's politeness maxims Levinson's Presumptive Meanings Jürgen Habermas's universal pragmatics Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson's relevance theory Dallin D. Oaks's Structural Ambiguity in English: An Applied Grammatical Inventory



[1] Mey, Jacob L. (1993) Pragmatics: An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell (2nd ed. 2001). [2] Shaozhong, Liu. "What is pragmatics?" (http:/ / www. gxnu. edu. cn/ Personal/ szliu/ definition. html). . Retrieved 18 March 2009. [3] Daejin Kim et al. (2002) "The Role of an Interactive Book Reading Program in the Development of Second Language Pragmatic Competence", The Modern Language Journal, Vol. 86, No. 3 (Autumn, 2002), pp. 332-348 [4] Masahiro Takimoto (2008) "The Effects of Deductive and Inductive Instruction on the Development of Language Learners' Pragmatic Competence", The Modern Language Journal, Vol. 92, No. 3 (Fall, 2008), pp. 369-386 [5] Dale April Koike (1989) "Pragmatic Competence and Adult L2 Acquisition: Speech Acts in Interlanguage", The Modern Language Journal, Vol. 73, No. 3 (Autumn, 1989), pp. 279-289 [6] http:/ / ocw. mit. edu/ OcwWeb/ Linguistics-and-Philosophy/ 24-903Spring-2005/ CourseHome/ [7] πραγματικός (http:/ / www. perseus. tufts. edu/ hopper/ text?doc=Perseus:text:1999. 04. 0057:entry=pragmatiko/ s), Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, on Perseus [8] πρᾶγμα (http:/ / www. perseus. tufts. edu/ hopper/ text?doc=Perseus:text:1999. 04. 0057:entry=pra=gma), Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, on Perseus [9] πράσσω (http:/ / www. perseus. tufts. edu/ hopper/ text?doc=Perseus:text:1999. 04. 0057:entry=pra/ ssw), Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, on Perseus [10] Silverstein 1976 [11] Middleton, Richard (1990/2002). Studying Popular Music, p. 241. Philadelphia: Open University Press. ISBN 0-335-15275-9. [12] Duranti 1997 [13] Deleuze, Gilles and Félix Guattari (1987) [1980]. A Thousand Plateaus. University of Minnesota Press.

• Austin, J. L. (1962) How to Do Things With Words. Oxford University Press. • Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson. (1978) Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge University Press. • Carston, Robyn (2002) Thoughts and Utterances: The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Oxford: Blackwell. • Clark, Herbert H. (1996) "Using Language". Cambridge University Press. • Cole, Peter, ed.. (1978) Pragmatics. (Syntax and Semantics, 9). New York: Academic Press. • Dijk, Teun A. van. (1977) Text and Context. Explorations in the Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse. London: Longman. • Grice, H. Paul. (1989) Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press. • Laurence R. Horn and Gregory Ward. (2005) The Handbook of Pragmatics. Blackwell. • Leech, Geoffrey N. (1983) Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman. • Levinson, Stephen C. (1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press. • Levinson, Stephen C. (2000). Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implicature. MIT Press. • Lin, G. H. C., & Perkins, L. (2005). Cross-cultural discourse of giving and accepting gifts. International Journal of Communication, 16,1-2, 103-12 (ERIC Collections in ED 503685 ED503685.pdf) • Lin, G. H. C. (2007). The significant of pragmatics. Mingdao Journal, Vol, 3, 91-102 ERIC Collection in ED503682<> • Lin. G. H. C., Su, S. C. F., & Ho, M. M. H. (2009). Pragmatics and communicative competences. Proceedings of the景 文 科 技 大 學 應 用 英 語 系2009研 討 會, 54-60 (ERIC Collections in ED514939<>) • Mey, Jacob L. (1993) Pragmatics: An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell (2nd ed. 2001). • Kepa Korta and John Perry. (2006) Pragmatics ( The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy • Potts, Christopher. (2005) The Logic of Conventional Implicatures. Oxford Studies in Theoretical Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Pragmatics • Robinson, Douglas. (2003). Performative Linguistics: Speaking and Translating as Doing Things With Words. London and New York: Routledge. • Robinson, Douglas. (2006). Introducing Performative Pragmatics. London and New York: Routledge. • Sperber, Dan and Wilson, Deirdre. (2005) Pragmatics ( In F. Jackson and M. Smith (eds.) Oxford Handbook of Contemporary Philosophy. OUP, Oxford, 468-501. (Also available here ( • Thomas, Jenny (1995) Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics. Longman. • Verschueren, Jef. (1999) Understanding Pragmatics. London, New York: Arnold Publishers. • Verschueren, Jef, Jan-Ola Östman, Jan Blommaert, eds. (1995) Handbook of Pragmatics. Amsterdam: Benjamins. • Watzlawick, Paul, Janet Helmick Beavin and Don D. Jackson (1967) Pragmatics of Human Communication: A Study of Interactional Patterns, Pathologies, and Paradoxes. New York: Norton. • Wierzbicka, Anna (1991) Cross-cultural Pragmatics. The Semantics of Human Interaction. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. • Yule, George (1996) Pragmatics (Oxford Introductions to Language Study). Oxford University Press. • Silverstein, Michael. 1976. "Shifters, Linguistic Categories, and Cultural Description," in Meaning and Anthropology, Basso and Selby, eds. New York: Harper & Row • • • • Wardhaugh, Ronald. (2006). "An Introduction to Sociolinguistics". Blackwell. Duranti, Alessandro. (1997). "Linguistic Anthropology". Cambridge University Press. Carbaugh, Donal. (1990). "Cultural Communication and Intercultural Contact." LEA. Mira Ariel (2010). Defining Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-73203-1.


External links
• Journal of Pragmatics ( description#description), An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language Studies • Liu, Shaozhong, "What is Pragmatics?", Eprint ( • wiki project in comparative pragmatics: European Communicative Strategies (ECSTRA) (http://www1. (directed by Joachim Grzega)



An orthography is a standardized system for using a particular writing system (script) to write a particular language. It includes rules of spelling. Other elements of written language that are part of orthography include hyphenation, capitalization, word breaks, emphasis, and punctuation. Most significant languages in the modern era are written down, and for most such languages a standard orthography has developed, often based on a standard variety of the language, and thus exhibiting less dialect variation than the spoken language. Sometimes there may be variation in a language's orthography, as between American and British spelling in the case of English. If a language uses multiple writing systems, it may have distinct orthographies, as is the case with Kurdish, Uyghur, Serbian, Inuktitut and Turkish. In some cases orthography is regulated by bodies such as language academies, although for many languages (including English) there are no such authorities, and orthography develops through less formal processes. Orthography is distinct from typography, which is concerned with principles of typesetting.

Etymology and meaning
The English word orthography dates from the 15th century. It comes from the French orthographie, from Latin orthographia, which derives from Greek ὀρθός orthós, "correct", and γράφειν gráphein, "to write".[1] Orthography is largely concerned with matters of spelling, and in particular the relationship between phonemes and graphemes in a language.[2][3] Other elements that may be considered part of orthography include hyphenation, capitalization, word breaks, emphasis, and punctuation.[4] Orthography thus describes or defines the set of symbols used in writing a language, and the rules about how to use those symbols. Most natural languages developed as oral languages, and writing systems have usually been crafted or adapted as ways of representing the spoken language. The rules for doing this tend to become standardized for a given language, leading to the development of an orthography that is generally considered "correct". In linguistics the term orthography is often used to refer to any method of writing a language, without judgment as to right and wrong, with a scientific understanding that orthographic standardization exists on a spectrum of strength of convention. The original sense of the word, though, implies a dichotomy of correct and incorrect, and the word is still most often used to refer specifically to a thoroughly standardized, prescriptively correct, way of writing a language. A distinction may be made here between etic and emic viewpoints: the purely descriptive (etic) approach, which simply considers any system that is actually used—and the emic view, which takes account of language users' perceptions of correctness, which are analogous in some ways to a moral sense of right and wrong.

Units and notation
Orthographic units, such as letters of an alphabet, are technically called graphemes. These are a type of abstraction, analogous to the phonemes of spoken languages; different physical forms of written symbols are considered to represent the same grapheme if the differences between them are not significant for meaning. For example, different forms of the letter "b" are all considered to represent a single grapheme in the orthography of, say, English. Graphemes or sequences of them are sometimes placed between angle brackets, as in ⟨b⟩ or ⟨back⟩. This distinguishes them from phonemic transcription, which is placed between slashes (/b/, /bæk/), and from phonetic transcription, which is placed between square brackets ([b], [bæk]).

and a number of detailed classifications have been proposed. English orthography. depending on what type of unit each symbol serves to represent. their pronunciation in standard Tokyo dialect) when the character is a voicing of an underlying ち or つ (see rendaku). A more systematic example is that of abjads like the Arabic and Hebrew alphabets.Orthography 54 Types The writing systems on which orthographies are based can be divided into a number of types. including reasons why such correspondence may break down. を. Defective orthographies In some cases an orthography based on the principle that symbols correspond to phonemes may lack characters to represent all the phonemes or all the phonemic distinctions in the language. in which the short vowels are normally left unwritten and must be inferred by the reader. and え. syllabic (with symbols representing syllables). as relics of historical kana usage. One consequence of this is that many spellings come to reflect a word's morphophonemic structure rather than its purely phonemic structure (for example. Correspondence with pronunciation Orthographies that use alphabets and syllabaries are based on the principle that the written symbols (graphemes) correspond to units of sound of the spoken language: phonemes in the former case. although the correspondence between letters and phonemes is still not exact. for example. This is discussed further at Phonemic orthography: Morphophonemic features. and the use of は. For a full discussion. However. Sometimes this problem is addressed by the use of such devices as . and hence spellings correspond to historical rather than present-day pronunciation. and alphabetic (with symbols roughly representing phonemes). An orthography in which the correspondences between spelling and pronunciation are highly complex or inconsistent is called a deep orthography (or less formally. see Phonemic orthography. Spanish and Finnish represent pronunciation much more faithfully. and へ to represent the sounds わ. is highly irregular. but as a representation of the modern language it frequently also reflects morphophonemic features. One of the main reasons for which spelling and pronunciation deviate is that sound changes taking place in the spoken language are not always reflected in the orthography. An example in English is that the digraph th is required to represent two different phonemes (as in either and ether). the English regular past tense morpheme is consistently spelled -ed in spite of its different pronunciations in various words). For full discussion of degrees of correspondence between spelling and pronunciation in alphabetic orthographies. When an alphabet is borrowed to represent a language other than it did originally—as has been done with the Latin alphabet for many languages. this correspondence is not exact. Different languages' orthographies offer different degrees of correspondence between spelling and pronunciation. This is called a defective orthography. An orthography with relatively simple and consistent correspondences is called shallow (and the language has regular spelling). or Japanese Katakana for non-Japanese words—it often proves defective in representing the new language's phonemes. The principal types are logographic (with symbols representing words or morphemes). お. although with a few exceptions where symbols reflect historical or morphophonemic features: notably the use of ぢ ji and づ zu (rather than じ ji and ず zu. see Writing system: Functional classification of writing systems. in virtually all cases. whereas the orthographies of languages such as Russian. the language is said to have irregular spelling). The Korean hangul system was also originally an extremely shallow orthography. The syllabary systems of Japanese (hiragana and katakana) are examples of almost perfectly shallow orthographies – the kana correspond with almost perfect consistency to the spoken syllables. Serbian orthography is remarkably consistent: approximation of the principle "one letter per sound". Many writing systems combine features of more than one of these types. and syllables in the latter.

Orthography.) 1964. as different from linguistics. analogy. Mark S. John P. pp. or meaning • Syntactics: Relations among signs in formal structures • Pragmatics: Relation between signs and the effects they have on the people who use them Semiotics is frequently seen as having important anthropological dimensions. which represent those same sounds in Czech). 396. 93." In Terry Crowley. Robert Calfee (2005).A. semiotics studies also non-linguistic sign systems. [3] Donohue. • Venezky. metaphor.Orthography digraphs (such as sh and ch in English. W.omniglot. Language Description. In general. (http://lonestar. Morphology. 55 References [1] orthography (http:/ / www. The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Writing Systems.). studies the structure and meaning of language more specifically. Online Etymology Dictionary [2] Seidenberg. Amsterdam: Elsevier. where pairs of letters represent single sounds)." In: Ram Frost & Leonard Katz (eds. their semiotic niche in the world (see semiosis). "Lexicography for Your Friends.php/Phonemic_awareness) page of the CTER wiki • lonestar. Chart semiotics of Social Networking . their denotata. "Beyond Orthographic Depth in Reading: Equitable Division of Labor. Florian. and Meaning. Phonology. Amsterdam: or the addition of completely new symbols (as some languages have introduced the letter w to the Latin alphabet). • Smalley. pp. [4] Coulmas. Von Richard L. Tom Trabasso. ISBN 0-8058-5089-9. likeness.ed. 1996. p. which. However. From Orthography to Pedagogy..htm) orthography of Old English Semiotics Semiotics. & Diana Eades (eds. htm#CODEPART1) • Omniglot – writing systems & languages of the world (http://www. External links • Videos: The History and Impact of Writing in the West (http://www. Oxford: Blackwell. diacritics (like the caron on the letters š and č.[1] However. History and Development: Linguistic Indulgence in Memory of Terry Crowley.). Sabatini. Massaro.uiuc. Orthography studies: articles on new writing systems (United Bible Society. They examine areas belonging also to the natural sciences – such as how organisms make predictions about. London). signification. for its part. Dominic W. for example. 85–118. 379. and communication. Semiotics is closely related to the field of linguistics. etymonline. 2007. Umberto Eco proposes that every cultural phenomenon can be studied as communication. indication. designation. some semioticians focus on the logical dimensions of the science. Routledge. ( is the study of signs and sign processes (semiosis). and adapt to. 1992. Mark.texas.childrenofthecode. also called semiotic studies and including (in the Saussurean tradition) semiology. Jeff Siegel. – a privately run orthography website • Phonemic awareness (http://wik. php?search=orthography& searchmode=none). com/ index. 395–406. Semiotics is often divided into three branches: • Semantics: Relation between signs and the things to which they refer. semiotic theories take signs or sign systems as their object of study: the communication of information in living organisms is covered in biosemiotics (including zoosemiotics). symbolism.

and tried (not excogitated. and. with all the psychological. especially happiness: or. that which man himself ought to do.. "observant of signs"[4] (from σημεῖον . It would investigate the nature of signs and the laws governing them. 'sign'). for the attainment of any end. and their manner of operation: or. in the social sciences: It is.[7] but an exact knowledge of medicinal physiology (founded on observation.[8] not commanding) medicines. a place ready for it in advance. But it has a right to exist.. naming it Σημειωτικη (Semeiotike) and explaining it as "the doctrine of signs" in the following terms: Nor is there any thing to be relied upon in Physick. —Locke.[2] More precisely. (sēmeiōtikos). thirdly. 174 Locke then elaborates on the nature of this third category. a mark"[5]) and it was first used in English by Henry Stubbes[6] in a very precise sense to denote the branch of medical science relating to the interpretation of signs. . which he called semiology. Chapter 21 of An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690). 4.Semiotics Syntactics is the branch of semiotics that deals with the formal properties of signs and symbols.. —Locke. syntactics deals with the "rules that govern how words are combined to form phrases and sentences. Since it does not yet exist. It would form part of social psychology. semiotics. and linguistics will thus be assigned to a clearly defined place in the field of human knowledge. and hence of general psychology.[9] and which is philosophical logic pursued in terms of signs and sign processes.21. p. biological. 56 Terminology The term. however. 175 In the nineteenth century. first. secondly. 1823/1963. "a sign. —Cited in Chandler's "Semiotics For Beginners". one cannot say for certain that it will exist. I think science may be divided properly into these three sorts. that is. the ways and means whereby the knowledge of both the one and the other of these is attained and communicated. which was spelled semeiotics.4. being either."[3] Charles Morris adds that semantics deals with the relation of signs to their designata and the objects which they may or do denote. and sociological phenomena which occur in the functioning of signs. derives from the Greek σημειωτικός. pragmatics deals with the biotic aspects of semiosis. their relations. possible to conceive of a science which studies the role of signs as part of social life. The laws which semiology will discover will be laws applicable in linguistics. as they are in themselves. Linguistics is only one branch of this general science. as a rational and voluntary agent. We shall call it semiology (from the Greek semeîon. Introduction. method of curing. the nature of things. Here he explains how science can be divided into three parts: All that can fall within the compass of human understanding. Ferdinand de Saussure. not principles). 1823/ intelligence capable of learning by experience".[10] Charles Morris followed Peirce in using the term "semiotic" and in extending the discipline beyond human communication to animal learning and use of signals. or formal doctrine of signs". John Locke used the terms semeiotike and semeiotics in Book 4. which abstracts "what must be the characters of all signs used by. Charles Sanders Peirce defined what he termed "semiotic" (which he sometimes spelled as "semeiotic") as the "quasi-necessary.sēmeion. p. founded his semiotics..

1990: 16). there may be found some differences regarding subjects. Both disciplines also recognize that the technical process cannot be separated from the fact that the receiver must decode the data. Peirce. and mechanics involved. cognitive science. and shared data. Scholars who have talked about semiosis in their sub-theories of semiotics include C. methods. the body movements they make to show attitude or emotion. . and Umberto Eco.e. [11] The research on cognitive semiotics researcher brings together semiotics from linguistics. trans. as this example shows. In a sense. Color-coding hot. be able to distinguish the data as salient and make meaning out of it. Semiosis or semeiosis is the process that forms meaning from any organism's apprehension of the world through signs. John Deely. Indeed. This difference does not match the separation between analytic and continental philosophy. i. Philosophy of language pays more attention to natural languages or to languages in general. On a closer look. Different authors have called themselves "philosopher of language" or "semiotician". But that word can transmit that meaning only within the language's grammatical structures and codes (see syntax and semantics). In Messages and Meanings: An Introduction to Semiotics. with providing new information into human signification and its manifestation in cultural practices. who. the community must agree on a simple meaning (a denotative meaning) within their language. Thus it broadens the range of sign systems and sign relations. The two faucets were probably sold as a coded set. while semiotics is closer to some of the humanities (including literary theory) and to cultural anthropology. Marcel Danesi (1994) suggested that semioticians' priorities were to study signification first and communication second. the difference lies between separate traditions rather than subjects. Cognitive Semiotics is combinding methods and theories developed in the disciplines of cognitive methods and theories developed in semiotics and the humanities. To coin a word to refer to a thing (see lexical words). communication theorists construct models based on codes. media. communication is defined as the process of transferring data from a source to a receiver. although in each field the emphasis is different. and contexts to explain the biology. To explain the relationship between semiotics and communication studies. This implies that there is a necessary overlap between semiotics and communication. Peirce's definition of the term "semiotic" as the study of necessary features of signs also has the effect of distinguishing the discipline from linguistics as the study of contingent features that the world's languages happen to have acquired in the course of human evolution. Semiotics differs from linguistics in that it generalizes the definition of a sign to encompass signs in any medium or sensory modality. considered the theoretical study of communication irrelevant to his application of semiotics. but the code is unusable (and ignored) as there is a single water supply. and are able to add new shades of connotation to every aspect of life. many of the concepts are shared. This process of carrying meaning depends on the use of codes that may be the individual sounds or letters that humans use to form words. the coding may be rendered meaningless because of context. as a musicologist. A more extreme view is offered by Jean-Jacques Nattiez (1987. while semiotics is deeply concerned about non-linguistic signification. and extends the definition of language in what amounts to its widest analogical or metaphorical sense.and cold-water faucets is common in many cultures but. Codes also represent the values of the culture.. or even something as general as the clothes they wear. psychology. Hence. and related disciplines on a common meta-theoretical platform of concepts.Semiotics 57 Formulations Semioticians classify signs or sign systems in relation to the way they are transmitted (see modality). Perhaps more difficult is the distinction between semiotics and the philosophy of language. S. Philosophy of language also bears a stronger connection to linguistics.

as an object. metaphor.Semiotics 58 History The importance of signs and signification has been recognized throughout much of the history of philosophy. rule.e.[13] Semiotics is usually defined as the study of signs. He regarded formal semiotic as logic per se and part of philosophy. thus leading to further interpretants." Saussure believed that dismantling signs was a real science. For a summary of Peirce's contributions to semiotics. itself a sign.[20] Signs also enter into various kinds of meaningful combinations. Bruner. in order to form a meaning-imbued "sign. major thinkers. Morris. and symbolic signs. and Augustine considered the nature of the sign within a conventional system. deductive. Saussure posited that no word is inherently meaningful. defined semiosis as an irreducibly triadic process wherein something. Saussure's insistence on the arbitrariness of the sign has also influenced later philosophers and theorists such as Jacques Derrida. but also semblances such as kindred sensible qualities. or even fictional (Hamlet). such as a state of agitation. and as allied to but distinct from logic's pure mathematics. has argued that semiotic theories are implicit in the work of most. the "father" of modern linguistics. These theories have had a lasting effect in Western philosophy. and it must be combined in the brain with the "signified. such as a word's usual meaning. intersecting to form ten (rather than 27) classes of sign. and in psychology as well. Tomasello) and linguistics (Langacker. for in doing so we come to an empirical understanding of how humans synthesize physical stimuli into words and other abstract concepts. to which inquiry taken far enough would be destined and with which any actual interpretant can at most coincide. Ferdinand de Saussure coined the term semiologie while teaching his landmark "Course on General Linguistics" at the University of Geneva from 1906–11. as also encompassing study of arguments (hypothetical. or (3) final or normal. In his Course in General Linguistics. Umberto Eco. and narrative. researchers from developmental and cognitive psychology (Bates. especially through scholastic philosophy. just about any semiotic theory from those of Peirce and Saussure to those of Eco (1999) and Hoffmeyer (1996) – could qualify as a cognitive semiotics [14] In the last two decades of the century. Plato and Aristotle both explored the relationship between signs and the world. This sets him apart from previous philosophers such as Plato or the Scholastics.[15] Some important semioticians • Charles Sanders Peirce (1839–1914).e.[16] Semiosis is logically structured to perpetuate itself.[12] Max Black attributes the work of Bertrand Russell as being seminal. The object can be quality. . More recently. relating the signifier as the form of the word or phrase uttered. linguistic. and inductive) and inquiry's methods including pragmatism. Saussure himself credits the American linguist William Dwight Whitney (1827–1894) with insisting on the arbitrary nature of the sign. according to Saussure. The interpretant can be (1) immediate to the sign. or (2) dynamic. the object as represented in the sign. Rather a word is only a "signifier. logically determines or influences something as a sign to determine or influence something as an interpretation or interpretant. i. the object as it really is. who thought that there must be some connection between a signifier and the object it signifies. see Liszka (1996) or Atkin (2006). fact.[17] His semiotic[18] covered not only artificial. on which the immediate object is founded. and indices such as reactions. the representation of something. Lakoff) turned increasingly to “experiential” notions such as joint attention. perhaps all. or (2) dynamic. the ultimate ramifications of the sign about its object. or more generally meaning." or the thing itself. in his Semiotics and the Philosophy of Language. all that the sign immediately expresses. and Jean Baudrillard. the polysemy and popularity of the term “cognitive”. • Ferdinand de Saussure (1857–1913). Peirce covered both semantic and syntactical issues in his speculative grammar. proposed a dualistic notion of signs. He came circa 1903[19] to classify any sign by three interdependent trichotomies. Talmy. a noted logician who founded philosophical pragmatism. the sign is completely arbitrary. there was no necessary connection between the sign and its meaning. Roland Barthes. It is important to note that. Early theorists in this area include Charles W." i. and can be (1) immediate to the sign. to the signified as the mental concept.

semantics. Sebeok insisted that all communication was made possible by the relationship between an organism and the environment it lives in. which situated language use in social process rather than in an entirely decontexualized Saussurean langue. Morris (1901–1979). relaxing wine. whose work has been influential in the field of literary theory and Marxist theory of ideology. A picture of a full. or connotations. thus establishing the field that is now called biosemiotics. 1940). this time relating to a new signified: the idea of healthy. • Louis Hjelmslev (1899–1965) developed a formalist approach to Saussure's structuralist theories. For instance. In his 1938 Foundations of the Theory of Signs. developed a diagnostic method based on semiotic and biosemiotic analyses.: Marksizm i Filosofiya Yazyka) developed a counter-Saussurean linguistics. thus raising some of the issues addressed by burtoni philosophy of mind and coining the term zoosemiotics. Unlike his mentor George Herbert Mead. alcoholic beverage – wine. He found semiotics useful in conducting these critiques. without regard to meaning. Umwelt. and pragmatics. Written in the late 1920s in the USSR. to describe the individual's subjective world. and he invented the concept of functional circle (Funktionskreis) as a general model of sign processes. In his Theory of Meaning (Bedeutungslehre. was a prolific and wide-ranging American semiotician. However. Morris was accused by John Dewey[21] of misreading Peirce. trying to shift the focus of discipline from signs to systems of signification. a student of Charles W. • Thomas A. dark bottle is a sign. a signifier relating to a signified: a fermented. the bourgeois take this signified and apply their own emphasis to it. These insights brought Barthes very much in line with similar Marxist theory. • Charles W. Voloshinov's Marxism and the Philosophy of Language (tr. His best known work is Prolegomena to a Theory of Language. He borrowed the German word for 'environment'. Barthes explained that these bourgeois cultural myths were second-order signs. making ‘wine’ a new signifier. Hjelmslev. • Roland Barthes (1915–1980) was a French literary theorist and semiotician. • Juri Lotman (1922–1993) was the founding member of the Tartu-Estonia (or Tartu-Moscow) Semiotic School. He developed a semiotic approach to the study of culture and established a communication model for the study of 59 . Sebeok (1920–2001).Semiotics • Jakob von Uexküll (1864–1944) studied the sign processes in animals. He would often critique pieces of cultural material to expose how bourgeois society used them to impose its values upon others. he defined semiotics as grouping the triad syntax. • Algirdas Julien Greimas (1917–1992) developed a structural version of semiotics named generative semiotics. His theories develop the ideas of Saussure. the portrayal of wine drinking in French society as a robust and healthy habit would be a bourgeois ideal perception contradicted by certain realities (i. Morris was a behaviorist and sympathetic to the Vienna Circle positivism of his colleague Rudolf Carnap. Though he insisted that animals are not capable of language. • Thure von Uexküll (1908–2004). • Valentin Voloshinov (1895–1936) was a Soviet/Russian linguist. the "father" of modern psychosomatic medicine. Motivations for such manipulations vary from a desire to sell products to a simple desire to maintain the status quo. he expanded the purview of semiotics to include non-human signaling and communication Signaling and communication between the Astatotilapia systems. He also posed the equation between semiosis (the activity of interpreting signs) and life – the view that has further developed by Copenhagen-Tartu biosemiotic school. Morris. that wine can be unhealthy and inebriating). and Maurice Merleau-Ponty. Claude Lévi-Strauss. which was expanded in Résumé of the Theory of Language. robust.e. his scientific calculus of language. Syntax studies the interrelation of the signs. he described the semiotic approach to biology. Semantics studies the relation between the signs and the objects to which they apply. a formal development of glossematics. Pragmatics studies the relation between the sign system and its human (or animal) user.

Communication. European Journal of Semiotics.Semiotics text semiotics. • Umberto Eco (1932–present) made a wider audience aware of semiotics by various publications. Issues of technological determinism in the choice of media and the design of communication strategies assume new importance in this age of mass media. In some countries. established by Juri Lotman and published by Tartu University Press. whether it be on a large scale. Vyacheslav Vsevolodovich Ivanov. based on indexes. as in architecture. • Eliseo Verón (1935–present) developed his "Social Discourse Theory" inspired in the Peircian conception of "Semiosis". (e. Sebeok). Zeitschrift für Semiotik. icons. La struttura assente. La production de signes) the "iconism" or "iconic signs" (taken from Peirce's most famous triadic relation. replica. . et al. The major semiotic book series "Semiotics. and the visual semiotics. "text" is any message preserved in a form whose existence is independent of both sender and receiver. its role is limited to literary criticism and an appreciation of audio and visual media. critical discourse analysis in Postmodernism and deconstruction in Post-structuralism). encyclopedia. He also introduced the concept of the semiosphere. For these purposes. and invention. The use of semiotic methods to reveal different levels of meaning and. Le signe. and as articles accepted in periodicals of other disciplines.g. Versus (founded and directed by Umberto Eco). The American Journal of Semiotics. 60 Current applications Applications of semiotics include: • It represents a methodology for the analysis of texts regardless of modality. His most important contributions to the field bear on interpretation. Publication of research is both in dedicated journals such as Sign Systems Studies.. and symbols). Since 1980 the Semiotic Society of America has produced an annual conference series: Semiotics: The Proceedings of the Semiotic Society of America. and Boris Uspensky. and model reader. nihilist. He has also criticized in several works (A theory of semiotics. such as the configuration of instrumentation for human use. but this narrow focus can inhibit a more general study of the social and political forces shaping how different media are used and their dynamic status within modern culture. sometimes. founded by Thomas A. hidden motivations has led Yale's Harold Bloom to demonise elements of the subject as Marxist. to which he purposes four modes of sign production: recognition. Sebeok and published by Mouton de Gruyter. or on a small scale. • The Mu Group (Groupe µ) (founded 1967) developed a structural version of rhetorics. The Name of the Rose. Semiotica. which includes applied semiotic operations. etc. Cognition". ostension. especially journals oriented toward philosophy and cultural criticism. published by De Gruyter Mouton (series editors Paul Cobley and Kalevi Kull) replaces the former "Approaches to Semiotics" (over 120 volumes) and "Approaches to Applied Semiotics" (series editor Thomas A. Among his Moscow colleagues were Vladimir Toporov. most notably A Theory of Semiotics and his novel. • It can improve ergonomic design in situations where it is important to ensure that human beings can interact more effectively with their environments.

Sweden. • Theatre Semiotics extends or adapts semiotics onstage. • Organisational semiotics is the study of semiotic processes in organizations. Some influences have been drawn from phenomenological analysis. etc. Claude Lévi-Strauss. • Urban semiotics. Introduced by Rune Monö while teaching Industrial Design at the Institute of Design. . • Design Semiotics or Product Semiotics is the study of the use of signs in the design of physical products. say in the study of and design for Human-Computer Interaction or to mimic aspects of human cognition through artificial intelligence and knowledge representation. This break from traditional art history and theory—as well as from other major streams of semiotic analysis—leaves open a wide variety of possibilities for pictorial semiotics. Jacques Lacan. See also visual rhetoric. 1986). Peer Bundgård. Cognitive semiotics was initially developed at the Center for Semiotics at Aarhus University (Denmark). • Cultural and literary semiotics examines the literary world. 1989).Semiotics 61 Branches Semiotics has sprouted a number of subfields." (Middleton 1990. Marcel Danesi. • Music semiology "There are strong arguments that music inhabits a semiological realm which. • Visual semiotics – a subdomain of semiotics that analyses visual signs. • Semiotic anthropology • Cognitive semiotics is the study of meaning-making by employing and integrating methods and theories developed in the cognitive sciences. however. on both ontogenetic and phylogenetic levels. [23] Pictorial semiotics Pictorial Semiotics is intimately connected to art history and theory. Key theoricians include Keir Elam. • Structuralism and post-structuralism in the work of Jacques Derrida. and Semiotica (66: 1–3 (1987)). Roman Jakobson. Umeå University. Tartu–Moscow Semiotic School). such as in slang. the mass media. with an important connection with the Center of Functionally Integrated Neuroscience (CFIN) at Aarhus Hospital. the visual media. While art history has limited its visual analysis to a small number of pictures which qualify as "works of art. including but not limited to the following: • Biosemiotics is the study of semiotic processes at all levels of biology. Mikkel Wallentin. Copenhagen–Tartu School). Frederik Stjernfelt. p.g. Michel Foucault. Kristian Tylén. Amongst the prominent cognitive semioticians are Per Aage Brandt. Baroni (1983). • Film Semiotics is the study of the various codes and signs of film and how they are understood. 1987.[22] • Semiotics of Photography. cognitive psychology.. Stefani (1973. See the work of Roland Barthes. and Juri Lotman (e. See the works of Christian Metz. It has gone beyond them both in at least one fundamental way. Louis Hjelmslev. Riccardo Fusaroli and Jordan Zlatev. Michael Halliday. 172) See Nattiez (1976. or a semiotic study of living systems (e. Roland Barthes. • Social semiotics expands the interpretable semiotic landscape to include all cultural codes. One of the more accomplished publications in this field is the International Journal for the Semiotics of Law. Bob Hodge. • Computational semiotics attempts to engineer the process of semiosis. • Law and Semiotics. It has strong ties to Computational semiotics and Human-Computer Interaction. and visual anthropology/sociology. Svend Østergaard. has developmental priority over verbal language.g. and structuralist and cognitivist linguistics. • Gregorian chant semiology is a current avenue of palaeographical research in Gregorian chant which is revising the Solesmes school of interpretation. and advertising in the work of writers such as Roland Barthes. and Christian Metz." pictorial semiotics has focused on the properties of pictures more generally.. and advertising. This involves conceptual and textual analysis as well as experimental investigations. fashion.

The Quest for Meaning: A Guide to Semiotic Theory and Practice. (2007). Marcel. S. Structuralist Poetics: Structuralism.[24] Semiotics is the study of sign processes when conducted individually or in groups and how these sign processes give insight as to how meaning is enabled and also understood. and Bologna University. D. their logos become more symbolic and less iconic. Analyzing Cultures: An Introduction and Handbook. • Culler.[24] Food can also be said to be symbolic of certain social codes. Principles of Semiotic. New York: Hill & Wang. (1999). London: Jonathan Cape. Marcel & Perron. The iconicity and symbolism of a sign depends on the cultural convention and are on that ground in relation with each other. • Barthes. Albert. Paul. Sign Levels.[26] Main institutions A world organisation of semioticians – the International Association for Semiotic Studies. (2003). (Translated by Annette Lavers & Colin Smith). Semiotics: The Basics. Marcel. meaning can always be extracted from the way a certain food has been prepared and the context in which it is served. the signs get more symbolic value.Semiotics 62 Semiotics of food Food has been one traditional topic of choice in relating semiotic theory because it is extremely accessible and easily relatable to the average individual’s life. Mythologies. Marcel. Roland. the messages it encodes will be found in the pattern of social relations being expressed. (2001/2007). Roland ([1964] 1967). Understanding Media Semiotics. inclusion and exclusion. Whether food is prepared with precision in a fine dining restaurant. (1994). devoured. plucked. D. Messages and Meanings: An Introduction to Semiotics. Jonathan (1975). References Bibliography • Atkin. • Barthes. If the cultural convention has greater influence on the sign. • Clarke. New York: Oxford UP. or even consumed by a wild animal. • Chandler. • Danesi. Elements of Semiology. London: Routledge. boundaries and transactions across boundaries”. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. ([1957] 1987). Linguistics and the Study of Literature. picked from a dumpster. (1987). Daniel. London: Arnold. “If food is treated as a code. . • Danesi. • Clarke. "Peirce's Theory of Signs [27]". Aarhus University. Toronto: Canadian Scholars' Press. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.[24] Food is said to be semiotic because it transforms meaning with preparation. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Bloomington: Indiana UP.[25] Food is a semiotic regardless of how it is prepared. S. (2006). Food that is eaten by a wild animal raw from a carcass is obviously different in meaning when compared to a food that is prepared by humans in a kitchen to represent a cultural dish. Semiotics and globalization Present research found that. • Danesi. The larger research centers together with extensive teaching program include the Semiotics Departments of Tartu University. with its journal Semiotica – was established in 1969. (2002). as airline industry brandings grow and become more international. The message is about different degrees of hierarchy. • Danesi. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Deely. Henry (Henry Stubbes). a Dialogic Response. Augustine Press. (1971). Tartu: Tartu University Press. 353-354. Semiotics.. Algirdas. (2009). Charles W. Kull. Eco. New York. Thure von (1982). (2009). ISBN 978-1-894508-98-8 Sebeok. Universe of the Mind: A Semiotic Theory of Culture. Cambridge. 1963. London: Boyars. (1970). Petrilli (2007) Semiotics Today. (Aalen). (Translated by Alan Sheridan). (London). Hjelmslev. Greimas. Wiley-Blackwell. Prolegomena to a Theory of Language. Jacques. The Works of John Locke. Kalevi (eds. Eco.. New York: St.015 Ponzio. Foucault. (1987). Indiana. Eagleton. Ottawa. A Perfusion of Signs. New York: Norton. Indiana University Press. (1976). Louis (1961). Bloomington: Indiana University Press. (Translated by Paul J Perron & Frank H Collins). Martin's Press. (1990). Gunther. (Editor) (1977). (1983). (Translated by Ann Shukman). Thomas A. Signs and Language. (2008) "Putting Social Context into Text: The Semiotics of Email Interaction.B. London: Frances Pinter. Umberto Eco: Philosophy. John. (Includes interviews with 29 leading semioticians of the world. Locke. Herlihy. Derrida. Social Semiotics. p. D. Indiana University Press.. From Global Semiotics to Semioethics. (1978). Toronto: University of Toronto Press. IN: Indiana University Press. 173(1-4). New York. David (1999) Elements of Semiotics.2009. Toronto: Legas. Semiotica 38-3/4:205-215 Williamson. edited by Peer Bundgaard and Frederik Stjernfelt. Notes [1] Caesar. Jordan. Signs and Meaning: 5 Questions. the Credit of the Aristotelians in part Re-advanced. "2nd year class of semiotics". Four Ages of Understanding. (1986) Semiotics and the Philosophy of Language. com/ syntactics) . The Plus Ultra reduced to a Non Plus: Or. doi: 10. Eco. Glanvill. A Specimen of some Animadversions upon the Plus Ultra of Mr. Yuri M. Tian. South Bend: St. John. (1976) A Theory of Semiotics. Judith. (2003). David. 55. (2005 [1990]).1515/SEMI. Umberto. London: I. Augusto & S. Emmeche. Semiotica. Umberto. 4th ed. A New Edition.S. Tegg. Whitfield). Uexküll. London: Macmillan. London: Imperial College Press. John. The Impact on Philosophy of Semiotics. 1988–present. MA. ISBN 978-0-7456-0850-1. thefreedictionary. Collected papers: Volume V. Positions. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Hodge. Ithaca: Cornell UP.) Lotman. and Enquiries made. Bloomington. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Morris. and X. Umberto." [28] The American Journal of Sociology. [2] The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language: Syntactics (http:/ / www. wherein sundry Errors of some Virtuosi are discovered. Corrected. Deely. (Translated by Francis J. London: Tavistock. 1670. Liszka. The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. 359. Semiotics as semioethics in the era of global communication. Charles S. Sweden: Scania. (Translated by Alan Bass). Peirce. T. 343-347. CIT. S. 2009 (Automatic Press / VIP). Harcourt Brace & Company. 114:2 pp. Basics of Semiotics. (1988). (2000) Kant and the Platypus. Menchik. 332–70. Petrilli. "The Semiotic Hierarchy: Life. Literary Theory: An Introduction. Terry. Writings on the general theory of signs. 1823. Umberto.. Pragmatism and pragmaticism. (1934). 63 • • • Zlatev. Michel. Tauris. A Theory of Semiotics. Peirce. Claus. (1977) Écrits: A Selection. (1996) A General Introduction to the Semeiotic of C. Eco. and the Work of Fiction. On Meaning: Selected Writings in Semiotic Theory. Semiotics and medicine.) (2011) Towards a Semiotic Biology: Life is the Action of Signs. Robert & Kress. J. Decoding Advertisements: Ideology and Meaning in Advertising. Cognitive Semiotics". Vol. John. Lacan. (2001).) Stubbe. 84 pp. (London). USA: Harvard University Press. London: Athlone Press. In Ten Volumes. Jacques (1981). Michael (1999).III.Semiotics • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Deely. Lidov.. J. The Hague: Mouton. (facsimile reprint by Scientia. Consciousness.

numericable. February 14). 2. paragraph 314. 43. com/ menu/ library/ bycsp/ l75/ l75. helsinki. com/ menu/ library/ bycsp/ l75/ ver1/ l75v1-05. v. global capital: a social semiotic analysis of transnational visual branding in the airline industry. New York: Norton. [18] He spelt it "semiotic" and "semeiotic". to be combined into 66 (Tn+1) classes of sign. [20] He worked on but did not perfect a finer-grained system of ten trichotomies. (1902). 6(3). [21] Dewey. iupui. perseus. Manuscript L75. especially purgatives or cathartics... (http:/ / en. See under " Semeiotic (http:/ / www. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.] in the Commens Dictionary of Peirce's Terms. Essential Peirce v. wikibooks. fi/ science/ commens/ terms/ semiosis. 4. (2007). page 75: ". Hillsdale. [25] Douglas. 305–344 [27] http:/ / plato. cspeirce. England. (1946. 1670). 79. Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Visual Communication. html). Robert Scott. 04. W. Mary. Thought. helsinki. The Philosophy of Bertrand Russell. Peirce v. 4-10) provides intuitive help. stanford. 1909. htm#m12) at Arisbe. fi/ science/ commens/ dictionary. see under " Sign (http:/ / www. Writings on the general theory of signs. [8] That is. fi/ science/ commens/ terms/ sign. That raised for Peirce 59. Henry George Liddell.049 = 310.” The Journal of Philosophy.S. pp. and Meaning. semeiosy (http:/ / www. Collected Papers v. 1938.. transcription (http:/ / www.049 classificatory questions (59. pp. org/ wiki/ syntax) [4] σημειωτικός (http:/ / www. written circa 1903. fi/ science/ commens/ terms/ semeiotic. helsinki. Peirce (http:/ / perso. Semiotics and communication: Signs. it specifically refers to the treatment of humans. its "On the Definition of Logic" (Memoir 12). on Perseus [5] σημεῖον (http:/ / www. cspeirce. C.) Myth. (http:/ / en. orig. cspeirce." [7] A now-obsolete term for the art or profession of curing disease with (herbal) medicines or (chemical) drugs. [26] Thurlow.The Plus Ultra reduced to a Non Plus . not commanding) medicines . transcription (http:/ / www. "thought out". 0057:entry=shmeiwtiko/ s). "Logic. [19] Peirce. org/ wiki/ Visual_Rhetoric/ Semiotics_and_Visual_Rhetoric) [23] Semiotics of Photography (http:/ / ssrn.. and. G. [22] Wikibooks. htm) at Arisbe: The Peirce Gateway.. edu/ entries/ peirce-semiotics/ [28] http:/ / menchik. C. pp. Robert Scott. fi/ science/ commens/ dictionary.S.85-95. (1993). html) [etc. or 3 to the 10th power). tufts. [9] Peirce. method of curing. H. excerpt from a letter to William James. paragraphs 243-63. fr/ robert. edu/ hopper/ text?doc=Perseus:text:1999. [10] Peirce. and appearing in Writings of Charles S. & Aiello. n. In: Clifford Geertz (ed. Collected Papers v. htm) at Arisbe. 482 in "Excerpts from Letters to Lady Welby". html). nor is there any thing to be relied upon in Physick. 04. see MS 218. 61–82.. wiktionary.. htm)" collected by Robert Marty. The Hague. helsinki. 1971. in particular. com/ menu/ library/ bycsp/ logic/ ms218. on Perseus [6] Stubbe. A Greek-English Lexicon. Mouton. S. html)" in the Commens Dictionary of Peirce's Terms (http:/ / www. pdf 64 . edu/ ~peirce/ ep/ ep2/ ep2book/ ch02/ ep2ch2. [11] (Zlatev [12] 1971. transcription (http:/ / www.Semiotics [3] Wiktionary. 3. htm)" (MS 404 of 1894. Deciphering a Meal. March 14. On coincidence of actual opinion with final opinion. paragraph 227. Peirce's " What Is a Sign (http:/ / www. not principles). 2. See p. cultures. National pride. (London. semeiotics. p. tufts. 8. or "devised" (Oxford English Dictionary). Henry George Liddell. vol. codes. com/ Menchik_Tian_AJS. marty/ semiotique/ access. helsinki. 0057:entry=shmei=on). Library of Living Philosophers. A Greek-English Lexicon. Also see under relevant entries in the Commens Dictionary of Peirce's Terms (http:/ / www. com/ abstract=2067834) [24] Leeds-Hurwitz. Black M. Essential Peirce v. html)" and " Semiosis. 2. Considered as Semeiotic". but an exact knowledge of medicinal phisiology (founded on observation. and tried (not excogitated. and " 76 definitions of sign by C. 2.. C. [17] See Peirce. Symbol and Culture. edu/ hopper/ text?doc=Perseus:text:1999. “Peirce's Theory of Linguistic Signs. V5 [14] Zlatev [15] Zlatev [16] For Peirce's definitions of signs and semiosis. The Netherlands [13] 1944.. "contrived". John.

Joseph (book series). Chief Editor. html) • • • • • • • Cognitive Semiotics (http://www.utoronto.degruyter. org/ ?lang=en).semioticon. html) Communicology: The link between semiotics and phenomenological manifestations (http:/ / www. and Wayback Machine cannot retrieve. ac. centers • American Journal of Semiotics (http://secure. Angelo Loula & João English. htm).org/). lecture courses. Marteinson & Pascal G. ca/ epc/ srb/ cyber/ espout. chass. aber. Some articles in English. • Biosemiotics (http://www. Editors. Home site seems gone from Web. ut. fi/ science/ commens/ dictionary.chass. utoronto. fr/ robert. html) Tartu Semiotics Department (http:/ / www.E. Journal (Semiotics. Edwina Taborsky. fr/ robert. Andrea Valle & Miriam Visalli. Denmark.signosemio. • S. Peirce (http:/ / perso. Søren Brier. • Center for Semiotics (http://www. helsinki. Editors-in-Chief. Roland Posner. inria.semiotiche. Thomas Sebeok et al. minutesemeiotic. Portuguese Peirce's Theory of Semiosis: Toward a Logic of Mutual Affection (http:/ / www. marty/ semiotique/ Sebeok.nsf/journal?openform&journal=pdc_ajs). Thomas A. Michelucci. Marcello Barbieri.degruyter.library. Editors. • Approaches to Applied Semiotics (http://www. with 76 definitions of the sign by C. .com — Presents semiotic theories and theories closely related to semiotics (http:/ / www. fr/ ~codognet/ web. Editors. ee/ SOSE/ eng. • Cybernetics and Human Knowing ( pages/SEED_Journal. • Semiotics. org/ ) Language and the Origin of Semiosis (http:/ / tprewitt/ssa.biosemiotics. Editor — from SEE (http://www. Aarhus University.degruyter. • Open Semiotics Resource Center (http://www. htm) Semiotics for Beginners (http:/ / www. Editor-in-Chief — from the International Society for Biosemiotic Studies (http:// www. utoronto.E. marty/ semiotique/ 12304). • Semiotiche (http://www.ananke-edizioni. Energy. com/ • Approaches to Semiotics (http://www.irma-international.chkjournal. Chief Editor — from the International Association for Semiotic Studies ( (1969–97 book series). html) — free online course Semiotics according to Robert Marty (http:/ / perso.hum.Semiotics 65 External links Further reading • • Applied Semiotics / Sémiotique appliquée (http:/ / www. uk/ media/ Documents/ S4B/ sem02. et al. ca/ french/ as-sa/ index. & John Deely. Per Aage Brandt & Todd Oakley. percepp. Gian Paolo Caprettini. chass.library. ca/see/index. Alain no longer good. Editor.. old url ( com/ ) Minute Semeiotic (http:/ / www.htm). Paul Cobley & Kalevi Kull. Journals. Peter G. • Semiotica (http://www. htm) The Commens Dictionary of Peirce's Terms (http:/ / www. numericable. • International Journal of Signs and Semiotic Systems (IJSSS) ( (2000–2009 book series).D. Communication and Cognition (http://www.html). book series — associations. Managing Editor — from the Semiotic Society of America (http://uwf. Editors. numericable. Marcel • Applied Semiotics / Sémiotique appliquée (AS/SA) (http://french.utoronto. signosemio. and Development) (http://www. html) Signo — www.html) (2001–7). Managing Director. com/ ) The Semiotics of the Web (http:/ / international-journal-signs-semiotic-systems/41024/). communicology. Editors. html) Peircean focus • • • • Arisbe: The Peirce Gateway (http:/ / www. Editors.

org/transactions. and linguists have often been reduced to approximations. Syntax has developed to describe the rules concerning how words relate to each other in order to form sentences. of Tartu (http://www. • Signs . Founding Editor. Gary • The Semiotic Review of Books ( like all other sciences.utoronto.International Journal of Semiotics (http://vip. Peirce Society (http://www. • Sign Systems Studies (http://www. Paul Bouissac. Paul Bouissac. description. founded by Umberto Eco.html). Kalevi Kull. study. Chief Editor — from The Charles • The Public Journal of Semiotics (http://semioticsonline.dsc. A description of the phonology of the language in question. which is found especially in education and in publishing. Accurate description of real speech is a difficult Torkild Thellefsen.semioticon. chief eds.ut. as exemplified in the work of Leonard Bloomfield and others. ee/SOSE/eng. Editors. Timo Peeter Torop.ut. A description of the syntax of well-formed sentences of that language.Semiotics • SemiotiX New Series: A Global Information Bulletin ( which gives them the ability to extrapolate correctly from their experience new but correct expressions.html). Such speakers have internalized something called "linguistic competence". A description of lexical derivations.html) (book series). Prescription seeks to define standard language forms and give advice on effective language use. . Prescription and description are complementary.iva. Paul Bouissac et al. Almost all linguistic theory has its origin in practical problems of descriptive linguistics. René Jorna. An extreme "mentalist" viewpoint denies that the linguistic description of a language can be done by anyone but a competent speaker. Phonology (and its theoretical developments. Silvi Salupere. though it also draws on more subjective aspects of language aesthetics. or descriptive linguistics.htm).[1] Modern descriptive linguistics is based on a structural approach to language. Winfried Nöth.html). Martin Thellefsen. without the bias of preconceived ideas about how it ought to be. Editors — from the Dept.chass. Alan Cienki. and can be thought of as a presentation of the fruits of descriptive research in a learnable form. Linguistic description is often contrasted with linguistic prescription. Kalevi Kull. 2. Silvi Salupere. is the work of objectively analyzing and describing how language is spoken (or how it was spoken in the past) by a group of people in a speech community. • Versus: Quaderni di studi semiotici (http://versus. Peeter Torop. and to reject unacceptable expressions. its aim is to observe the linguistic world as it is. but have different priorities and sometimes are seen to be in conflict.ut. of Semiotics. and practice than prescription. 66 Linguistic description In the study of language.peircesociety. Estonia. A linguistic description is considered descriptively adequate if it achieves one or more of the following goals of descriptive linguistics: 1. 3. Kati Lindstrom. • Transactions of the Charles S. Cornelis de Waal. Peirce Society (http://www. such as the phoneme) deals with the function and interpretation of sound in language. General Editor. 4. • Tartu Semiotics Library (http://www. Lexicology collects "words" and their derivations and transformations: it has not given rise to much generalized Mihhail Lotman. Associate Editor. A description of the morphology of words belonging to that language. U. Editor in Chief. All scholarly research in linguistics is descriptive. Descriptivism is the belief that description is more significant or important to teach. & Bent Sørensen.

pdf) on 8 July 2012. books?id=LfruK29pVl8C&pg=PA3&dq="Descriptive+linguistics"& sig=ACfU3U3AfpGzNiZI-cdsWUctHrs9aAqGSg) – 1998 – 269 pages. Bunny McBride. This study includes phonology. 93 Anthropological linguistics Anthropological linguistics is the study of the relations between language and culture and the relations between human biology. A reproduction of a few genuine texts. LCCN 2011520778. 377 • Patrick R. Cultural Anthropology: The Human Challenge (http://books. 60. Dana Walrath. including at least one thousand entries. Rotulus Universitas. PRINS. . OL{{{1}}}. Harald E. This study includes the study of linguistic divergence and language families. Conventional linguistic anthropology also has implications for sociology and self-organization of peoples. ISBN 978-953-188-311-5. Whatever one calls it. semantics.Linguistic description 5. Comparative Semitic Linguistics: A Manual (http://books. which is the branch of anthropology that studies humans through the languages that they use. Archived from the original (http:/ / bib. Prins. for instance. Related Fields Anthropological linguistics is concerned with • Descriptive (or synchronic) linguistics: Describing dialects (forms of a language used by a specific speech community). Snježana (2010) (in Serbo-Croatian). both of which are concerned with distinctions that are made in languages about perceptions of the surroundings. Jezik i nacionalizam [Language and Nationalism] (http:/ / www. comparative linguistics. much as it studies distinctions made in languages regarding the colours of the rainbow: seeing the tendency to increase the diversity of terms. and grammar. p. syntax. org/ 690BiBe4T). L. p. This strongly overlaps the field of linguistic anthropology. Haviland. • Historical (or diachronic) linguistics: Describing changes in dialects and languages over time. Anthropological linguistics studies these distinctions. as evidence that there are distinctions that bodies in this environment must 67 References [1] Kordić. The Changing Face of Corpus Linguistics ( books?id=UBk7B4PWFmkC&pg=PA377&dq="Descriptive+linguistics"& sig=ACfU3U0Rq1iOjSsfJ-dujYRhwe70GS74BQ) – 2006 – 408 pages. cognition and language. 3 • William A. Andrew Kehoe. Zagreb: Durieux. reveals that their language employs six different and distinct words whose best English translation is "we". this field has had a major impact in the studies of such areas as visual perception (especially colour) and bioregional democracy. dq="Descriptive+linguistics"&sig=ACfU3U0vfdMoPP_ohYtb2P_CeHfW34JhUQ) – HAVILAND – 2004 – 496 pages. irb. hr/ datoteka/ 475567. and philology. and relates them to types of societies and to actual bodily adaptation to the senses. • Ethnolinguistics: Analyzing the relationship between culture. Retrieved 11 August A documentation of the vocabulary. 6. morphology. etymology. leading to situated knowledge and perhaps a situated ethics. p. webcitation. Study of the Penan people. p. whose final evidence is the differentiated set of terms used to denote "we". . Bibliography • Antoinette Renouf. Bennett. OCLC 729837512. and language.

James W. perhaps designed. the individual representing his culture. 68 Recent work Mark Fettes. and in An Ecological Approach to Language Renewal (1997). political.Anthropological linguistics • Sociolinguistics: Analyzing the social functions of language and the social. External links • "An Ecological Approach to Language Renewal" [1]. 1997. This may cross a line between science and activism. and the subject-object problem). in Steps Towards an Ecology of Language (1996). love. See anthropology. the scope of interest of ethnolinguistics and linguistic anthropology overlap. ucc. Both work with the concept of worldview. the question who's we. Related to problems in critical philosophy (for instance. Ethnolinguistics looks at the relationship between discourse and language. hate & war (Cambridge University Press 2012). set of tools in language. sought to approach a transformative ecology via a more active. html . In many respects. and economic relationships among and between members of speech communities. but is within the anthropological tradition of study by the participant observer. edu/ ~jar/ TIL_25. nau. ethnolinguists are concerned with the way individuals express themselves and how they communicate together. while linguistic anthropology tends to make more general claims about vocabulary and grammar. linguistics. References [1] http:/ / jan. Mark Fettes. But unlike linguistic anthropology which as a discipline of anthropology. Underhill redefined the term in his Ethnolinguistics and Cultural Concepts: truth. sought "a theory of language ecology which can integrate naturalist and critical traditions". Anna Wierzbicka is one of the best-known exponents of ethnolinguistics in English-speaking countries. focuses on man. Both are concerned with the relationship between language and culture.

just to the lexicon. Such methods have gone through a long process of development. culminating in the nineteenth century. In principle.Comparative linguistics 69 Comparative linguistics Comparative linguistics (originally comparative philology) is a branch of historical linguistics that is concerned with comparing languages to establish their historical relatedness. In the twentieth century an alternative method.[2] The comparative method uses information from two or more languages and allows reconstruction of the ancestral language. syntax and the lexicon of two or more languages using techniques such as the comparative method. Methods The fundamental technique of comparative linguistics is to compare phonological systems. with comparison of word variants. a reconstruction may have predictive power. In some methods it may be possible to reconstruct an earlier proto-language. In practice. which is mainly associated with Morris Swadesh but is based on earlier work. The method of Internal reconstruction uses only a single language. though other lists have also been used. History The earliest method of this type was the comparative method. The former uses lexical cognates like the comparative method but the latter uses only lexical similarity. lexicostatistics. the comparative method becomes impracticable. A number of methods based on statistical analysis of vocabulary have been developed to try and overcome this limitation. was developed. Internal reconstruction is more resistant to interference but usually has a limited available base of utilizable words and is able to reconstruct only certain changes (those that have left traces as morphophonological variations). for example in Indo-European. a type of consonant attested in no Indo-European language known at the time. and systematic changes. Although the proto-languages reconstructed by the comparative method are hypothetical. Swadesh used 100 (earlier 200) items that are assumed to be cognate (on the basis of phonetic similarity) in the languages being compared. attempting to relate two reconstructed proto-languages by the comparative method has not generally produced results that have met with wide acceptance. Where languages are derived from a very distant ancestor. To maintain a clear distinction between attested and reconstructed forms. The theoretical basis of such methods is that vocabulary items can be matched without a detailed language reconstruction and that comparing enough vocabulary items will negate individual inaccuracies. and are thus more distantly related. The method has also not been very good at unambiguously identifying sub-families and different scholars have produced conflicting results. consistent). which proved to have exactly the consonants Saussure had hypothesized in the environments he had predicted. such as lexicostatistics and mass comparison. comparative linguists prefix an asterisk to any form that is not found in surviving texts. morphological systems.g. being informal and lacking testability. Thus they can be used to determine relatedness but not to determine the proto-language. to perform the same function. e. the comparison may be more restricted. This uses a long word list and detailed study. which was developed over many years.e. The hypothesis was vindicated with the discovery of Hittite. for example in phonological or morphological systems. The most notable example of this is Saussure's proposal that the Indo-European consonant system contained laryngeals. This uses a short word list of basic vocabulary in the various languages for comparisons. However. every difference between two related languages should be explicable to a high degree of plausibility. A number of methods for carrying out language classification have been developed. it has been criticized for example as being subjective. are expected to be highly regular (i. Genetic relatedness implies a common origin or proto-language. Distance measures are derived .[1] In particular. to reconstruct proto-languages and specify the changes that have resulted in the documented languages. ranging from simple inspection to computerised hypothesis testing. and comparative linguistics aims to construct language families.

aims simply to show which languages are more and less close to each other. though later versions allow variance but still fail to achieve reliability. In its simplest form a constant rate of change is assumed. it is flatly rejected by the majority of historical linguists. since without a reconstruction or at least a detailed list of phonological correspondences there can be no demonstration that two words in different languages are cognate. is mass comparison. which disavows any ability to date developments. which are not. These are considered by many to show promise but are not wholly accepted by traditionalists. However. apart from the fact of the existence of shared items of the compared vocabulary. Dating estimates can now be generated by computerised methods that have fewer restrictions. This is also an important issue both for the comparative method and for the lexical comparison methods. Its ultimate aim is to understand the universals that govern language. they are not intended to replace older methods but to supplement them. Typological similarity does not imply a historical relationship.[8] Such statistical methods cannot be used to derive the features of a proto-language. however. However. for example). These approaches have been challenged for their methodological problems. .and network-based phylogenetic methods have been used to investigate the relationships between languages and to determine approximate dates for proto-languages. Glottochronology has met with mounting scepticism.[4] However. calculating rates from the data.[3] The method. based on percentage of a core vocabulary of culturally independent words. One of the goals of etymology is to establish which items in a language's vocabulary result from linguistic contact.[7] However.Comparative linguistics by examination of language pairs but such methods reduce the information. and the range of types found in the world's languages is respect of any particular feature (word order or vowel system. An empirical study of loans is by definition historical in focus and therefore forms part of the subject matter of historical linguistics. and is seldom applied today. Greenberg suggested that the method is useful for preliminary grouping of languages known to be related as a first step towards more in-depth comparative analysis. since failure to recognize a loan may distort the findings.[6] Since the mid-1990s these more sophisticated tree. since mass comparison eschews the establishment of regular changes. • Contact linguistics examines the linguistic results of contact between the speakers of different languages. which proposed a mathematical formula for establishing the date when two languages separated. 70 Related fields There are other branches of linguistics that involve comparing languages. Another controversial method. typological arguments can be used in comparative linguistics: one reconstruction may be preferred to another as typologically more plausible. particularly as evidenced in loan words. • Contrastive linguistics compares languages usually with the aim of assisting language learning by identifying important differences between the learner's native and target languages. An outgrowth of lexicostatistics is glottochronology. Character based methods are similar to the former and distanced based methods are similar to the latter (see Quantitative comparative linguistics). Contrastive linguistics deals solely with present-day languages. initially developed in the 1950s. computerised statistical hypothesis testing methods have been developed which are related to both the comparative method and lexicostatistics.[5] Recently. The characters used can be morphological or grammatical as well as lexical. part of comparative linguistics: • Linguistic typology compares languages to classify them by their features. developed by Joseph Greenberg. no mathematical means of producing proto-language split-times on the basis of lexical retention has been proven reliable.

grammar and core vocabulary. provided . which is contrary to the principles of the scientific method. First. For example. similarities between the Uralic and Altaic languages which provided an innocent basis for this theory. and the mother of all others. the Dutch lawyer Hugo Grotius proves that the American Indians (Mohawks) speak a language (lingua Maquaasiorum) derived from Scandinavian languages (Grotius was on Sweden's payroll). it has been suggested that the Turanian or Ural–Altaic language group. compared to French. the large size of all languages' vocabulary and a relatively limited inventory of articulated sounds used by most languages makes it easy to find coincidentally similar words between languages. supposedly proving that the British people are the 'covenant people' of God.Comparative linguistics 71 Pseudolinguistic comparisons Comparative linguistics includes the study of the historical relationships of languages using the comparative method to search for regular (i. Armstrong. which. some persons with little or no specialization in the field sometimes attempt to establish historical associations between languages by noting similarities between them.[10] There are also strong.g. was used to justify racism towards the Sami in particular. There are sometimes political or religious reasons for associating languages in ways that some linguists would dispute. In 1885. albeit areal not genetic. linguistic scientists consider this kind of comparison to be unreliable for two primary reasons. supporting Swedish colonial pretensions in America.[11] In the Dissertatio de origine gentium Americanarum (1625). Some believers in Abrahamic religions try to derive their native languages from Classical Hebrew. as Herbert W.a claim considered so ridiculous that Leibniz coined the term "goropism" to mean "absurd etymology". in a way that is considered pseudoscientific by specialists (e.e. around 1900) the assertion that humans descended from the frog. by linguistic means. in his 1941 Les langues Nitales) are the Bantu languages of Africa and Latin. Hilaire de Barenton proved that Turkish is the mother of languages (Sun Language Theory). a proponent of British Israelism. whilst asserting that Hebrew is derived from Dutch . which relates Sami and other languages to the Mongolian language. The most common method applied in pseudoscientific language comparisons is to search two or more languages for words that seem similar in their sound and meaning. The Dutch doctor Johannes Goropius Becanus. Just like frogs' quacking. Second. African/Egyptian comparisons[9]). While similarities of this kind often seem convincing to laypersons. and through hypothesis testing. A French Éloi Johanneau claim in 1818 (Mélanges d'origines étymologiques et de questions grammaticales) that the Celtic language is the oldest. .according to Jean-Pierre Brisset (La Grande Nouvelle. in support of Kemal Atatürk's nationalism. And Lithuanian-American archaeologist Marija Gimbutas argued during the mid-1900s that Basque is clearly related to the extinct Pictish and Etruscan languages. Edward Tregear (the Aryan Maori) compared Maori and Aryan languages. In 1759. the method applied is not well-defined: the criterion of similarity is subjective and thus not subject to verification or falsification. recurring) correspondences between the languages' phonology. who said that the word 'British' comes from Hebrew brit meaning 'covenant' and ish meaning 'man'. in his Orgines Antverpiana (1580) admits Quis est enim qui non amet patrium sermonem (who does not love his fathers' tongue ?). in attempt to show that Basque was a remnant of an "Old European culture". Also related (according to Jean Prat. Joseph de Guignes theorized(Mémoire dans lequel on prouve que les Chinois sont une colonie égyptienne) that Chinese and Egyptian were related.

(2010). Cambridge: The MIT Press Greenberg.2010. Något om rastänkandet i Sverige. A Meade. no.0051. (1993). 1997) ISBN 0-521-45924-9 • Winfred P. See for example the criticisms of Gray and Atkinson's work in Language Log. The Handbook of Historical Linguistics (Blackwell. Lehmann. 1989) ISBN 90-272-3557-0 • Theodora Bynon. Boehlau (1861/62). Don. (http:/ / www. Altitalischen. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 137.1075/dia.) Weimar. Altiranischen. Q D Atkinson. Janda and Brian D. pdf)". (Cambridge University Press. 122 and 171-175 ISBN 0-520-22915-0 Bibliography • August Schleicher: Compendium der vergleichenden Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen. The methods and purposes of linguistic genetic classification. 2009.). S J. 10 December 2003 Greenhill. See for example "Language Classification by Numbers" by April McMahon and Robert McMahon Campbell. 2004) ISBN 1-4051-2747-3 • Roger Lass. 1977) ISBN 0-521-29188-7 • Richard D.) (2 vols. Wissenschaftlicher Verlag.L.). student. Historical linguistics and language change. Diachronica 12 (1): 55–74. (Kurzer Abriss der indogermanischen Ursprache. Litauischen und Altdeutschen. " Austronesian language phylogenies: Myths and misconceptions about Bayesian computational methods (http:/ / simon. In Austronesian historical linguistics and culture history: a festschrift for Robert Blust. 1962) ISBN 0-03-011430-6 • R. 2001) ISBN 1-57958-218-4 . "A reply to Professor Greenberg".1. D. " The shape and tempo of language evolution (http:/ / simon.Comparative linguistics 72 References [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] Ringe. and R D Gray. e. net. S J. Lyle (2004). ISBN 3-8102-1071-4 • Karl Brugmann. Berthold Delbrück. Russell G. des Altindischen. Language and Linguistics 2: 111-135. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics. Historical Linguistics: An Introduction (Holt. Altgriechischen. kth. 1:91-109. se/ ~d95-nwa/ rasII. html) [11] See Gimbutas. J H. nada. K A Adelaar and A Pawley. Ringe. The Living Goddesses pp.04rin. Historical Linguistics (Cambridge University Press. Greenhill. • Raimo Anttila. Altkeltischen. reprinted by Minerva GmbH. Grundriss der vergleichenden Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen (1886–1916).l2. net. Joseph (Eds). pdf)". nz/ files/ 2009/ 09/ Greenhill_and_Gray2009.g. Historical and Comparative Linguistics (Benjamins. (2001). Trask (ed. doi:10. and R D Gray. doi:10. (1995). 375-397. nz/ files/ 2010/ 04/ Greenhill_et_al2010-preprint. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 277. Schuh (1997) "The Use and Misuse of language in the study of African history" Ufahamu 25(1):36-81 [7] [8] [9] [10] (Swedish) Niclas Wahlgren. Marija. ed. A. H. Dictionary of Historical and Comparative Linguistics (Fitzroy Dearborn. Historical Linguistics: An Introduction (2nd ed. doi:10. "'Nostratic' and the factor of chance".1098/rspb.1007/s101209900033. Altslawischen. 1693: 2443-50.

for example. the work of sociolinguists on linguistic variation has shown synchronic states are not uniform: the speech habits of older and younger speakers differ in ways that point to language change. such as the comparative method. however. i. but a limit of around 10. The focus was initially on the well-known Indo-European languages.e. but most linguists regard it as too remote to be reliably established by standard techniques of historical linguistics. At first. such as mass lexical comparison. The dating of the various proto-languages is also difficult. Less-standard techniques. another European language family for which less early written material exists. Written records are difficult to date accurately before the development of the modern title page. Most research is being carried out on the subsequent development of these languages. and diachronic linguistics is defined as the study of successive synchronic stages. Primacy is accorded to synchronic linguistics. Indo-European. It has five main concerns: • to describe and account for observed changes in particular languages • to reconstruct the pre-history of languages and determine their relatedness. Synchronic variation is linguistic change in progress. and other families into Nostratic. only a part of a more broadly conceived discipline of historical linguistics. a purely synchronic linguistics is not possible for any period before the invention of the gramophone. These attempts have not been accepted widely. such as on the Austronesian languages and various families of Native American languages. using the comparative method and internal reconstruction. as written records always lag behind speech in reflecting linguistic developments. It grew out of the earlier discipline of philology. The biological origin of language is in principle a concern of historical linguistics. The time-depth of linguistic methods is limited due to chance word resemblances and variations between language groups. etymology.Historical linguistics 73 Historical linguistics Historical linguistics (also called diachronic linguistics) is the study of language change. Scholars were concerned chiefly with establishing language families and reconstructing prehistoric proto-languages. comparative study is now a highly specialised field. History and development Modern historical linguistics dates from the late 18th century. but only approximate results can be obtained. but most linguists regard them as unreliable. In practice. Comparative linguistics is now. the scholars also studied the Uralic languages. in particular. Evolution into other fields Initially. historical linguistics was comparative linguistics. there has been significant comparative linguistic work expanding outside of European languages as well. grouping them into language families (comparative linguistics) • to develop general theories about how and why language changes • to describe the history of speech communities • to study the history of words. Ferdinand de Saussure's distinction between synchronic and diachronic linguistics is fundamental to the present day organization of the discipline. among many others. Also. the development of the modern standard varieties. even the study of modern dialects involved looking at their origins. however. all modern linguistics was historical in orientation.000 years is often assumed. is now seen to be idealised. For the Indo-European languages. linking. . the study of ancient texts and documents dating back to antiquity. The information necessary to establish relatedness becomes less available as the time depth is increased. many of which had long written histories. Saussure's clear demarcation. Uralic. Since then. several methods are available for dating. are used by some linguists to overcome the limitations of the comparative method. Some scholars have undertaken studies attempting to establish super-families.

A word may enter a language as a loanword (i. etymology makes use of philology. through derivational morphology by combining pre-existing elements in the language. much current etymological research is done in language families for which little or no early documentation is available. To maintain a clear distinction between attested language and reconstructed forms. linguists can make inferences. In this way.Historical linguistics The findings of historical linguistics are often used as a basis for hypotheses about the groupings and movements of peoples. they are usually dealing with populations living in specific locales for generations without moving. the study of how words change from culture to culture over time. from what source. such as Uralic and Austronesian. it is often unclear how to integrate the linguistic evidence with the archaeological or genetic evidence. Dialectology Dialectology is the scientific study of linguistic dialect. This is in contrast to variations based on social factors. reconstructing proto-languages. and how their form and meaning have changed over time. Although originating in the philological tradition. based primarily on geographic distribution and their associated features. the varieties of a language that are characteristic of particular groups. each with its own interpretation of the archaeological record. or variations based on time. . comparative linguists prefix an asterisk to any form that is not found in surviving texts. the Indo-European language family have been found. or in several other minor ways. For example. Etymologists also apply the methods of comparative linguistics to reconstruct information about languages that are too old for any direct information (such as writing) to be known. Comparative linguistics has the goal of constructing language families. which are studied in sociolinguistics. 74 Sub-fields of study Comparative linguistics Comparative linguistics (originally comparative philology) is a branch of historical linguistics that is concerned with comparing languages in order to establish their historical relatedness. thus languages can change and are also able to cross-relate. which are studied in historical linguistics. By analyzing related languages with a technique known as the comparative method. Dialectology treats such topics as divergence of two local dialects from a common ancestor and synchronic variation.. Etymology Etymology is the study of the history of words — when they entered a language. for instance.e. Languages may be related by convergence through borrowing or by genetic descent. Thus. Genetic relatedness implies a common origin or proto-language. Dialectologists are concerned with grammatical features that correspond to regional areas. In practice. particularly in the prehistoric period. however. word roots that can be traced all the way back to the origin of. there are numerous theories concerning the homeland and early movements of the Proto-Indo-Europeans. about their shared parent language and its vocabulary. as a word from one language adopted by speakers of another language). but also with immigrant groups bringing their languages to new settlements. In languages with a long and detailed history. and specifying the changes that have resulted in the documented languages. by a hybrid of these two processes called phono-semantic matching.

[1] Words as units in the lexicon are the subject matter of lexicology. how the means of expression change over time. languages with complex inflectional systems tend to be subject to a simplification process. Morphology Morphology is the study of the formal means of expression in a language. the "p" in "pin" is aspirated while the "p" in "spin" is not. and intonation. phonology describes the way sounds function within a given language or across languages. See grammaticalisation. how characteristics of sentence structure in related languages changed over time. and attempts to formulate rules that model the knowledge of the speakers of those languages. In English these two sounds are used in complementary distribution and are therefore not used to differentiate words and so are considered allophones of the same phoneme. morphology is the branch of linguistics that studies patterns of word-formation within and across languages. While words are generally accepted as being (with clitics) the smallest units of syntax. although the phonological units do not consist of sounds. for instance. The term syntax is used to refer directly to the rules and principles that govern the sentence structure of any individual language. In some other languages. The principles of phonological theory have also been applied to the analysis of sign languages. Many professionals in this discipline attempt to find general rules that apply to all natural languages in the context of historical linguistics. Whereas phonetics is about the physical production and perception of the sounds of speech.Historical linguistics 75 Phonology Phonology is a sub-field of linguistics which studies the sound system of a specific language or set of languages. accent. Modern researchers in syntax attempt to describe languages in terms of such rules. See grammaticalisation. not language-specific ones. how the formal means of expression change over time. The principles of phonological analysis can be applied independently of modality because they are designed to serve as general analytical tools. such as the /p/ in English. in most (if not all) languages. it is clear that. Syntax Syntax is the study of the principles and rules for constructing sentences in natural languages. as in "the syntax of Modern Irish". In this way. in the context of historical linguistics. this same difference of aspiration or non-aspiration does differentiate words and these two sounds phones are therefore considered phonemes. . An important part of phonology is studying which sounds are distinctive units within a language. The rules understood by the speaker reflect specific patterns (or regularities) in the way words are formed from smaller units and how those smaller units interact in speech. and topics such as syllable structure. stress. In addition to the minimal meaningful sounds (the phonemes). in the context of historical linguistics. phonology studies how sounds alternate. for example Thai and Quechua. words can be related to other words by rules. This field studies the internal structure of words as a formal means of expression. For example.

Historical linguistics and language change. Anglistik-Amerikanistik.. but it does not describe their semantics (i. Litauischen und Altdeutschen.e. Janda and Brian D. archaic The terms "conservative" and "innovative" are often used in historical linguistics to characterize the extent of change occurring in a particular language or dialect as compared with related varieties. • Theodora Bynon. of Chicago Press 1960). Trask. 37-49 Recommended readings • Karl Brugmann. These descriptive terms carry no value judgment. i. Altslawischen.) (2 vols. The Handbook of Historical Linguistics (Blackwell. Palgrave Macmillan. • Richard D.) Dictionary of Historical and Comparative Linguistics (Fitzroy Dearborn. Lehmann. p. Wissenschaftlicher Verlag. H. 1977) ISBN 0-521-29188-7 • Henry M. ISBN 3-8102-1071-4 • Zuckermann. Language Contact and Lexical Enrichment in Israeli Hebrew. 1973) ISBN 0-03-078370-4 • April McMahon. (Cambridge University Press. Boehlau (1861/62). A formal language is often defined by means of a formal grammar. The inventory from which these letters are taken is the alphabet through which the language is defined. a conservative variety has changed relatively less than an innovative variety. Berthold Delbrück. 1997) ISBN 0-521-45924-9 • Winfred P. Grundriss der vergleichenden Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen (1886–1916). 1992) ISBN 0-631-14367-X • M. 1994) ISBN 0-521-44665-1 • James Milroy.L. 2004) ISBN 1-4051-2747-3 • Roger Lass. ISBN 1-4039-1723-X. Cornlesen. des Altindischen.L. . Altiranischen. Altkeltischen. finite strings of letters or symbols.e. Samuels. 2001) ISBN 1-57958-218-4 • August Schleicher: Compendium der vergleichenden Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen. Altgriechischen.) Weimar. what they mean) References • Bernd Kortmann: English Linguistics: Essentials. Joseph (Eds). innovative. Linguistic Variation and Change (Blackwell. Hoenigswald. In particular. Historical Linguistics (Cambridge University Press.(ed. reprinted by Minerva GmbH. Ghil'ad (2003). A particularly conservative variety that preserves features that have long since vanished elsewhere is sometimes said to be "archaic". Altitalischen. Citations and notes [1] A formal language is a set of words. Language change and linguistic reconstruction (Chicago: Univ. Historical Linguistics: An Introduction (Second Edition) (Holt. (Kurzer Abriss der indogermanischen Ursprache. Linguistic Evolution (Cambridge University Press. Understanding Language Change (Cambridge University Press.Historical linguistics 76 Conservative. 1972) ISBN 0-521-29188-7 • R.

• Making use of dialectological data.Etymology 77 Etymology Etymology is the study of the history of words. if such are available. the assumption of a particular change of meaning may be substantiated by showing that the same type of change has . the term "etymology (of a word)" means the origin of a particular word. In this way.[1] Methods Etymologists apply a number of methods to study the origins of words. The form or meaning of the word might show variations between dialects. Even though etymological research originally grew from the philological tradition. Changes in the form and meaning of the word can be traced with the aid of older texts. Etymologists must often make hypotheses about changes in the meaning of particular words. Etymologists also apply the methods of comparative linguistics to reconstruct information about languages that are too old for any direct information to be available. For example. and how their form and meaning have changed over time. word roots have been found that can be traced all the way back to the origin of. such as Uralic and Austronesian. By a systematic comparison of related languages. • The comparative method. denoting the study of. For languages with a long written history. which may yield clues about its earlier history. By analyzing related languages with a technique known as the comparative method. Etymology The word Etymology is derived from the Greek etymon. by Hendrik Willem van Loon. A map demonstrating the supposed evolution of the word "mother". currently much etymological research is done on language families where little or no early documentation is available. some of which are: • Philological research. Such hypotheses are tested against the general knowledge of semantic shifts. linguists can make inferences about their shared parent language and its vocabulary. By an extension. • The study of semantic change. their origins. meaning true sense and the suffix -logia. etymologists make use of texts in these languages and texts about the languages to gather knowledge about how words were used during earlier periods of their history and when they entered the languages in question. for instance. the Indo-European language family. etymologists may often be able to detect which words derive from their common ancestor language and which were instead later borrowed from another language.

hallelujah. Although many of the words in the English lexicon come from Romance languages. All these words. While the origin of newly emerged words is often more or less transparent. algebra. most of the common words used in English are of Germanic origin. such as the noun case system. When the Normans conquered England in 1066 (see Norman Conquest). algorithm. sofa. palaver. nine/neun. verandah. calf/Kalb.e. and zero from Arabic (often via other languages). while the peasants spoke the vernacular English of the time. refer to the meat rather than to the animal. it is not readily obvious that the English word set is related to the word sit (the former is originally a causative formation of the latter). the ruling class spoke Anglo-Norman. hazard. It is even less obvious that bless is related to blood (the former was originally a derivative with the meaning "to mark with blood"). veal to veau. particularly seven/sieben. prima donna. aided by the circulation of Langue d'oïl literature from France. for example. savvy. some of which are borrowed from French.Etymology occurred in other languages as well. French and English. taiga. alligator. This led to many paired words of French and English origin. the most important of which are borrowing (i. Satan. Due to sound change. language change has eroded many grammatical elements. although its current vocabulary includes words from many languages. cotton.[2] The Old English roots may be seen in the similarity of numbers in English and German. Assimilation of foreign words English has proved accommodating to words from many languages. cow/Kuh. behemoth. Semantic change may also occur. and certain elements of vocabulary. Words that refer to farm animals. slalom. bolshevik. a West Germanic variety. The variant usage has been explained by the proposition that it was the Norman rulers who mostly ate meat (an expensive commodity) and the Anglo-Saxons who farmed the animals. we/wir us/uns. Muslim. it tends to become obscured through time due to sound change or semantic change. pork to porc. mosque. and pundit from Sanskrit. karma. and onomatopoeia and sound symbolism. English language English derives from Old English (sometimes referred to as Anglo-Saxon). caliber. (i. Scientific terminology. Albino. through borrowing. the adoption of "loanwords" from other languages). This explanation has passed into common folklore but has been disputed. word formation such as derivation and compounding. Spanish has contributed many words. thou/thine/thee and du/dein/dich. However. For example swine/Schwein. It acquired its modern meaning through the practice of counting the recitation of prayers by using beads. on the other hand. Danish and Norwegian. the creation of imitative words such as "click"). brahman. eight/acht. pasta. which united insular and continental territories. particularly in the southwestern United States. rodeo. jubilee. and sheep/Schaf. but there are a great many non-scientific examples. safari. sauna from Finnish. jar. adobe. lingo. and states' names such as Colorado and Florida. and rabbi from Hebrew. assassin.e. apricot. jacket. and umbrella from Italian. relies heavily on words of Latin and Greek origin. which is greatly simplified in modern English. and sputnik from Russian. tend to be cognates of words in other Germanic languages. diva. julep. alcohol. steppe. During the Anglo-Norman period. paparazzi. For example. to modern French bœuf. she/sie. the English word bead originally meant "prayer". and poultry to poulet. they brought their Norman language with them. pizza. and coconut from Portuguese. 78 Types of word origins Etymological theory recognizes that words originate through a limited number of basic mechanisms.. guru. Anglo-Norman was the conduit for the introduction of French into England. and ten/zehn. Examples include buckaroo. . Smorgasbord.. orange. and ombudsman are from Swedish. beef is related. For example. Pronouns are also cognate: I/mine/me ich/mein/mich.

phoney. however. one of several similar Byzantine works. and typhoon from Cantonese. Plutarch employed etymologies insecurely based on fancied resemblances in sounds.") 79 History The search for meaningful origins for familiar or strange words is far older than the modern understanding of linguistic evolution and the relationships of languages. in which the supposed origins of words were changed to satisfy contemporary requirements. and tsunami from Japanese. gung ho. The study of Sanskrit etymology has provided Western scholars with the basis of historical linguistics and modern etymology. Aranyakas. from Pāṇini to Pindar to Sir Thomas Browne. The analyses of Sanskrit grammar done by the previously mentioned linguists involved extensive studies on the etymology (called Nirukta or Vyutpatti in Sanskrit) of Sanskrit words. because the ancient Indo-Aryans considered sound and speech itself to be sacred and. and Upanishads. etymology had been a form of witty wordplay. Those that exist include coracle. which began no earlier than the 18th century. The earliest of attested etymologies can be found in Vedic literature in the philosophical explanations of the Brahmanas. galore and whisky from Scottish Gaelic. (See also "loanword. . kowtow. dim sum. 6th-5th centuries BCE) Pāṇini (c. come from other languages native to the British Isles. gull and penguin from Welsh. Isidore of Seville's Etymologiae was an encyclopedic tracing of "first things" that remained uncritically in use in Europe until the sixteenth century. They followed a line of ancient grammarians of Sanskrit who lived several centuries earlier like Sakatayana of whom very little is known. and eerie and canny from Scots (or related Northern English dialects). Surprisingly few loanwords. the words of the sacred Vedas contained deep encoding of the mysteries of the soul and God. however. sushi. Eisteddfod and (probably) flannel. Four of the most famous Sanskrit linguists are: • • • • Yaska (c. Ancient Sanskrit The Sanskrit linguists and grammarians of ancient India were the first to make a comprehensive analysis of linguistics and etymology. 520-460 BCE) Kātyāyana (2nd century BCE) Patañjali (2nd century BCE) These linguists were not the earliest Sanskrit grammarians. and boondocks from the Tagalog word. for them. Kampong and amok are from Malay. kumquat. From Antiquity through the 17th century. ketchup. trousers. bundok. Etymologicum genuinum is a grammatical encyclopedia edited at Constantinople in the ninth century. cromlech. and Tory from Irish. The fourteenth-century Legenda Aurea begins each vita of a saint with a fanciful excursus in the form of an etymology.Etymology honcho. The Greek poet Pindar (born in approximately 522 BCE) employed creative etymologies to flatter his patrons.

During much of the dialogue. Elisha Coles. János Sajnovics. The sacrifices performed on the bridge were amongst the most sacred and ancient. after that S.[5] The study of etymology in Germanic philology was introduced by Rasmus Christian Rask in the early 19th century and elevated to a high standard with the German Dictionary of the Brothers Grimm. Stephen Skinner. and light is beauty in beholding. Each saint's legend in Jacob de Voragine's Legenda Aurea begins with an etymological discourse on the saint's name: Lucy is said of light. rightful going and devotion to God. when he attempted to demonstrate the relationship between Sami and Hungarian (work that was later extended to the whole Finno-Ugric language family in 1799 by his fellow countryman. In Lucy is said. essence of charity without disordinate love. and assigns the priests the title of bridge-makers." although preceded by 17th century pioneers such as Marcus Zuerius van Boxhorn. have used etymologies to indicate former meanings of words to de-center the "violent hierarchies" of Western metaphysics. to the priesthood. Plutarch (Life of Numa Pompilius) spins an etymology for pontifex ("bridge-builder"): the priests.Etymology 80 Ancient Greco-Roman One of the earliest philosophical texts of the Classical Greek period to address etymology was the Socratic dialogue Cratylus (c. who have power and command over all. Others make the word refer to exceptions of impossible cases. who in 1782 observed the genetic relationship between Sanskrit.. Vossius. right long line by continual work without negligence of slothful tarrying. called Pontifices.. and therefore it is showed the blessed Lucy hath beauty of virginity without any corruption. and William Wotton. an English philologist living in India. In his Odes Pindar spins complimentary etymologies to flatter his patrons. The first known systematic attempt to prove the relationship between two languages on the basis of similarity of grammar and lexicon was made in 1770 by the Hungarian. the way of light.[4] The origin of modern historical linguistics is often traced back to Sir William Jones. and philosophers. Medieval Isidore of Seville compiled a volume of etymologies to illuminate the triumph of religion. The successes of the comparative approach culminated in the Neogrammarian school of the late 19th century. Greek and Latin. the exception was not to be cavilled at. she is gracious in beholding. she passeth in going right without crooking by right long line. like any other public sacred office. Socrates makes guesses as to the origins of many words.[3] Modern era Etymology in the modern sense emerged in the late 18th century European academia. cultural) origins where modulations in meaning regarding certain concepts (such as "good" and "evil") show how these ideas had changed over time—according to which value-system appropriated them. she spreadeth over all without lying down. because they attend the service of the gods. The most common opinion is the most absurd.. 360 BCE) by Plato. the priests were to perform all the duties possible to them. This strategy gained popularity in the 20th century. powerful. if any thing lay beyond their power. such as Jacques Derrida. Still in the 19th century. have the name of Pontifices from potens. . within the context of the wider "Age of Enlightenment. but also elsewhere) to argue that moral values have definite historical (specifically. laying the foundation for the field of Indo-European linguistics. and the keeping and repairing of the bridge attached. Ambrose saith: The nature of light is such. and it is without dilation of tarrying. Jones published his The Sanscrit Language in 1786. the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche used etymological strategies (principally and most famously in On the Genealogy of Morals. including the names of the gods. without squaring out of the way. which derives this word from pons. Samuel Gyarmathi).

[2] Coulmas. sciencephoto. Dictionary of Lexicography. 1: A–L.. "Graphetics" (http:/ / books. London. David (2003). Burchfield. visual graphetics and mechanical graphetics.[1] Graphetics is analogous to phonetics. The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Writing Systems. (1966. Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology. S. Language Contact and Lexical Enrichment in Israeli Hebrew. 2011.and How We Know Them: Etymology for Everyone. it can be divided into two areas.). . Encyclopedia of Linguistics. An Etymological Dictionary of the English Language.. "Graphetics" (http:/ / books.[2] Both printed and handwritten language can be the subject of graphetic study. . graphetics is to the study of writing as phonetics is to the study of spoken language. Marko (2005). at the Open Directory Project Graphetics Graphetics (sometimes known as graphics) is a branch of linguistics concerned with the analysis of the physical properties of shapes used in writing. Philipp (ed. G.[1][2] It is an etic study. the study of the relation between different shapes in particular writing systems. . 2011. Malden. respectively. The Language Library (5th ed. "Word Origins. vol. [3] Hartmann. google.. Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. • C. blackwellreference. .. Retrieved October 10. com/ public/ tocnode?id=g9780631214816_chunk_g97806312148169_ss1-18).[3] References [1] Crystal. (1999). • Skeat. Retrieved October 10. Friedrichsen. ISBN 978-0-631-22663-5. (1963). In: Strazny. etymonline. google. edu/ halsall/ basis/ goldenlegend/ GoldenLegend-Volume2. New York: Routledge.dmoz. htm#Lucy) [4] Szemerényi 1996:6 [5] "Sir William Jones. R. Anatoly (2005). php?term=etymology& allowed_in_frame=0) Online Etymology Dictionary [2] The American educator: a library of universal knowledge . Walter W. It is contrasted with the related emic field of graphemics. Volume 3 By Charles Smith Morris. W.Etymology 81 References [1] (http:/ / www.). James. (2000). Etymology. . (ISBN 0-7881-9161-6) • Skeat. W. British philologist" (http:/ / www." (ISBN 0-19-516147-5) • Zuckermann. R. reprinted 1992. (ISBN 0-19-863104-9) • Snoj. Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 1-4039-1723-X. "Graphetics" (http:/ / www. Florian. com/ books?id=3JtAOHLtlHoC& pg=PA210#v=onepage& q& f=false). External links • Etymology (http://www. Walter W. which are analogous to auditory and articulatory phonetics.. (ISBN 0-19-861112-9) • Liberman. As such. repr ed. Retrieved October 10. The Concise Dictionary of English Etymology.. Blackwell Reference Online: Blackwell. MA: Blackwell. fordham. 2011. ISBN 978-0-415-14143-7. Ghil'ad (2003). pages 304–306. New York: Fitzroy Dearborn. ed. 1994). meaning that it has an outsider's perspective and is not concerned with any particular writing system. Amos Emerson Dolbear [3] Medieval Sourcebook: The Golden Legend: Volume 2 (full text) (http:/ / www. K.. com/ index. com/ media/ 226197/ view). R. Gregory (1998). Onions. com/ books?id=49NZ12icE-QC& pg=PA65#v=onepage& q& f=false). T.

grammatical characterization of systems of sounds or signs.Phonetics 82 Phonetics Phonetics (pronounced /fəˈnɛtɪks/. 'sound. In the case of oral languages there are three basic areas of study: • Articulatory phonetics: the study of the production of speech sounds by the articulatory and vocal tract by the speaker • Acoustic phonetics: the study of the physical transmission of speech sounds from the speaker to the listener • Auditory phonetics: the study of the reception and perception of speech sounds by the listener These areas are inter-connected through the common mechanism of sound. such as wavelength (pitch).[2][3] Phonetic transcription The International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) is used as the basis for the phonetic transcription of speech. It is based on the Latin alphabet and is able to transcribe most features of speech such as consonants. It was in these papers that the term formant was first introduced. auditory perception. or—in the case of sign languages—the equivalent aspects of sign. The difference between phonetics and phonology Phonology concerns itself with systems of phonemes. Ludimar Hermann investigated the spectral properties of vowels and consonants. vowels. The field of phonetics is a multiple layered subject of linguistics that focuses on speech. and neurophysiological status. 1779) and Alexander Melville Bell (in Visible Speech. The major Indic alphabets today order their consonants according to Pāṇini's classification. Modern phonetics begins with attempts — such as those of Joshua Steele (in Prosodia Rationalis. . on the other hand. Phonology. concerns itself with the production. with Pāṇini's account of the place and manner of articulation of consonants in his 5th century BC treatise on Sanskrit. The Ancient Greeks are credited as the first to base a writing system on a phonetic alphabet. amplitude. acoustic properties. Phonetics. 1867) — to introduce systems of precise notation for speech sounds. History Phonetics was studied as early as 500 BC in ancient India. on the other hand. is concerned with the abstract. phōnē. Every documented phoneme available within the known languages in the world is assigned its own corresponding symbol. and perception of the physical phenomena which are abstracted in the mind to constitute these speech sounds or signs. abstract cognitive units of speech sound or sign which distinguish the words of a language. and suprasegmental features. transmission. Using an Edison phonograph. voice') is a branch of linguistics that comprises the study of the sounds of human speech. from the Greek: φωνή.[1] It is concerned with the physical properties of speech sounds or signs (phones): their physiological production. Hermann also played back vowel recordings made with the Edison phonograph at different speeds in order to test Willis' and Wheatstone's theories of vowel production. and harmonics.

constraints. syllables. amplitude.[10] Applications Application of phonetics include: • forensic phonetics: the use of phonetics (the science of speech) for forensic (legal) purposes.g. 1981. edu/ ~duchan/ new_history/ hist19c/ subpages/ mbell.[8][10][11] The IPA is a useful tool not only for the study of phonetics. whether oral or sign. 1976. The State University of New York. phonemes. shape. in The Cambridge Handbook of Phonology (ed. etc. 2001. 1983. The Phonetics-Phonology Interface. Brogan: English Versification. 2007. Phonological representations and phonetic implementation of distinctive features. [5] Halle. However. e. On Distinctive Features and their articulatory implementation. sexuality. provides a standardized set of symbols for oral phones. net/ resources/ evrg/ index. Morris. p. 91 . relating such concerns with other levels and aspects of language.g. ethnicity. categorization. E394.[5][6][7] Subfields Phonetics as a research discipline has three main branches: • articulatory phonetics is concerned with the articulation of speech: The position. • acoustic phonetics is concerned with acoustics of speech: The spectro-temporal properties of the sound waves produced by speech. phonology is a distinct branch of linguistics. html). and movement of articulators or speech organs. phonology is the study of how sounds and gestures pattern in and across languages.15 [2] T. [3] Alexander Melville Bell 1819-1905 (http:/ / www. • Speech Recognition: the analysis and transcription of recorded speech by a computer system. [4] Kingston.V.g. phoneticians may concern themselves with the physical properties of meaningful sound contrasts or the social meaning encoded in the speech signal (socio-phonetics) (e. gender. acoustic signals. Paul DeLacy). allophonic rules.[8][9] The standardized nature of the IPA enables its users to transcribe accurately and consistently the phones of different languages. T.Phonetics 83 Relation to phonology In contrast to phonetics.[4] Phonology relates to phonetics via the set of distinctive features. acsu. Cambridge University Press. MIT Press. Notes [1] O'Grady (2005) p. mora. Transcription Phonetic transcription is a system for transcribing sounds that occur in a language. and how they are perceived. tongue. and recognition of speech sounds and the role of the auditory system and the brain in the same. and harmonic structure. arsversificandi. and idiolects. [7] Hall.. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. or derivational rules). such as their frequency. html). Allen.F. Phonetics deals with the articulatory and acoustic properties of speech sounds.. a substantial portion of research in phonetics is not concerned with the meaningful elements in the speech signal. John. Gunnar Fant. etc. professional acting.) and their conditioned variation (via. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. buffalo. dialects. how they are produced. Mouton de Gruyter. distinctive features. 1570–1980 (http:/ / www. Roman. and/or perceptual representations. As part of this investigation. While it is widely agreed that phonology is grounded in phonetics. the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA). . • auditory phonetics is concerned with speech perception: the perception. such as the lips. and speech pathology. and Morris Halle. but also for language teaching. which map the abstract representations of speech units to articulatory gestures. and vocal folds. Preliminaries to Speech Analysis: The Distinctive Features and their Correlates.105 [6] Jakobson.). The most widely known system of phonetic transcription. concerned with sounds and gestures as abstract units (e. University at Buffalo.

5th ed. • SID.ling.17 [9] International Phonetic Association (1999) Handbook of the International Phonetic Association.htm) • Speech Analysis Tutorial (http://www.uni-osnabrueck. Peter & Ian Maddieson (1996) The Sounds of the World’s Languages.phonetics.Speech Internet Dictionary (http://www.ims. (2005). Contemporary Linguistics: An Introduction (5th ed. [11] Ladefoged.) • IPA handbook ( with some exercises ( Peter (1975) A Course in Phonetics.php) • Beginner's course in phonetics. Martin's.htm) (electroglottography.cambridge.htm) • IPA-SAM Phonetic Fonts (http://www. ( lecture2. Professor of Oxford: William.PhoneticsandPhonology) (University of Osnabrueck) • EGG and Voice Quality (http://www.html) U Penn • UCLA lab data (http://hctv.Phonetics [8] O'Grady (2005) p. Boston: Thomson/Wadsworth 2006.ucla. etc.isphs.html) • Real-time MRI video of the articulation of speech sounds.phon.pdf).html) • Praat .de/ sprachwissenschaft/personal/lehmann/CL_Lehr/PhonPhon/Phon_Index. External links • the Web Site of the Phonetic Sciences Laboratory of the Université de Montré • UCLA Phonetics Lab Archive ( ISBN 0-312-41936-8. university of Erfurt (http://www.phon. from the USC Speech Articulation and kNowledge (SPAN) Group ( Peter • Extensive collection of phonetics resources on the Web (http://www. Orlando: Harcourt Brace. [10] • The International Society of Phonetic Sciences (ISPhS) (http://www. 84 References • O'Grady. (pdf) • The sounds and sound patterns of language (http://www.phonetique.Phonetic analysis software (http://www.html) • Lecture materials in German on phonetics & phonology. Cambridge University Bedford/ show?n=PhoneticsandPhonology.unc. UK.html) (University of North Carolina) • Phonetics and Phonology (http://www. University of • A little encyclopedia of phonetics (http://www. et al.).

who established the English Language Institute (ELI) at the University of Michigan in 1941. applied linguistics has broadened including critical studies and multilingualism. applied linguistics became a problem-driven field rather than theoretical linguistics. the Research Club at Michigan established Language Learning: A Journal of Applied Linguistics."[2] United States In the United States. psychology. In the early days. by any lawful charitable means. applied linguistics began to establish its own identity as an interdisciplinary field concerned with real-world language issues. the study of language use.[1] Although the field of applied linguistics started from Europe and the United States. lexicography. language assessment. anthropology. applied linguistics was expanded to include language assessment.]"[4] Australia . discourse analysis. By the 1990s. and by Charles C. language acquisition and language teaching and the fostering of interdisciplinary collaboration in this study [. Major journals of the field include Annual Review of Applied Linguistics. and Language Learning. In the late 1960s. Issues in Applied Linguistics. the first journal to bear the term applied linguistics. applied linguistics was thought as “linguistics-applied” at least from the outside of the field. History The tradition of applied linguistics established itself in part as a response to the narrowing of focus in linguistics with the advent in the late 1950s of generative linguistics. Domain Applied linguistics is an interdisciplinary field. In the 1960s.[3] United Kingdom The British Association for Applied Linguistics (BAAL) was established in 1967. contrastive linguistics. Its mission is "the advancement of education by fostering and promoting. language policy. computer science. forensic linguistics and translation. language pedagogy. Fries. In 1948. Major branches of applied linguistics include bilingualism and multilingualism. stylistics. the field rapidly flourished in the international context. As early as the 1970s. who developed the foundation for the Army Specialized Training Program. applied linguistics also began narrowly as the application of insights from structural linguistics—first to the teaching of English in schools and subsequently to second and foreign language teaching. second language acquisition. and sociology. Applied Linguistics. interlinguistics.. however. International Journal of Applied Linguistics. sign linguistics. computer-mediated communication (CMC). and offers solutions to language-related real-life problems.. demonstrated by its central interest in language problems. The new identity was solidified by the creation of the American Association for Applied Linguistics in 1977. linguistics. The linguistics applied approach to language teaching was promulgated most strenuously by Leonard Bloomfield. Some of the academic fields related to applied linguistics are education. Research of applied linguistics was shifted to "the theoretical and empirical investigation of real world problems in which language is a central issue. conversation analysis. language planning and policy.Applied linguistics 85 Applied linguistics Applied linguistics is an interdisciplinary field of study that identifies. and has always maintained a socially accountable role. Applied linguistics also included solution of language-related problems in the real world. pragmatics. literacies. Applied linguistics first concerned itself with principles and practices on the basis of linguistics. and second language acquisition. International Review of Applied Linguistics. investigates. Greek Applied Linguistics Association ( • Japan Association of Language Teachers ( Irish Association for Applied Linguistics ( Association Suisse de Linguistique Appliquée ( British Association for Applied Linguistics ( Europe • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Association Belge de Linguistique Appliquée ( rather than of Britain.aitla.[7] 86 Societies • International Association of Applied Linguistics ( • Asociación Mexicana de Lingüística Aplicada ( • China English Language Education Association ( JAAL became an affiliate of the International Association of Applied Linguistics (AILA).cn/) • Hong Kong Association for Applied Linguistics (http://www.uji.[5] Applied Linguistics Association of Australia (ALAA) was established at a national congress of applied linguists held in August 1976.hf.html) Association Française de Linguistique Appliquée ( • Associação de Linguística Aplicada do Brasil (http://www. In Association Finlandaise de Linguistique Appliquée ( Association Suédoise de Linguistique Appliquée ( Associazione Italiana di Linguistica Applicata (http://www.baal.html) • Applied Linguistics Association of Australia ( America • American Association for Applied Linguistics ( linguistics Australian applied linguistics took as its target the applied linguistics of mother tongue teaching and teaching English to Gesellschaft für Angewandte Linguistik ( • Japan Association of College English Teachers ( Asociación Española de Lingüística Aplicada (! Association Néerlandaise de Linguistique Appliquée ( Asia • Asian Association of TEFL (Asia TEFL) ( • Asociación de Lingüística y Filología de América Latina/Associação de Lingüística e Filologia da América Latina (http://www. the Japan Association of Applied Linguistics (JAAL) was established in the Japan Association of College English Teachers (JACET) in order to engage in activities on a more international Estonian Association of Applied Linguistics (http://www.[6] Japan In 1982. The Australia tradition shows a strong influence of continental Europe and of the • Canadian Association of Applied Linguistics ( Polish Association of Applied Linguistics Oceania • Applied Linguistics Association of New Zealand ( • Applied Linguistics Association of Korea (http://www.htm#SG) Association Norvegienne de Linguistique Appliquée ( • Center for Applied Linguistics (http://www.alab.ntnu.

jacet. Mapping Applied Linguistics. Handbook of Applied Linguistics. & Wicaksono. MA: Blackwell. "International Journal of Applied Linguistics". 6 [6] "Applied Linguistics Association of Australia (home page)" (http:/ / www. Oxford/ Michael (2001) Issues in Applied Oxford: Oxford University Press. Helen (1999) Encyclopedic Dictionary of Applied Linguistics. A Guide for Students and Others • Israel Association of Applied Linguistics (http://www. au/ ). • Applied Linguistics information and resources (USA and Canada) (http://www. 1 [2] Christopher Brumfit.Applied linguistics • Linguistic Society of the Philippines (http://www. In K. html) . MA: Blackwell.). (2006). & Matsuda.appliedlinguistics. html External links • mappling. C. org. uk/ constitution.mappling. References [1] Alan Davies & Catherine Elder. K. [3] Margie Berns and Paul Kei Matsuda. Oxford/Malden. London: Routledge. Retrieved 19 March 2012. UK: Elsevier. September 2011. 86-94. • Cook. G. pp. 7(1).edu. Retrieved 19 March 2012. alaa. London: Arnold. • McCarthy. Handbook of Applied Linguistics. [5] Alan Davies & Catherine Elder. P. September 2011.dlsu. Public In K.) (2004) Handbook of Applied Linguistics.(Eds. Brown (Ed.). (2003) Applied Linguistics (in the series Oxford Introduction to Language Study). Norbert (2002) An Introduction to Applied Linguistics. Applied Linguistics Association of Australia. org/ about-e. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.). • Pennycook. M.. & Applied Linguistics community website (http://www. Applied linguistics: Overview and history. . Smith. • Schmitt. • Davies. • Hall. Keith & Johnson. A.saala. (2011). Applied linguistics: Overview and history.. • Johnson. The Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (2nd ed. Cambridge University Press.asp) • Singapore Association for Applied Linguistics (http://www. (eds. H. Alastair (2001) Critical Applied Linguistics: A Critical baal. 2004.).il/~ilash/) • Southern African Applied Linguistics Association (http://www. .za/) 87 Further reading • Berns.). The Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (2nd ed. [7] http:/ / www.(Eds. P. How applied linguistics is the same as any other science. R. C. Brown (Ed. pdf). J. 394–405). Paragraph 3: "Objects". 2004. 2006. British Association for Applied Linguistics. Oxford. [4] "British Association for Applied Linguistics constitution" (http:/ / www.

on the way language is used. In order to get a grasp on a specific linguistic form and how it is used in the dialect of the subject. and it is these sociolects that sociolinguistics studies.[5] Bosnian/Croatian/Montenegrin/Serbian Serbo-Croatian[6]). who is the interviewee. a variety of methods are used to elicit certain registers of speech. Code-switching is the term given to the use of different varieties of language in different social situations.. As the usage of a language varies from place to place. Applications of sociolinguistics For example. The first attested use of the term sociolinguistics was by Thomas Callan Hodson in the title of a 1939 paper.g. There are five different styles. Minimal pairs are pairs of words that differ in only one phoneme. Sociolinguistics differs from sociology of language in that the focus of sociolinguistics is the effect of the society on the language. He is especially noted for introducing the quantitative study of language variation and change. There is an interviewer. ethnicity.g. e. Having the subject read a word list (WL) will elicit a formal register. It is historically closely related to linguistic anthropology and the distinction between the two fields has even been questioned recently. The study of the social motivation of language change. and also by Louis Gauchat in Switzerland in the early 1900s. religion. and other aspects of this sociolect much as dialectologists would study the same for a regional dialect. Sociolinguistics overlaps to a considerable degree with pragmatics. but generally not as formal as MP. American/British/Canadian/Australian English. phonetics. but none received much attention in the West until much later.[1] It also studies how language varieties differ between groups separated by certain social variables. who is conducting the study. During the IS the interviewer can converse with the subject and try to draw out of them an even more casual sort of speech by asking him to recall childhood memories or maybe a near death experience. level of education. vocabulary.[4] Austrian/German/Swiss German. Sociolinguists might also study the grammar. while the sociology of language focuses on language's effect on the society. and a subject.. Traditional sociolinguistic interview Sociolinguistic interviews are an integral part of collecting data for sociolinguistic studies.Sociolinguistics 88 Sociolinguistics Sociolinguistics is the descriptive study of the effect of any and all aspects of society. a sociolinguist might determine through study of social attitudes that a particular vernacular would not be considered appropriate language use in a business or professional setting. In the 1960s. etc. including cultural norms. and the interview style (IS) is when an interviewer can finally get into eliciting a more casual speech from the subject. and the effects of language use on society. The social aspects of language were in the modern sense first studied by Indian and Japanese linguists in the 1930s. and how creation and adherence to these rules is used to categorize individuals in social or socioeconomic classes. age. or informant. status. in which case the subject will get deeply . and context. such as cat and bat. William Stewart[3] and Heinz Kloss introduced the basic concepts for the sociolinguistic theory of pluricentric languages.[7] making the sociology of language into a scientific discipline. The study of language variation is concerned with social constraints determining language in its contextual environment. which describes how standard language varieties differ between nations (e. has its foundation in the wave model of the late 19th century. ranging from formal to casual. The most formal style would be elicited by having the subject read a list of minimal pairs (MP). on the other hand. The reading passage (RP) style is next down on the formal register.[2] Sociolinguistics in the West first appeared in the 1960s and was pioneered by linguists such as William Labov in the US and Basil Bernstein in the UK. gender. William Labov is often regarded as the founder of the study of sociolinguistics. language usage also varies among social classes. expectations.

This is sometimes referred to as a Sprechbund. It can be realised on the level of the individual sound/phoneme. certain speech habits are assigned a positive or a negative value. and less likely if their networks were looser (i. Members of speech communities will often develop slang or jargon to serve the group's special purposes and priorities. in some neighborhoods. had strong local ties and interacted with many other speakers in the community). A large course with 100+ students would be a looser community because students may only interact with the instructor and maybe 1–2 other students. This type of speech is difficult if not impossible to elicit because of the Observer's Paradox. which is then applied to the speaker. An important implication of sociolinguistic theory is that speakers 'choose' a variety when making a speech act. A network could be loose or tight depending on how members interact with each other. or even tight-knit groups like families and friends. The closest one might come to CS in an interview is when the subject is interrupted by a close friend or family member. but also to the inter-personal level of neighborhoods or a single family. A social network is another way of describing a particular speech community in terms of relations between individual members in a community. Of course. or on the macro scale of language choice. and online dating services. For instance. organizations. Recently.e. as Labov discovered in investigating pronunciation of the post-vocalic /r/ in the North-Eastern USA. or perhaps must answer the phone.Sociolinguistics involved with the story since strong emotions are often attached to these memories. CS is used in a completely unmonitored environment where the subject feels most comfortable and will use their natural vernacular without overtly thinking about it.e. an office or factory may be considered a tight community because all members interact with each other. A multiplex community is one in which members have multiple relationships with each other.[8] For instance. fewer local ties). . 89 Fundamental concepts in sociolinguistics While the study of sociolinguistics is very broad.[8] For instance. whether consciously or subconsciously. where Swiss-German/High German is perhaps most well known. as realised in the various diglossias that exist throughout the world. members may live on the same street.[9] A social network may apply to the macro level of a country or a city. Sylvie Dubois and Barbara Horvath found that speakers in one Cajun Louisiana community were more likely to pronounce English "th" [θ] as [t] (or [ð] as [d]) if they participated in a relatively dense social network (i. MySpace groups. Speech communities can be members of a profession with a specialized jargon. Social network Understanding language in society means that one also has to understand the social networks in which language is embedded. This can operate on many levels. social networks have been formed by the Internet. through chat rooms. the most sought after type of speech is the casual style (CS). Speech community Speech community is a concept in sociolinguistics that describes a more or less discrete group of people who use language in a unique and mutually accepted way among themselves. there are a few fundamental concepts on which many sociolinguistic inquiries depend. work for the same employer and even intermarry. distinct social groups like high school students or hip hop fans. High prestige and low prestige varieties Crucial to sociolinguistic analysis is the concept of prestige. The looseness or tightness of a social network may affect speech patterns adopted by a speaker.

have shown that social aspirations influence speech patterns. However. He stated that this type of code allows strong bonds between group members. Social language codes Basil Bernstein. This social group also uses language in a way that brings unity between people. Differences according to class Sociolinguistics as a field distinct from dialectology was pioneered through the study of language variation in urban areas.e. 'Elaborated and restricted codes: their social origins and some consequences. the restricted code was an example of the speech patterns used by the working class. internal language is linguistic knowledge that a native speaker of language has. and less likely if their networks were looser (i. Whereas dialectology studies the geographic distribution of language variation. the upper class. which fosters greater solidarity than an emphasis on 'I'. Class and occupation are among the most important linguistic markers found in society. is that class and language variety are related. not being native upper class speakers. who tend to behave largely on the basis of distinctions such as 'male'. while the lower. For instance. and upper middle class will in turn speak closer to the standard.e. In this context. One of the fundamental findings of sociolinguistics. It applies to the study of syntax and semantics on the abstract level. Sandra Thompson). Internal language analyses operate on the assumption that all native speakers of a language are quite homogeneous in how they process and perceive language. which has been hard to disprove. Sylvie Dubois and Barbara Horvath found that speakers in one Cajun Louisiana community were more likely to pronounce English "th" [θ] as [t] (or [ð] as [d]) if they participated in a relatively dense social network (i. 'female'. a well-known British socio-linguist. The same is true for individuals moving down in socio-economic status. among them class. which involves overcorrecting their speech to the point of introducing new errors. middle. as their shared knowledge and common understanding often bring them together in a way that other social language groups do not experience. external language In Chomskyan linguistics.Sociolinguistics 90 Internal vs. such as those by William Labov in the 1960s. 'older'. On this view. Class aspiration Studies. Elinor Ochs.' a social code system he used to classify the various speech patterns for different social classes. This is also true of class aspirations. In the process of wishing to be associated with a certain class (usually the upper class and upper middle class) people who are moving in that direction socio-economically will adjust their speech patterns to sound like them. but class aspirations. External language applies to language in social contexts. Members of the working class tend to speak less standard language. attempt to explain why this is in fact not the case. The difference with the restricted code is the emphasis on 'we' as a social group. He claimed that members of the middle class have ways of organizing their speech that are fundamentally very different from the ways adopted by the working class. i. grammar is first and foremost an interactional (social) phenomenon (e. sociolinguistics focuses on other sources of variation. and members often do not need to be explicit about meaning. are important. a distinction is drawn between I-language (internal language) and E-language (external language). even members of the upper middle class. such as sociolinguistics. had strong local ties and interacted with many other speakers in the community). may often speak 'less' standard than the middle class. The time when "restricted-code" matters is the day when children start school where the standard . devised in his book. External language fields.e. Emanuel Schegloff. However. they often hypercorrect. and 'younger'. The looseness or tightness of a social network may affect speech patterns adopted by a speaker.and E-language on the grounds that it is based on a mentalist view of language. behavioral habits shared by a community.g. Restricted code In Basil Bernstein's theory. Many sociolinguists reject the distinction between I. fewer local ties) This is because not only class.

there are two types of codes. verbal and non-verbal. 53). According to Paivio. The higher the social class. Paivio (1986) states: "Human cognition is unique in that it has become specialized for dealing simultaneously with language and with nonverbal objects and events. What's more. events. the written form of a language is already very different from the everyday form. therefore. within this social formation members negotiate and achieve their roles. and behaviors. Moreover. children with restricted-code may have difficulty in understanding the teacher. the less variation. Early schooling may provide them with opportunities to acquire the way of speaking valid at school. Therefore. Elaborated code Basil Bernstein also studied what he named the 'elaborated code' explaining that in this type of speech pattern the middle and upper classes use this language style to gain access to education and career advancement. struggle at school more than those who speak an "elaborated-code". Children with restricted-code. rather than have them there ready-made in advance. the only source of information for them at school. The type of communication used by the working class reminds Paivio's dual code theory. The dual coding theory proposed by Paivio attempts to give equal weight to verbal and non-verbal processing." (p. the language system is peculiar in that it deals directly with linguistic input and output (in the form of speech or writing) while at the same time serving a symbolic function with respect to nonverbal objects. therefore. Bonds within this social group are not as well defined and people achieve their social identity largely on the basis of individual disposition and temperament. However. 91 Deviation from standard language varieties The existence of differences in language between social classes can be illustrated by the following table: A diagram showing variation in the English language by region (the bottom axis) and by social class (the side axis). Any representational theory must accommodate this dual functionality. this type of communicative skills may not be understood by other children who belong to other classes. .Sociolinguistics variety of language is used. The use of context by members of working class to imply what they mean. Due to the lack of solidarity the elaborated social language code requires individual intentions and viewpoints to be made explicit as the 'I' has a greater emphasis with this social group than the working class. it is suggested that working-class children should have pre-school training within their early childhood period. may be a "non-verbal code". Moreover. There is no obvious division of tasks according to sex or age and generally.

at least in England and Australia. It is also notable that. "A Sociolinguistic Typology for Describing National Multilingualism". 1111/ j. Österreich und der Schweiz: das Problem der nationalen Varietäten [German Language in Germany.Sociolinguistics 92 Bristolian Dialect (lower class) .. Norbert. and society: Sociolinguistics or linguistic anthropology?". Zur Theorie des Dialekts: Aufsätze aus 100 Jahren Forschung. "Abstandsprachen und Ausbausprachen [Abstand-languages and Ausbau-languages]". such as traditional working-class neighborhoods. Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter. References [1] John J. in certain groups. the use of non-standard varieties (even exaggeratedly so) expresses neighborhood pride and group and class solidarity. 2008. (http:/ / doi. [2] T. In Göschel. ncl. There will thus be a considerable difference in use of non-standard varieties when going to the pub or having a neighborhood barbecue (high). This is because the working class dialect is a powerful in-group marker. They are: vernacular of a subgroup with membership typically characterized by a specific age range. the closer to standard English a dialect gets. tend to use slightly different language styles.F. the less the lexicon varies by region. Beihefte. A commonly studied source of variation is regional dialects. wiley.. Zeitschrift fur Dialektologie and Linguistik.. 2008: 532–545. Sociolinguistic variables Studies in the field of sociolinguistics typically take a sample population and interview them. p. but some women are taller than some men). 1467-9841. pp. Sociolinguists concerned with grammatical and phonological features that correspond to regional areas are often called dialectologists. assessing the realisation of certain sociolinguistic variables.. I didn't do it Any native speaker of English would immediately be able to guess that speaker 1 was likely of a different social class than speaker 2. Joseph (http:/ / www. 00378. I did it yesterday . The Hague. That is. 310. and vice versa. php?id=304) Sociolinguistics Symposium 15. x) Journal of Sociolinguistics 12(4). "Studying language. Joshua A. men are on average taller than women. These differences tend to be quantitative rather than qualitative. standard language may be considered undesirable in many contexts. p. Nail. and going to the bank (lower) for the same individual. April 2004 [3] Stewart. 1–11. to say that women use a particular speaking style more than men do is akin to saying that men are taller than women (i. on average. Variation may also be associated with gender. n. Steiner. . Paris: Mouton.. The differences in grammar between the two examples of speech is referred to as differences between social class dialects or sociolects. Gumperz and Jenny Cook-Gumperz.. and indications of linguistic change in progress. Dialectology studies variations in language based primarily on geographic distribution and their associated features. Ulrich (1995) (in German). age-graded variation. Newcastle-upon-Tyne. OCLC 2598722. culture. probably from a working class pedigree. Joachim. Gaston.. William A (1968). and especially for non-mobile individuals. namely from a lower social class.. uk/ ss15/ papers/ paper_details. [5] Ammon. [4] Kloss. Wiesbaden: F.e. C. 534. There are several different types of age-based variation one may see within a population. OCLC 306499. Heinz (1976). com/ 10.. ac. Standard English (higher class) I ain't done nothing I done it yesterday It weren't me that done it . Die deutsche Sprache in Deutschland. In Fishman. OCLC 33981055. I haven't done anything . Austria and Switzerland: The Problem of National Varieties]. Readings in the Sociology of Language. van der Els.. Hodson and the Origins of British Socio-linguistics by John E. Heft 16. However. Covert prestige It is generally assumed that non-standard language is low-prestige language. Men and women.

(Publications in Sociolinguistics. n. ISSN 0044-2356. • Labov. ISBN 978-953-188-311-5. Analyzing Linguistic Variation: Statistical Models and Methods CSLI Press 2001.Sociolinguistics [6] Kordić. (2003). Archived from the original (http://www.revel. ISBN 0-14-028921-6 This book is a very readable. ISBN 978-0-521-79406-0. It's a little tough at times. Sali Analysing Sociolinguistic Variation Cambridge. ISBN 0-520-21666-0 • Meyerhoff. W. S. Sociolinguistic Theory. ISBN 0-631-22225-1. Principles of Linguistic Changes: Social Factors. pp. revel_9_interview_labov.php About sociolinguistic fieldwork • Sociolinguistics: an interview with William Labov (http://www. LCCN 2011520778. New York: Routledge. Sylvie and Horvath. (2001). (1998). A sociolinguistics book specializing in the research in politeness. Retrieved 31 August 2012. (2006). Zeitschrift für Balkanologie (http://www. (An entry-level introduction to sociolinguistics that features a practical how-to guide for setting up an investigation. Lesley and Gordon. John C. if Anglo-centric. 93 Further reading • Chambers. J. Archived from the original (http:/ / bib. 9. Richard J. webcitation. Snježana (2009). webcitation. [7] Paolillo. Malden. Politeness. Linguistic Variation and its Social Significance. • Watts. Peter. org/ 690BiBe4T). Zagreb: Durieux. variability debate. Ronald (2006). Abstand languages and the Serbo-Croatistics]" (http://www. Ma: Blackwell Publishers. (2010). zeitschrift-fuer-balkanologie. 5.) • Kordić. Berkely. hr/ datoteka/ 475567. "Let's tink about dat: Interdental Fricatives in Cajun English.inf. Ausbau languages. Rotulus Universitas.) • Paulston. • Tagliamonte. Introducing Sociolinguistics.) Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics.dmoz. 2007. editors. pp 245–61. Christina Bratt and G. at the Open Directory Project • http://www. 77–90. Analysing Sociolinguistic Variation. Malden. The early days of sociolinguistics: memories and reflections. 1997.ncsu. Jezik_i_nacionalizam.php/zfb/index) 45 (2): 210–215. "Plurizentrische Sprachen.pdf) ReVEL. but has lots of good examples and describes research methodologies to use. Jezik i nacionalizam [Language and Nationalism] (http:/ / www. MA: Blackwell Publishers." Language Variation and Change 10 (3). The Language War. irb. but very helpful and (in German).) • Trudgill. New York: Wiley-Blackwell [9] Dubois. Abstandsprachen und die Serbokroatistik [Pluricentric languages. (2000). 2006 [8] Wardhaugh. . Barbara. Richard Tucker. London: Penguin Books. CA: University of California Press. OCLC 729837512.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ausbausprachen. Retrieved 17 July Sociolinguistics: An Introduction to Language and Society(4th Ed. (More advanced. External links • Applied Linguistics (http://www. It also offers an overview of the structure vs. (A very elaborate book that brings the reader a detailed overview of the most important investigations that have been done in Snježana (2010) (in Serbo-Croatian). vol.zeitschrift-fuer-balkanologie. (2003) Sociolinguistics: Method and Interpretation London: Blackwell Publishing.).php/zfb/article/view/203/203) on 4 August 2012. OL{{{1}}}. Tagliamonte.K. Robin T. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. . (2000). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. pdf) on 8 July 2012. • Lakoff. ISBN 0-415-39948-3 • Milroy. (2006). their results and the tendencies that can be derived from those. introduction for the non-linguist.

one had to also understand the semantics and the lexicon (or 'vocabulary').[6] computer science departments. a field under which it is often grouped.[7] and linguistics departments. including both morphology (the grammar of word forms) and syntax (the grammar of sentence structure). experts in artificial intelligence. anthropologists and neuroscientists.[3] When machine translation (also known as mechanical translation) failed to yield accurate translations right away. language experts (persons with some level of ability in the languages relevant to a given project). computational linguistics was usually performed by computer scientists who had specialized in the application of computers to the processing of a natural language. Computational linguistics originated with efforts in the United States in the 1950s to use computers to automatically translate texts from foreign languages. logicians. In order to translate one language into another.[8][9] .[5] computational linguistics laboratories. where theoretical computational linguistics takes up issues in theoretical linguistics and cognitive science. and even to understand something of the pragmatics of language use. computer scientists. including linguists (specifically trained in linguistics). among others. the field of computational linguistics became that sub-division of artificial intelligence dealing with human-level comprehension and production of natural languages. what started as an effort to translate between languages evolved into an entire discipline devoted to understanding how to represent and process natural languages using computers. Computational linguistics was born as the name of the new field of study devoted to developing algorithms and software for intelligently processing language data.[1] Origins Computational linguistics as a field predates artificial intelligence. Traditionally. Computational linguistics has theoretical and applied components.Computational linguistics 94 Computational linguistics Computational linguistics is an interdisciplinary field dealing with the statistical or rule-based modeling of natural language from a computational perspective.[4] Nowadays research within the scope of computational linguistics is done at computational linguistics departments. and computer scientists. into English. particularly Russian scientific journals. Thus. and applied computational linguistics focuses on the practical outcome of modelling human language use. psycholinguists. philosophers. cognitive psychologists. In order to understand syntax. it was observed that one had to understand the grammar of both languages. cognitive scientists. computational linguistics draws upon the involvement of linguists. Computational linguists often work as members of interdisciplinary teams. automated processing of human languages was recognized as far more complex than had originally been assumed. When artificial intelligence came into existence in the 1960s.[2] Since computers can make arithmetic calculations much faster and more accurately than humans. mathematicians. it was thought to be only a short matter of time before the technical details could be taken care of that would allow them the same remarkable capacity to process language. In general.

Enabled to learn as children might. and linguistic comprehension.[11] and so provides certain boundaries for a computational approach to modeling language development and acquisition in an individual. human children are largely only exposed to positive evidence. Structural Approaches In order to create better computational models of language. The ability of infants to develop language has also been modeled using robots[13] in order to test linguistic theories. Computational approaches to understanding this phenomenon have unearthed very interesting information. an understanding of language’s structure is crucial. structural linguistics.Computational linguistics 95 Approaches Just as computational linguistics can be performed by experts in a variety of fields. This grants computational linguists the raw data necessary to run their models and gain a better understanding of the underlying structures present in the vast amount of data . Work in this realm has also been proposed as a method to explain the evolution of language through history. these robots were able to acquire functioning word-to-meaning mappings without needing grammatical structure. As our understanding of the linguistic development of an individual within a lifetime is continually improved using neural networks and learning robotic systems. vastly simplifying the learning process and shedding light on information which furthers the current understanding of linguistic development. so too can the research fields broach a diverse range of topics. Crucially. Using the Price Equation and Pólya urn dynamics. One of the most important pieces of being able to study linguistic structure is the availability of large linguistic corpora.[10] This means that during the linguistic development of an individual. it has been shown that languages can be learned most efficiently with a combination of simple input at first presented incrementally and the child develops better memory and longer attention span. only evidence for what is a correct form is provided. The ability to model and modify systems at will affords science an ethical method of testing hypotheses that would otherwise be intractable. linguistic production. researchers have created a system which not only predicts future linguistic evolution. Developmental Approaches Language is a skill which develops throughout the life of an individual. It is important to note that this information could only have been empirically tested using a computational approach. This is insufficient information for a simple hypothesis testing procedure for information as complex as language. during language acquisition. and through a plethora of departments. but also gives insight into the evolutionary history of modern day languages. a model was created based on an affordance model in which mappings between actions.[12] This was simultaneously posed as a reason for the long developmental period of human children. perceptions. For instance.[14] This modeling effort achieved through computational linguistics what would have otherwise been impossible. and not evidence for what is not correct. It is clear that the understanding of linguistic development in humans as well as throughout evolutionary time has been fantastically improved because of advances in computational linguistics. Attempts have been made to model the developmental process of language acquisition in children from a computational angle. and effects were created and linked to spoken words. and a computational approach is one of them. This developmental process has been examined using a number of techniques. The following sections discuss some of the literature available across the entire field broken into four main area of discourse: developmental linguistics. it is also important to keep in mind that languages themselves change and develop through time. Using models.[12] Both conclusions were drawn because of the strength of the neural network which the project created. To this end. Human language development does provide some constraints which make it feasible to apply a computational method to understanding it. the English language has been meticulously studied using computational approaches to better understand how the language works on a structural level.

but in truth it simply followed a pattern matching . one with a fellow human and another with a machine attempting to respond like a human. it has recently been proven that based on the structural information present in patterns of human discourse. This type of annotated corpus allows other researchers to apply hypotheses and measures that would otherwise be impossible to perform. Computational linguistics allows for very exciting additions to the scientific knowledge base to happen quickly and with very little room for doubt. and could have any number of effects on the understanding of Japanese as a language.[11] In these models. rules or patterns learned increase in strength with the frequency of their encounter. and are crucial to the growth of the field.Computational linguistics which is contained in any single language. As a thought experiment for what might define the concept of thought in machines. The other half is how a system produces language. Without the computational approach to this question. Without a computational approach to the structure of linguistic data. comprehension is only half the battle of communication. much of the information that is available now would still be hidden under the vastness of data within any single language.[15] Containing over 4. These works allow computational linguistics to have a framework within which to work out hypotheses that will further the understanding of the language in a myriad of ways.[18] Today this test is known as the Turing test and it remains an influential idea in the area of artificial intelligence. Information regarding the structural data of a language is not simply available for English. the vastly complex information present in discourse data would have remained inaccessible to scientists. conceptual recurrence plots can be used to model and visualize trends in data and create reliable measures of similarity between natural textual utterances. such as Japanese. Japanese sentence corpora were analyzed and a pattern of log-normality was found in relation to sentence length. That is to say. Theoretical approaches to the structure of languages have also been submitted. creating the possibility for discoveries unlike any seen in most other approaches.[16] This technique is a strong tool for further probing the structure of human discourse. One of the earliest and best known examples of a computer program designed to converse naturally with humans is the ELIZA program developed by Joseph Weizenbaum at MIT in 1966. Turing proposes that if the subject cannot tell the difference between the human and the machine.[11] The work also created a question for computational linguists to answer: how does an infant learn a specific and non-normal grammar (Chomsky Normal Form) without learning an overgeneralized version and getting stuck[11]? Theoretical efforts like these set the direction for research to go early in the lifetime of a field of study. One of the original theoretical theses on internalization of grammar and structure of language proposed two types of models. Computational linguistics allows scientists to parse huge amounts of data reliably and efficiently. this corpus has been annotated for part-of-speech information. Structural information about languages allows for the discovery and implementation of similarity recognition between pairs of text utterances.5 million words of American English. but can also be found in other languages. This information could lead to further important discoveries regarding the underlying structure of Japanese. and computational linguistics has made some very interesting discoveries in this area. it is precisely this sort of intriguing information which computational linguistics is designed to uncover.[16] For instance. In a now famous paper published in 1950 Alan Turing proposed the possibility that machines might one day have the ability to "think". One of the most cited English linguistic corpora is the Penn Treebank. The program emulated a Rogerian psychotherapist when responding to written statements and questions posed by a user. he proposed an "imitation test" in which a human subject has two text-only conversations.[17] Using computational methods. it may be concluded that the machine is capable of thought.[17] Though the exact cause of this lognormality remains unknown. 96 Production Approaches The production of language is equally as complex in the information it provides and the necessary skills which a fluent producer must have. It appeared capable of understanding what was said to it and responding intelligently.

. Early work in comprehension included applying Bayesian statistics to the task of optical character recognition. This environment consisted of different shaped and colored blocks.[24] While impressive. and online education. The primary language parsing program in this project was called SHRDLU.[21] This work takes a computational approach via parameter estimation models to categorize the vast array of linguistic styles we see across individuals and simplify it for a computer to work in the same way[11]. They also provide efficient training algorithms for the models presented." and asking questions such as "I don't understand which pyramid you mean. smoothing techniques. which can give other scientists the ability to improve further on their results. and consequently the results generated by computational linguists have become more enlightening. algorithms have been constructed which are able to modify a system’s style of production based on a factor such as linguistic input from a human. but it is not required for a logical response in the context of this type of psychotherapy.[25] These kinds of problems are referred to as question answering. including hidden Markov models. For example in the phrase "It seems that you hate me" ELIZA understands "you" and "me" which matches the general pattern "you [some words] me". WIth the proliferation of the internet and the abundance of easily accessible written human language. which was capable of carrying out a somewhat natural conversation with the user giving it commands. 97 Comprehension Approaches Much of the focus of modern computational linguistics is on comprehension. and the specific refinements of those to apply them to verb translation.[23] In 1979 Terry Winograd developed an early natural language processing engine capable of interpreting naturally written commands within a simple rule governed environment. Using linguistic input from humans. the methods have become more refined and clever. or more abstract factors like politeness or any of the five main dimensions of personality.[20] The model which was found to produce the most natural translations of German and French words was a refined alignment model with a first-order dependence and a fertility model[16]. automated customer service. In an effort to improve computer translation. Similarly a project developed by NASA called LUNAR was designed to provide answers to naturally written questions about the geological analysis of lunar rocks returned by the Apollo missions.Computational linguistics routine that relied on only understanding a few keywords in each sentence. including improved search engines. and has applications which could vastly improve understanding of how language is produced and comprehended by computers. several models have been compared." in response to the user's input. and SHRDLU was capable of interpreting commands such as "Find a block which is taller than the one you are holding and put it into the box. but only within the scope of the toy environment designed for the task. Work has also been done in making computers produce language in a more naturalistic manner. this kind of natural language processing has proven much more difficult outside the limited scope of the toy environment.[22] Other attempts at applying Bayesian statistics to language analysis included the work of Mosteller and Wallace (1963) in which an analysis of the words used in the Federalist papers was used to attempt to determine their authorship (concluding that Madison most likely authored the majority of the papers). Its responses were generated by recombining the unknown parts of the sentence around properly translated versions of the known words. as illustrated by Bledsoe and Browing in 1959 in which a large dictionary of possible letters were generated by "learning" from example letters and then the probability that any one of those learned examples matched the new input was combined to make a final decision.[19] Some projects are still trying to solve the problem which first started computational linguistics off as its own field in the first place. the ability to create a program capable of understanding human language would have many broad and exciting possibilities. However. making human-computer interaction much more natural. This type of work is specific to computational linguistics. In this example ELIZA has no understanding of the word "hate". allowing ELIZA to update the words "you" and "me" to "I" and "you" and replying "What makes you think I hate you?".

Parsing and generation are sub-divisions of computational linguistics dealing respectively with taking language apart and putting it together. The Association for Computational Linguistics defines computational linguistics as: .[28] 98 Subfields Computational linguistics can be divided into major areas depending upon the medium of the language being processed. whether analyzing language (recognition) or synthesizing language (generation). • Computational semantics comprises defining suitable logics for linguistic meaning representation. Speech recognition and speech synthesis deal with how spoken language can be understood or created using computers. is it justified to label it as a separate epistemological discipline? Natural science problem: This problem deals with the matching condition between 'human cognitive domain' and 'machine algorithm' (identity and difference between computer and human being) on the basis of Russel's paradox . These problems are summarized as follows: Philosophy of science problem: There is nothing called 'pen-paper-card linguistics'.the scientific study of language from a computational perspective. • Simulation and study of language evolution in historical linguistics/glottochronology.[26] This approach attempts to determine probabilities for the arbitrary number of models that could be being used in generating speech as well as modeling the probabilities for various words generated from each of these possible models. when these tools were used to taxonomize corpus. which is only controlled or appropriated by the algorithm) in contrast with post-formal subjective and substantive task of Linguistics. Machine translation remains the sub-division of computational linguistics dealing with having computers translate between languages. Computational linguists are interested in providing computational models of various kinds of linguistic phenomena. whether spoken or textual. An initial and somewhat successful approach to applying this kind of signal modeling to language was achieved with the use of hidden Marcov models as detailed by Rabiner in 1989.. Social Science Problem (Plurilingual condition and the advent of the simulated hyper-real cf. automatically constructing them and reasoning with them • Computer-aided corpus linguistics • Design of parsers or chunkers for natural languages • Design of taggers like POS-taggers (part-of-speech taggers) • Machine translation as one of the earliest and most difficult applications of computational linguistics draws on many subfields.. Baudrillard). and upon the task being performed. Algocentricism (the discourse.[29] Counter-views The status of Computational linguistics may be questioned from four perspectives: from the standpoints of philosophy of science.Computational linguistics Initial attempts at understanding spoken language were based on work done in the 1960s and 70s in signal modeling where an unknown signal is analyzed to look for patterns and to make predictions based on its history. largely modeled on automata theory. If computer manipulates linguistic data through the 'pen-paper-card' method.[27] More recently these kinds of statistical approaches have been applied to more difficult tasks such as topic identification using Bayesian parameter estimation to infer topic probabilities in text documents. with the application of context-sensitive grammar and linearly bounded Turing machines. natural science (mismatch between human Cognitive domain and machine algorithms). Similar approaches were employed in early speech recognition attempts starting in the late 70s at IBM using word/part-of-speech pair probabilities. Some of the areas of research that are studied by computational linguistics include: • Computational complexity of natural language.

H. Retrieved from http:/ / www. M.1109/TSMCB. (1950). mpg. M.. J. (2011). 30–44. Jimmy Lin. (2012). IEEE transactions on systems. Ralph Weischedel (http:/ / www-nlpir.1145/365153. 988-97. T. pdf) Proceedings of MT Summit VII. 1959. com/ science/ article/ pii/ 0010027793900584 [13] Salvi. 36-45. de/ pubman/ item/ escidoc:468143:4/ component/ escidoc:532427/ bowerman_1988_The-No.. doi:10.0033171 [15] Marcus. New York: Academic Press. org/ stable/ 10. (1993). Inference in an authorship problem. [4] Natural Language Processing by Liz Liddy. doi:10. 034004. mitpressjournals.IRE-AIEE-ACM ’59 (Eastern).D. What Is Computational Linguistics? (http:/ / www.1994) and Searle's Chinese room puzzle. pp. php/ Main_Page) [8] Computational Linguistics – Department of Linguistics – Georgetown College (http:/ / linguistics. Retrieved from http:/ / www. J. Computational linguistics..1460326 [23] Mosteller. On two types of models of the internalization of grammars.. Part B. Communications of the ACM.1162/089120103321337421 [21] Mairesse. and cybernetics.. jstor. (2012). me.81..Computational linguistics and Goedel's theorem Problem raised by Roger Penrose (1990. 29(1).2011. Retrieved from http:/ / dl. acm. pdf [11] Braine. speaking subject perceives language as a whole (gestalt). 225-232. A. ELIZA---a computer program for the study of natural language communication between man and machine. uk/ MTS-1999. & Wiles.called natural language (The paper deals with some Bangla usages of numerals. uni-saarland. ru) [7] Clip: Computational Linguistics and Information Processing (https:/ / wiki.2011.[30][31][32] 99 References [1] Hans Uszkoreit.. Smith. org/ citation. Computational Linguistics. eastern joint IRE-AIEE-ACM computer conference on . com/ photos/ bostworld/ 2152048032/ in/ set-72157603898383698/ ) 1975: And the Changes To Come. 81(3).I. Explaining language universals. & Marcinkiewicz. Montesano. coli. Cybernetics : a publication of the IEEE Systems. html) Department of Computational Linguistics and Phonetics of Saarland University [2] John Hutchins: Retrospect and prospect in computer-based translation. & Santos-Victor. de/ ~hansu/ what_is_cl. 433-460.2172420 [14] Gong.365168 [20] Och. cfm?id=972475 [16] Angus. Retrieved from http:/ / www. In D. edu/ programs/ graduate/ computational/ ) [9] UPenn Linguistics: Computational Linguistics (http:/ / www. (1959). 42(3). IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics. (1966).. Slobin (Ed. A. & Ney. Learning and development in neural networks: The importance of starting small. 19-51. F. Controlling user perceptions of linguistic style: Trainable generation of personality traits. & Jäger.) Post-formalists deny the analytical procedures proposed by structralists. (2003). 2307/ 2283270 . Pattern recognition and reading by machine. S. upenn. ling. Fuzziness of so. Fragmenting language-object by deploying grammatical rules implies understanding symbolic order by means of another (meta-)symbolic order. The value of this fuzzy one is determined by the context. M. (1963).. flickr. Barach: Translating Machine (http:/ / www.. J.1145/1460299. 9(1). sciencedirect. (2012). L. Retrieved from http:/ / pubman. Conceptual recurrence plots: revealing patterns in human discourse. 660-71. 59(236). (January 2009). doi:10. org/ doi/ abs/ 10. uni-saarland. New York. Scalas. J. Journal of the Physical Society of Japan. F. F. 7(3). M. de) [6] Yatsko's computational linguistics laboratory (http:/ / vetsky. A Systematic Comparison of Various Statistical Alignment Models. Computer's halting problem. nist. man. According to them. 71-99. edu/ research/ computational. D. & Hayakawa. Computational Linguistics. Bernardino.100 [17] Furuhashi. 1999. J. narod2. The “no negative evidence”problem: How do children avoid constructing an overly general grammar. Journal of the American Statistical Association. Language bootstrapping: learning word meanings from perception-action association. e33171. Shuai. It leads to a metonymic transformation of speaking subject as subjects’ non-algorithmic capability is ignored. Mind. speakers socio-economic status etc. 2307/ 2251299 [19] Weizenbaum. doi:10. [12] Elman. Cognition. mpdl.1109/TVCG. Lucy Vanderwende. hutchinsweb. Papers presented at the December 1–3. & Browning. 275-309. where the status of number one is not always equal to one. [3] Arnold B. (1993). umd.. M. New York. Building a large annotated corpus of English: The Penn Treebank. Lognormality of the Distribution of Japanese Sentence Lengths. (2012).. and Cybernetics Society. doi:10. Retrieved from http:/ / www.1143/JPSJ. Studying Language Change Using Price Equation and Pólya-urn Dynamics. A binary machine appropriates language-object according its own algorithmic program. Man. edu/ clip/ index.1371/journal. John Prager. gov/ MINDS/ FINAL/ NLP. 18(6). Dragomir Radev. umiacs. The ontogenesis of grammar: A theoretical perspective. W. Eduard Hovy. jstor. doi:10. Ed. (E. org/ stable/ 10. G. Tamariz. 58(302). L.)PLoS ONE. georgetown.). I. pdf) [5] Computational linguistics and phonetics at Saarland University (http:/ / www. M.pone. Computing machinery and intelligence. doi:10. web. A. html) [10] Bowerman. USA: ACM Press. (1971).034004 [18] Turing.S. coli. G. W. Y. (http:/ / www. 1162/ COLI_a_00063 [22] Bledsoe. (1988).

Cohen. 2005. L. jsp?R=19850068999 [26] Rabiner. T. 993-1022. nasa. com/ sol3/ papers. (1971). • Resources for (Internet Archive copy) • Language Technology World (http://www. Kaplan. A. The Journal of Machine Learning. jsp?arnumber=18626 [27] Bahl. Retrieved from http:/ / ieeexplore. cfm?abstract_id=2019795) [32] Bangla Numerals and Problems of Computability (http:/ / linguistlist.. Latent dirichlet allocation. Recognition of continuously read natural corpus.. mil/ docs/ citations/ AD0721399 [25] • ACL Wiki for Computational Linguistics (http://aclweb. jsp?arnumber=1170402 [28] Blei.imcsit. (2003).. Procedures as a Representation for Data in a Computer Program for Understanding Natural Language. (1989). 422-424. & Nash-Webber.CICLing. org/ pubs/ papers/ browse-papers-action. Feb. J. Retrieved from http:/ / ieeexplore. ieee. ssrn. cfm?id=944937 [29] The Association for Computational Linguistics What is Computational Linguistics? (http:/ / www. Retrieved from http:/ / dl. & ssrn. (1978). org/ xpls/ abs_all. Proceedings of the IEEE. Speech.cs. & Jelinek. Speech and Language Processing (http://www. D.aclweb. B. • CICLing annual conferences on Computational Linguistics (http://www. Baker. org/ archive/ misc/ • Computational Linguistics – Applications workshop ( resources. ieee. [30] Computational Linguistics: A Dissenter's Voice (http:/ / papers.Computational linguistics [24] Winograd.html) .archive. F. org/ citation. Retrieved from http:/ / ntrs. The lunar sciences natural language information system.. Retrieved from http:/ / • Free online introductory book on Computational Linguistics (http://web. (1972). dtic. cfm?PaperID=7802) 100 External links • Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) (http://www. gov/ search. 3. and Signal. P. com/ sol3/ • ACL Anthology of research papers (http://www. org/ xpls/ abs_all.gelbukh.technion. A tutorial on hidden Markov models and selected applications in speech recognition. acm. html) Published online. http://www. R. cfm?abstract_id=2015944) [31] On Computational and Chomskyan Linguistic Theory (http:/ / papers.aclweb.

e. something that is not always appreciated by speakers of the dominant version of English. a professor of linguistics. Early work of forensic linguistics in the United States concerned the rights of individuals with regard to understanding their Miranda rights during the interrogation process. That includes the study of text types and forms of analysis. Any text or item of spoken language can potentially be a forensic text when it is used in a legal or criminal context. causing important details to be left out. the legal defense for many criminal cases questioned the authenticity of police statements. private wills. customary police procedure for taking suspects' statements dictated that it be in a specific format.[2] During the early days of forensic linguistics in the United Kingdom. i. It is a branch of applied linguistics. . rather than in the suspect's own words. 'white English'. The delivery is often too fast-paced. used it in an analysis of statements by Timothy John Evans. interactional styles to the interview. The Aboriginal people also bring their own culturally based. methods and insights to the forensic context of law. At the time. They discovered that a phrase such as ' the same language ' is open to interpretation. One of the bigger cases involved fastfood giant McDonald's claiming that it had originated the process of attaching unprotected words to the 'Mc' prefix and was unhappy with Quality Inns International's intention of opening a chain of economy hotels to be called 'McSleep. with speculation and backtracking done out loud. History The phrase forensic linguistics first appeared in 1968 when Jan Svartvik.. but research occurs in the following areas: The language of legal texts The study of the language of legal texts encompasses a wide range of forensic texts.'[3] In the 1980s.[2] This includes analysing the linguistics of documents as diverse as Acts of Parliament (or other law-making body). it involves a range of experts and researchers in different areas of the field. and the evolution of the legal specifics associated with it.understanding language of the written law. such as States and government departments. and judicial procedure. language. Australian linguists discussed the application of linguistics and sociolinguistics to legal issues. crime investigation. There are principally three areas of application for linguists working in forensic contexts . It can also refer to the ongoing attempts at making legal language more comprehensible to laypeople. Aboriginal people have their own understanding and use of 'English'. An early application of forensic linguistics in the United States was related to the status of trademarks as words or phrases in the language. Statements by witnesses are very seldom made in a coherent or orderly fashion. court judgements and summonses and the statutes of other bodies. trial.Forensic linguistics 101 Forensic linguistics Forensic linguistics is the application of linguistic knowledge. Areas of study The range of topics within forensic linguistics is diverse.[1] The discipline of forensic linguistics is not homogenous. One important area is that of the transformative effect of Norman French and Ecclesiastic Latin on the development of the English common law. understanding language use in forensic and judicial processes and the provision of linguistic evidence.

it might represent a lack of commitment. Forensic text types Emergency call In an emergency call. Therefore. this area examines language as it is used in cross-examination. the questioning process in court and in other areas such as police interviews. This makes the emergency call unlike any other kind of service encounter. evidence presentation. summing up to a jury. The proposition of genuine suicide is thematic.[6] . and incomplete or overly short answers indicate that the caller might be making a false or hoax call. If the caller uses a rising pitch at the end of every turn.Forensic linguistics 102 The language of legal processes Among other things. the recipient or emergency operator's ability to extract primarily linguistic information in threatening situations and to come up with the required response in a timely manner is crucial to the successful completion of the call.[2] Ransom demands or other threat communication Threat is a counterpart of a promise and is an important feature in a ransom demand. the recipient's use of a rising pitch indicates doubt or desire for clarification. interview techniques. so hesitations. The recipient trusts the caller to provide accurate information and the caller trusts the recipient to ask only pertinent questions. judge's direction. signs of evasiveness. Ransom demands are also examined to identify between genuine and false threats. An example of a ransom note analysis can be seen in the case of the Lindbergh kidnapping. the note would have to be written before the perpetrator enters the premises. Genuine suicide letters are short. typically less than 300 words in length. the kidnapper makes the claim that the child is in good hands but to make such a claim. Intonational emphasis. voice pitch and the extent to which there is cooperation between the caller and the recipient at any one time are also very important in analysing an emergency call.[2] A credible suicide letter must be making a definite unequivocal proposition in a situational context. or the method of suicide that was undertaken. The call ideally moves from nil knowledge on the part of the recipient to a maximum amount of knowledge in a minimum possible period of time. Suicide notes generally have sentences alluding to the act of killing oneself.[2] Extraneous or irrelevant material are often excluded from the text. police testimonies in court.[6] The contents of a suicide note could be intended to make the addressee suffer or feel guilt. Full cooperation includes frank and timely responses. directed to the addressee (or addressees) and relevant to the relationship between them.[sic]".[5] Suicide letters A suicide note is typically brief. concise and highly propositional with a degree of evasiveness.[4] From the sentence. police cautions. where the first ransom note (sometimes referred to as called the Nursery Note) stated: "We warn you for making anyding public or for notify the Polise the child is in gut care. A genuine call has distinctive interlocking and slight overlap of turns. the claim is false since the kidnapper had not even encountered the child when he wrote the note. Urgency plays a role in emergency calls.

or deny the crime.[2] Research into authorship identification is ongoing.[11] The paucity of documents (ransom notes. However. also known as forensic phonetics. police statements. punctuation (both in terms of overall density and syntactic boundaries) and the measurements of hapax legomena (unique words in a text). Authorship measures that analysts use include word length average. leaving the witness with an impression of innocence.[8] or particular patterns of language use (vocabulary. grammar. Firstly. pronunciation. article frequency. William Labov has stated that nobody has found a "homogenous data" in idiolects. etc). The idiolect is a theoretical construct based on the idea that there is linguistic variation at the group level and hence there may also be linguistic variation at the individual level. Statistical approaches include factor analysis. leaving the witness with an impression of honesty and forthrightness. mobile phone texts. Author identification The identification of whether a given individual said or wrote something relies on analysis of their idiolect. the information provided may be adequate to eliminate a suspect as an author or narrow down an author from a small group of suspects.[9] and there are many reasons why it is difficult to provide such evidence. Education can have a profoundly homogenizing effect on language use. etc) in most criminal cases in a forensic setting means there is often too little text upon which to base a reliable identification. Linguists have provided evidence in: • Trademark and other intellectual property disputes • Disputes of meaning and use • Author identification (determining who wrote an anonymous text by making comparisons to known writing samples of a suspect. These include corpora of suicide notes. They may also denounce witnesses as dishonest. understand how it is used.[10] Because acquisition is continuous and life-long. mobile phone texts or emails) • Forensic stylistics (identifying cases of plagiarism) • Voice identification. type-token ratio. such as threat letters. used to determine.Forensic linguistics 103 Death row statements Death row statements either admit the crime. through acoustic qualities. threatening letters. language is not an inherited property. collocations. if the voice on a tape recorder is that of the defendant) • Discourse analysis (the analysis of the structure of written or spoken utterance to determine who is introducing topics or whether a suspect is agreeing to engage in criminal conspiracy) • Language analysis (forensic dialectology) tracing the linguistic history of asylum seekers (Language Analysis for the Determination of Origin)[7] • Reconstruction of mobile phone text conversations • Forensic phonetics Specialist databases of samples of spoken and written natural language (called corpora) are now frequently used by forensic linguists. police interview records and witness statements. Death row statements are within the heavily institutionalized setting of death row prisons. an individual's use of language is always susceptible to variation from a variety of sources. including other speakers. Use of linguistic evidence in legal proceedings These areas of application have varying degrees of acceptability or reliability within the field. the media and macro-social changes. average number of syllables per word. Bayesian . but one which is socially acquired. spelling. critique law enforcement as corrupt in an attempt to portray innocence or seek an element of revenge in their last moments (Olsson 2004). The term authorship attribution is now felt to be too deterministic. and to reduce the effort needed to identify words that tend to occur near each other (collocations or collocates). They are used to analyse language.

in identifying plagiarism. Condon was fond of expanding existing words into phrases and existing phrases into more extensive ones. Poisson distribution. extending the existing text and flourish their language significantly. The Cusum distribution for these two habits will be compared with the average sentence length of the text. 104 Forensic stylistics This discipline subjects written or spoken materials (or both). Other examples of plagiarism include the cases between Richard Condon. The two sets of values should track each other.[2] In the plagiarism case of Martin Luther King Jr. The Cusum (Cumulative Sum) method for text analysis has also been developed." While Helen Keller took pride in using rare phrases and avoids common source words. Keller relied on a lexis that is less common when compared to Canby's. Condon was also found to have borrowed from a wide range of Graves' work. Keller used 'vast wealth' instead of 'treasure' (approximately 230 times less common in the language) 'bethought' instead of 'concluded' (approximately 450 times less common). Any altered section of the text would show a distinct discrepancy between the values of the two reference points. Upon investigation.[14] Carey's and Graves' texts (source texts) were noticeably shorter.Forensic linguistics statistics. The Frost King. King simply changed the names of the mountains and used much more alliteration and assonance. Keller was discovered to have made only minute changes to common words and phrases and used less common words to put the same point across. The tampered section will exhibit a different pattern from the rest of the text. The Flesch and Flesch-Kincaid readability test showed that Canby's text showing more originality compared to Keller's. author of The Manchurian Candidate and English novelist Robert Graves. speaker identification. 'bade them' instead of 'told them' (approximately 30 times less common). meaning. suggesting mere alterations to original ideas. Keller used the phrase 'ever since that time' whilst Canby chose 'from that time' (the latter 50 times more common than the former). pithier and simpler in structure while Condon's and King's texts relied on 'purple' devices. Speakers tend to utilize two to three letter words in a sentence and their utterances tend to include vowel-initial words. The distinctions between Keller and Canby's text are at the lexical and phrasal level. Condon's work is seen to be rich in clichés such as "in his superstitious heart of hearts. and between Martin Luther King Jr and Archibald Carey. In order to carry out the Cusum test on habits of utilizing two to three letter words and vowel-initial words in a sentential clause. and discriminant function analysis of function words. Judging by the text in The Manchurian Candidate. thus rendering no significant difference between their speech and writing. Keller also used ' I cannot imagine' whereas Canby used ' I do not know'. The Frost King was found to have been plagiarised from Margaret Canby's book Frost Fairies which had been read to her some time ago. Canby's text obtained a higher grade on the reading ease scale compared to Keller's. The blind American author was accused of plagiarism in 1892 with regard to her published short story. multivariate analysis. . to scientific analysis for determination and measurement of content. 'Know' is approximately ten times more common than 'imagine'. or determination of authorship.[13] One of the earliest cases where forensic stylistics was used to detect plagiarism was the case of Helen Keller's short story. almost half of his doctoral dissertation was discovered to have been copied from another theology student. the occurrences of each type of word in the text must be identified and the distribution plotted in each sentence.[12] Cusum analysis works even on short texts and relies on the assumption that each speaker has a unique set of habits.

Forensic phonetics can determine similarities between the speakers of two or more separate recordings.[15] Forensic phonetics The forensic phonetician is concerned with the production of accurate transcriptions of what was being said. the contemporaneity of an arsonist's diary. or sign language use. where police statements were found to be too similar to have been independently produced by police officers.[2] Forensic speechreading is the complement of forensic voice identification. . Voice recording as a supplement to the transcription can be useful as it allows victims and witnesses to indicate whether the voice of a suspect is that of the accused. Forensic linguists have given expert evidence in a wide variety of cases. Transcripts of surveilled video records can sometimes allow expert speechreaders to identify speech content or style where the identity of the talker is apparent from the video record.e. the playing of the car radio. the authorship of hate mail. One of the topics of conversation was a third man known as 'Ernie'." Another disputed utterance was between a police officer and a suspect. Discourse analysts are not always allowed to testify but during preparation for a case they are often useful to lawyers. and the intrusive noise coincided with the first syllable of the disputed name. The utterance of 'yeah' and 'uh-huh' as responses indicate that the suspect understands the suggestion. Political and social issues have also caused languages to straddle geographical borders resulting in certain language varieties spoken in multiple countries.Forensic linguistics 105 Discourse analysis Discourse analysis deals with analyzing written. Some well-known examples include an appeal against the conviction of Derek Bentley and the identification of Theodore Kaczynski as the so-called "Unabomber". Dialectology was used during the investigations into the Yorkshire Ripper tape hoax. including abuse of process. the actual utterance was "but if it's as you say it's German. it's in the Sigma catalogue. and during government investigations. Examples Evidence from forensic linguistics has more power to eliminate someone as a suspect than to prove him or her guilty. alleged criminal. or any significant semiotic event. It is becoming more important to conduct systematic studies of dialects. leading to complications when determining an individual's origin by means of his/her language or dialect. it's in the Sigma catalogue. while feedback markers such as 'yeah' and 'uh-huh' do not denote the suspect's agreement to the suggestion.. the close analysis of a covert recording can produce useful deductions. the comparison between a set of mobile phone texts and a suspect's police interview. Transcriptions can reveal information about a speaker's social and regional background. especially within the English intrusive electronic-sounding cackle." However. The poor signal of the recording made 'Ernie' sound like 'Ronnie'. The surveillance tape presented acoustic problems. because they are no longer as distinct as they once were due to the onslaught of mass media and population mobility. i. the authorship of letters to an Internet child pornography service. the movement of the target vehicle. and the reconstruction of a mobile phone text conversation. Linguistic expertise has been employed in criminal cases to defend an individual suspected of a crime. The use of 'I' instead of 'We' in a recording highlights non-complicity in a conspiracy. According to the method. A man accused of manufacturing the drug Ecstasy was mis-heard by the police transcriber as 'hallucinogenic' [16] The police transcriber heard "but if it's as you say it's hallucinogenic. the sound of the car engine. oral. Linguistic dialectology This refers to the study of dialects in a methodological manner based on anthropological information.

who subsequently confessed to having written it and to having killed his wife. Investigators found that letters written by Turner's friend Howard Simmerson shared several unusual orthographic and punctuation features with the text messages. When the case was reopened.[2] It is formed as a result of merged language style. An analysis produced by FBI Supervisory Special Agent James R. could produce his evidence. The conviction against the Bridgewater Four was quashed before the linguist in the case.[16] Forensic linguistic evidence also played a role in the investigation of the 2005 disappearance of Julie Turner. sorting my life out. it is assumed that every individual uses languages differently and this difference can be observed as a fingerprint.[20] During the appeal against the conviction of the Bridgewater Four.[17] In the case of Theodore Kaczynski. Simmerson was eventually found guilty of Turner's murder. who was eventually convicted of being the "Unabomber". one of the defendants — a confession which he had retracted immediately — and a written record of an interview which the police claimed took place immediately before the confession was dictated. her partner received several text messages from Julie's mobile phone. The letter was compared with a sample of her previous writing and that of her husband. the forensic linguist examined the written confession of Patrick Molloy. allegedly transcribed verbatim from a spoken monologue. a forensic linguist found that the frequency and usage of the word "then" in police transcripts suggested the transcripts were not verbatim statements but had been partially authored by police interviewers. Eagleson came to the conclusion that the letter had been written by the husband of the missing woman. The linguist came to the conclusion that the interview had been fabricated by police. and notified the authorities. Under this view. who was functionally illiterate. FBI agents searching Kaczynski's hut found hundreds of documents written by Kaczynski but not published anywhere. Nineteen-year-old Bentley.Forensic linguistics The criminal laboratories Bundeskriminalamt (in Germany) and the Nederlands Forensisch Instituut (in the Netherlands) both employ forensic linguists. Fitzgerald identified numerous lexical items and phrases common to the two documents.[21] 106 Additional forensic linguistics concepts Linguistic fingerprinting A linguistic fingerprint is a concept put forward by some scholars that each human being uses language differently. (sic) be in touch to get some things". a "farewell letter" had apparently been written by a woman prior to her disappearance. In an Australian case reported by Eagleson. but the prosecution argued that even the more common words and phrases being used by Kaczynski became distinctive when used in combination with each other. and "Tell kids not to worry. back later need to sort my head out". After she was reported missing. marked themes. a 40-year-old woman living in Yorkshire.[7] Forensic linguistics contributed to the overturning of Derek Bentley's conviction for murder in 1998 although there were other non-linguistic issues. Malcolm Coulthard. A person's linguistic fingerprint can be reconstructed from the individual's daily interactions and relate to a variety of self-reported . had been hanged in 1953 for his part in the murder of PC Sidney Miles. family members recognized his writing style from the published 35. and the analysis indicated that the answers in the interview were not consistent with the questions being asked. Molloy denied that the interview had ever taken place.000-word Industrial Society and Its Future (commonly called the "Unabomber Manifesto").[19] Forensic linguist John Olsson gave evidence in a murder trial on the meaning of 'jooking' in connection with a stabbing. and deletion of prepositions. and that this difference between people involves a collection of markers which stamps a speaker/writer as unique. The features analysed included sentence breaks. he had been convicted partly on the basis of his statement to police. such as "Stopping at jills. similar to a fingerprint. this and other evidence led to Bentley's posthumous pardon.[18] Some were more distinctive than others. suggesting that Simmerson had been aware of the contents of the messages.

illegible handwriting and illustrations that are difficult to comprehend. hence disguising output to prevent recognition.Forensic linguistics personality characteristics. A scanned document is tricky.[22] In the process of an investigation. blood pressure. the greater the likely variation. • Private vs Public: A politician writing a political speech. the evidence is altered. Accurate. • Time lapse as a cause of variation: The greater the time lapse between two works. Because of this. • Disguise as a sort of variation: A writer can publish anonymously.[2] 107 Variation Intra-author variations are the ways in which one author's texts differ from each other. Language changes more than we realize in a relatively short span of time. evidence is once again altered unwittingly. Two texts by one author do not necessarily vary less than texts by two different authors. situational variables and physiological markers (e. If there is failure to transcribe the full text. Each type of transcription contains its own problems. however. Audio and video documents can include repetitions. there is so far little hard evidence to support the notion. nonsensical talk. • Genre: When texts are being measured in different genres. If a transcription is wrong. There must be emphasis on the text being the evidence. Due to the different demands of each medium. A transcription of an audio file should never be assumed to be completely accurate. John Olsson. the emphasis should be on the relative rather than absolute difference between the authors and how investigators can classify their texts.[23] . reliable text transcription is important because the text is the data which becomes the available evidence. as it may alter the original document. jargon which can be hard to understand and speakers mumbling incoherently and inaudibly. Inter-author variations are the ways in which different authors' writing varies. Non-Fiction: Some fiction writers are journalists. testosterone). A handwritten document might contain unusual spellings which may result in ambiguous meanings. civil libertarians argued that interrogations in major criminal cases should be recorded and the recordings kept. influencing our susceptibility to language changes around us. will differ greatly from a private text to a friend or family member. • Fiction vs. which is a public text. hesitation. Non-linguistic sounds such as crying and laughing may also be included in the audio and video text which cannot be transcribed easily. • Text Type: Personal letters contain more inter-relationship bonding strategies than academic articles or term papers.g. cortisol. argues that although the concept of linguistic fingerprinting is attractive to law enforcement agencies. Forensic transcription The two main types of transcriptions are written documents and video and audio records. considerable variation is observed even though they are by the same author. they can be completely different from one another and this results in intra-author variation. as well as transcribed.

Oxford: Routledge:162-3. 8 November 2005. Forensic Linguistics VIII(1): 66-79. to Court: 'Mc' Is Ours (http:/ / www. J. Author identification. 79. [13] http:/ / www. J. B. html [5] http:/ / njspmuseum. html [6] John Olsson (2004).). "Genre as social action. French (1990). net/ cfl_fl. stm). King" (http:/ / query. Ellis. The New York Times. . Turell (Eds. 431-447. and M. An Introduction to Language Crime and the Law. London. Drummond (22 July 1988). (2002). (1989) Language and Power.. Coulthard: Discourse and Social Life. London: Pinter Publishers. [10] Miller.M. K V Tirumalesh. L. London: Continuum International Publishing Group [7] Peter Tiersma. in S. Philadelphia. Blackwell. 'Physiological factors influencing the reporting of physical symptoms'. and Baker. NJ: Erlbaum Publishers. A. Sarangi and R. (2004). Gibbons.S. J. McDonald's. (1984). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 6. An Introduction to Language. Crime and Law (with original cases in Bureau of Police Investigation and Courts) by Azizi. & Johnson. 421-44 • Koenig. New York: Harcourt. [22] Pennebaker. (2001). Campbell. bbc. PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. London: Longman. http:/ / www. M. J. C. (2008). J. What is Forensic Linguistics?. Negar. and P. T. London: Continuum ISBN 978-0-8264-6109-4 [3] Ayres. html).Forensic linguistics. Retrieved 16 November 2011.Forensic linguistics 108 References [1] Centre for Forensic Linguistics. Hollien. 2088-90. html [2] John Olsson (2008). (1990). [21] Eagleson. 24. John Gibbons (ed. Gibbons. Department of Computer Science. org/ FORENSIC. com/ 2004/ 06/ 15/ opinion/ recording-police-questioning.. Gibbons & M.)Profilers: Leading investigators take you inside the criminal mind (pp. Central Criminal Court. . . Further reading • • • • • • • • • Baldwin. (1994). 193-222). html). "Forensic Voice Identification". K. [19] "Life term for man who shot lover" (http:/ / news. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. org/ wgbh/ amex/ lindbergh/ sfeature/ crime. The Chronicle of Crime: The infamous felons of modern history and their hideous crimes [16] Coulthard. & D. Retrieved 2008-06-14.Q. Forensic Linguistics: an introduction to language in the Justice System. Panel Finds Plagiarism by Dr. "Statistical stylistics and authorship attribution: an empirical investigation". 197-206 Fairclough. 2012. com/ 1988/ 07/ 22/ us/ mcdonald-s-to-court-mc-is-ours. J. [4] http:/ / www. 'Case report: The Yorkshire Ripper enquiry. (2007). pp 151-167 [11] Grant. D. (1986) 'Spectrographic voice identification: a forensic survey'. Robert. An introduction to forensic linguistics: Language in evidence. and S. Tehran: JahadDaneshgahi Publication. Journal of Speech. T. Dimensions of Forensic Linguistics. Language and the Law 14(1). pbs. N. R. Jr. com/ 2008/ 02/ one-of-most-fascinating-areas-of-study. (2001). (2004). R. p192. XIV (4). Grant. T. Teresa Turell (eds) (2008). blogspot. and H Nagarajan (Eds) (2004). London. Part 1'. Forensic Linguistics 1. html?res=9D0CEFD61030F932A25753C1A967958260). New York: The New York Times. New York: Prometheus Books.. Aston University http:/ / www.J. Syrous & Momeni. [12] Morton. 'Forensic analysis of personal written texts: a case study'. Acoustic Soc. 'Reliable. Forensic phonetics. nytimes.). Dimensions of Forensic Linguistics. co. com/ forensic-science/ linguistics-forensic-stylistics [14] "Boston U. Mahwah. [20] Trial of Rehan Asghar. Longman. Internal Report CSR-3-90. forensiclinguistics. Applied Linguistics. January 2008. Language and the Law.M. pp. A. (1994). [15] Martin Fido (1994). R. nytimes. letter to the editor of J. [17] Coulthard. uk/ 2/ hi/ uk_news/ england/ south_yorkshire/ 4418518. The New York Times. "Using a forensic linguistic approach to tracking the Unabomber. • Hoover. 299-316 [23] "Recording Police Questioning" (http:/ / www. Gibbons. V Prakasam. H. M. 25(4). [18] Fitzgerald. HTM [8] Coulthard.. 15 June 2004. BBC News. Am. William (1972) Sociolinguistic patterns. . University of Edinburgh. New Delhi: Orient Longman. " Whose text is it? On the linguistic investigation of authorship ". London: Longman. nytimes. Grant. 362–373. enotes. Second Edition. [9] Labov. Forensic Linguistics. "Quantifying evidence in forensic authorship analysis". Literary and Linguistic Comuputing. Approaching questions in forensic authorship analysis. languageandlaw. ii. (2008). Language in the Law. DeNevi (Eds." Quarterly Journal of Speech. . valid markers of authorship'. (2003). (2000)." In J. Retrieved 19 March 2012. idiolect and linguistic uniqueness. The Science of Self-report: Implications for Research and Practice. T. W. com/ gst/ fullpage. B. 1991-10-11. D.. Michaelson (1990) The Qsum Plot. In J.

TESOL Quarterly.246-69 • McGehee.). Language might be vocalized as speech or manual as in sign. there are a few design features that can be found in all known forms of human language. which studies infants' acquisition of their native language. one can say and understand an infinite number of sentences. syntax. 'The language of the law'. Roger W (2001). Other forms of animal communication may utilize arbitrary sounds. 437–452. 201-30. So. 74-94 • Pennycook. Journal of General Language acquisition Language acquisition is the process by which humans acquire the capacity to perceive and comprehend language. F. Hockett called this design feature of human language "productivity". rather. Children. • Shuy. The human language capacity is represented in the brain. that infants are able to acquire most aspects of language without being explicitly taught. but this kind of communication lacks the arbitrariness of human vernaculars (in that there is nothing about the sound of the word "dog" that would hint at its meaning). (1993).[1] The capacity to acquire and use language is a key aspect that distinguishes humans from other beings. in J. Forensic Stylistics. (1996) 'Borrowing others words: text. (1994). This is distinguished from second-language acquisition. For example. Y. Hamilton. must be able to understand and utilize a complex system that allows for an infinite number of possible messages. and Heidi E. contexts. 30. Language acquisition usually refers to first-language acquisition. Evidence suggests that every individual has three recursive mechanisms that allow sentences to go indeterminately. Language and the Law. which is based on a syntactic principle called Recursion. as well as to produce and use words and sentences to communicate. Even though the human language capacity is finite. 109 External links • International Association of Forensic Linguists (http://www. within a few years of birth. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. (1937).[2] A major question in understanding language acquisition is how these capacities are picked up by infants from the linguistic input. and other forms of language to which a learner is exposed. considering the hugely complex nature of human languages. but. morphology. G. and Grabe. (1996) 'Preparing a voice lineup'. 17. as one .' The reliability of the identification of the human voice'. Deborah Schiffrin. while many forms of animal communication exist. E. they differ from human languages. Nativists find it difficult to believe. • Nolan. 3 i. relative to acquired proficiency in first or second languages".org/) • International Association for Forensic Phonetics and Acoustics (http://www. Eds.Forensic linguistics • Maley. but are unable to combine those sounds in different ways to create completely novel messages that can then be automatically understood by another. F. memory and plagiarism'. Input in the linguistic context is defined as "All words. These three mechanisms are: relativization. It is crucial to the understanding of human language acquisition that we are not limited to a finite set of words.iafpa. many animals are able to communicate with each other by signaling to the things around them. 'Discourse Analysis in the Legal Context. Forensic Linguistics. and the relatively limited cognitive abilities of an infant. complementation and coordination. A. which deals with the acquisition (in both children and adults) of additional languages. Deborah Tannen. London:Longman. The capacity to successfully use language requires one to acquire a range of tools including phonology. Amsterdam: Elsevier. in that they have a limited range of non-syntactically structured vocabulary tokens that lack cross cultural variation between groups. and an extensive vocabulary. pp.' In The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. understand the grammatical rules of their native language without being explicitly taught.iafl. semantics. 249-71 • McMenamin. ownership. but that are missing from forms of animal communication. Gibbons (ed. Although it is difficult to pin down what aspects of language are uniquely human.

that language is acquired through sensory experience. Some think that there are some qualities of language acquisition that the human brain is automatically wired for (a "nature" component) and some that are shaped by the particular language environment in which a person is raised (a "nurture" component). functionalist linguistics. an attempt to learn all knowledge from sense datum. These theories. A "successful" use of a sign would be one in which the child is understood (for example. who felt that word-meaning mapping in some form was innate.[6] Proponents of Behaviorism argued that language may be learned through a form of operant conditioning. such as a word or lexical unit. which would eventually map into language. a child learning the word for cow by listening to trusted speakers talking about cows. This led to Carnap's Aufbau. given a certain stimulus. Relational Frame Theory. for Locke. Chomsky argued for a mathematical approach to language acquisition. social interactionist theory. Hockett of language acquisition.[7] Instead. as opposed to other theories in which language is simply learned as other cognitive skills. like Hobbes and Locke. F. Skinner's behaviourist idea was strongly attacked by Noam Chomsky in a review article in 1959.g. Skinner's Verbal Behaviour (1957).[3] A range of theories of language acquisition have been proposed in order to explain this apparent problem. using the notion of "remembered as similar" to bind these into clusters. These arguments lean towards the "nurture" side of the argument. but for the most part they seemed to regard language acquisition as a subset of man's ability to acquire knowledge and learn concepts. a child would learn that a specific combination of sounds stands for a specific thing through repeated successful associations made between the two. he suggested that the successful use of a sign. calling it "largely mythology" and a "serious delusion". Since operant conditioning is contingent on reinforcement by rewards. and usage-based language acquisition. strongly object to assuming syntactic knowledge is genetically encoded and provided by automatic wiring of the brain. empiricists. argued that knowledge (and. language) emerge ultimately from abstracted sense impressions.Language acquisition learns grammar in school. Sanskrit grammarians debated for over twelve centuries whether humans' ability to recognize the meaning of words was god-given (possibly innate) or passed down by previous generations and learned from already established conventions—e. In B. Others. thereby reinforcing the child's understanding of the meaning of that word and making it more likely that he or she will use that word in a similar situation in the future. especially evolutionary biologists.[4] Some early. The conflict between the theories assuming humans are born with syntactic knowledge and those that claim all such knowledge is the product of learning from one's environment is often referred to as the "Nature vs. based on a study of syntax. 110 History Philosophers in ancient societies were interested in how humans acquired the ability to understand and produce language well before empirical methods for testing those theories were developed. Some Empiricist theories of language acquisition include the statistical learning theory Charles F. include innatism and Psychological nativism. reinforces its "momentary" or contextual probability. observation based ideas about language acquisition were proposed by Plato. . including such mundane motor skills as learning to ride a bike.[5] In a more modern context. championed by the likes of Noam Chomsky and others. a child saying "up" when he or she wants to be picked up) and rewarded with the desired response from another person. in which a child is born prepared in some manner with these capacities. Additionally. Nurture" debate.

in relation to language learning. RFT theorists introduced the concept of functional contextualism in language learning. Young children learn the past tense of verbs individually. which emphasizes the importance of predicting and influencing psychological events. The child then need to relearn how to apply these past tense rules to the irregular verbs they had previously done correctly. both of these influences must work together in order to allow children to acquire a language. and philosophers that knowing a language was not merely a matter of associating words with concepts. Barnes-Holmes. and behaviors. to date. such as those in the English language. Empirical studies supporting the predictions of RFT suggest that children learn language via a system of inherent reinforcements. such as adding -ed to form the past tense. appears to occur only in humans possessing a capacity for language. The findings of many empirical studies support the predictions of these theories. it became apparent to linguists.g. neither nature nor nurture alone is sufficient to trigger language learning. a learning process that. feelings. such as thoughts. are irregular verbs. by focusing on manipulable variables in their context. however. suggesting that language acquisition is a more complex process than many believe. RFT posits that children acquire language purely through interacting with the environment. not just isolated words. provides a wholly selectionist/learning account of the origin and development of language competence and complexity. The proponents of these theories argue that general cognitive processes subserve language acquisition and that the end result of these processes is language-specific phenomena. RFT distinguishes itself from Skinner's work by identifying and defining a particular type of operant conditioning known as derived relational responding. runned. hitted) as a result of learning these basic syntactical rules that do not apply to all verbs.[8] Emergentism Emergentist theories. 2001). such as MacWhinney's competition model. such as word learning and grammar acquisition. psychologists. but that a critical aspect of language involves knowledge of how to put words together—sentences are usually needed in order to communicate successfully.Language acquisition 111 General approaches Social interactionism Social interactionist theory is a claim that language development occurs in the context of social interaction between the developing child and knowledgeable adults who model language usage and "scaffold" the child's attempts to master language. Roche. they begin to exhibit overgeneralization errors (e. when they are taught a "rule". This type of theory is strongly influenced by the socio-cultural theories of the Soviet psychologist Lev Vygotsky. posit that language acquisition is a cognitive process that emerges from the interaction of biological pressures and the environment. challenging the view that language acquisition is based upon innate.[4] When acquiring a language. A major theorist is Jerome Bruner who has published extensively within this tradition. Based upon the principles of Skinnerian behaviorism. Relational frame theory The relational frame theory (RFT) (Hayes. These verbs do not follow specific rules to form the past tense.[10] .[9] Syntax and morphology As syntax began to be studied more closely in the early 20th century. According to these theories. language-specific cognitive capacities. it is often found that most verbs.

[18] These linguists argue that the concept of a Language Acquisition Device (LAD) is unsupported by evolutionary anthropology. which tends to show a gradual adaptation of the human brain and vocal cords to the use of language.[17] Empiricism Although Chomsky's theory of a generative grammar has been popular with some linguists since the 1950s. Eric Lenneberg and others to argue that the types of grammar the child needs to consider must be narrowly constrained by human biology (the nativist position). complex underlying structures. subscribers to this theory argue that it must. is currently one of the approaches to children's acquisition of syntax.[14][15] Considerations such as these have led Chomsky. came to suspect that there may indeed be many learning processes involved in the acquisition process. the debate surrounding the nativist position has centered on whether the inborn capabilities are language-specific or domain-general. compatible with an infinite number of conceivable grammars. combined with both general and language-specific learning capacities. or the "language instinct".[11] The leading idea is that human biology imposes narrow constraints on the child's "hypothesis space" during language acquisition. however. (Binary parameters are common to digital computers. An especially dramatic example is provided by children who. While all theories of language acquisition posit some degree of innateness. may yield different conclusions. linguists studying children. are unable to produce speech. the generative theory has several hypothetical constructs (such as movement. empty categories.Language acquisition 112 Generativism Generative grammar. in combination with the context. if any. therefore. few. Since language. for medical reasons. Jerry Fodor. yet. according to comprehension-based tests of grammar. and that ignoring the role of learning may have been a mistake. is the Poverty of the stimulus argument. as imagined by nativists. who argue that language structure is created through language use. and psychologists following Jean Piaget. The anti-nativist view has many strands. Under such a theory of grammar. therefore. like Elizabeth Bates and Jean Mandler. and. The child's input (a finite number of sentences encountered by the child. children can rely on corrective feedback from adults when they make a grammatical error. the human "language faculty". which has dominated generative syntax since Chomsky's (1980) Lectures on Government and Binding: The Pisa Lectures. together with information about the context in which they were uttered) is. converge on the same grammar as their typically developing peers. such as those that enable the infant to visually make sense of the world in terms of objects and actions. but may not be applicable to neurological systems such as the human brain. the input.) Further. all the children in a given speech-community converge on very much the same grammar by the age of about five years. in principle. nonetheless. rather than a sudden appearance of a complete set of binary parameters delineating the whole spectrum of possible grammars ever to have existed and ever to exist. using learning mechanisms that are a part of a general cognitive learning apparatus .[13] Yet. such as Melissa Bowerman. many criticisms of the basic assumptions of generative theory have been put forth by cognitive-functional linguistics. the acquisition of syntax resembles ordering from a menu: The human brain comes equipped with a limited set of choices. be innate. It is unclear that human language is actually anything like the generative conception of it. In recent years. is unlearnably complex. can literally never be corrected for a grammatical error. Moreover. which favors the generative approach. from which the child selects the correct options using her parents' speech.[16] These innate constraints are sometimes referred to as universal grammar. cognitive-functional theorists use this anthropological data to show how human beings have evolved the capacity for grammar and syntax to meet our demand for linguistic symbols. In the Principles and Parameters Framework. A different theory of language. but a frequent theme is that language emerges from usage in social contexts. barring situations of medical abnormality or extreme privation. associated especially with the work of Noam Chomsky.[12] An important argument. Since 1980. On the other hand. a less convoluted theory might involve less innate structure and more learning. and strict binary branching) that cannot possibly be acquired from any amount of linguistic input. might be sufficient for acquisition.

[19] Elizabeth Bates. phonemes. Philosophers. This position has been championed by David M W Powers. and German. Michael Tomasello. but also limited by what qualifies as input. this approach has been highly successful in simulating several phenomena in the acquisition of syntactic categories[28] and the acquisition of phonological knowledge. Researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology have developed a computer model analyzing early toddler conversations to predict the structure of later conversations. Richard Aslin.[25] Some language acquisition researchers. The new field of Cognitive Linguistics has emerged as a specific counter to Chomskian Generative Grammar and Nativism. and they have simulated phenomena in several languages. which can be words. which can be compared with children's utterances.Language acquisition (which is what is innate). they produce actual utterances. as do empirical studies of children's learning of words and syntax. namely statistical learning. such as Elissa Newport. Recently. they learn from naturalistic input. including sound patterns. The development of connectionist models that are able to successfully learn words and syntactical conventions[26] supports the predictions of statistical learning theories of language acquisition. which enables clear-cut and quantitative predictions to be made.[20] Catherine Snow. they postulate different learning mechanisms. words. and the beginnings of grammar. however.[27] Chunking Chunking theories of language acquisition constitute a group of theories related to statistical learning theories. A significant outcome of the research was that rules inferred from toddler speech were better predictors of subsequent speech than traditional grammars. Statistical learning Statistical learning suggests that. The statistical abilities are effective. or syllables. Brian MacWhinney. in that they assume the input from the environment plays an essential role. They showed that toddlers develop their own individual rules for speaking with slots.[2] Michael Ramscar. Anat Ninio. Spanish.[30] 113 . in learning language.[21] William O'Grady. a learner would use the natural statistical properties of language to deduce its structure. and Jenny Saffran. made of actual child-directed utterances. The central idea of these theories is that language development occurs through the incremental acquisition of meaningful chunks of elementary constituents. and by the structure of the resulting output. including English.[22] and others. what is done with that input. believe that language acquisition is based primarily on general learning mechanisms.[29] The approach has several features that make it unique: the models are implemented as computer programs. such as Fiona Cowie[23] and Barbara Scholz with Geoffrey Pullum[24] have also argued against certain nativist claims in support of empiricism. into which they could put certain kinds of words.

However.[38] It has been proposed that the elementary units of speech have been selected to enhance the ease with which sound and visual input can be mapped into motor vocalization. which looks at learning to use and understand language parallel to a child's brain development. the age at which a child acquires the ability to use language is a predictor of how well he or she is ultimately able to use language. even after instruction.[3] This critical period is usually never missed by cognitively normal children—humans are so well prepared to learn language that it becomes almost impossible not to. A lack of language richness by this age has detrimental and long-term effects on the child's cognitive development. infants can discriminate the phonetic contrasts of all languages. Researchers believe that this gives infants the ability to acquire the language spoken around them. If a child knows fifty words or less by the age of 24 months. the general functional connexions have been established and fixed for the speech cortex. After this age the child is only able to perceive the phonemes specific to the language he or she is learning. which is why it is so important for parents to engage their infants in language.[39] Several computational models of vocabulary acquisition have been proposed so far. a child has many more neural connections than he or she will have as an adult. allowing for the child to be more able to learn new things than he or she would be as an adult. will be slower and may be stunted.[34][35][36][37] Children with reduced abilities to repeat nonwords (a marker of speech repetition abilities) show a slower rate of vocabulary expansion than children for whom this is easy. After the age of ten or twelve. the uncommitted cortex is a blank slate on which nothing has been written.Language acquisition 114 Representation of language acquisition in the brain Recent advances in functional neuroimaging technology have allowed for a better understanding of how language acquisition is manifested physically in the brain. Several findings have observed that from birth until the age of six months. It has been determined. because it would be unethical to deprive children of language until this period is over. he or she is classified as a "late-talker" and future language development. language acquisition has typically been solidified and it becomes more difficult to learn a language in the same way a native speaker would. language deprived children show that they were extremely limited in their language skills. In the ensuing years much is written. . Researchers are unable to experimentally test the effects of the sensitive period of development on language acquisition." According to the sensitive or critical period models.[32] However. This reduced phonemic sensitivity enables children to build phonemic categories and recognize stress patterns and sound combinations specific to the language they are acquiring. through empirical research on developmentally normal children.[33] Vocabulary acquisition The capacity to acquire the ability to incorporate the pronunciation of new words depends upon the capacity to engage in speech repetition. Language acquisition almost always occurs in children during a period of rapid increase in brain volume. that there is a "sensitive period" of language acquisition in which human infants have the ability to learn any language. "Before the child begins to speak and to perceive. At this point in development. and the writing is normally never erased. but this ability does not last into adulthood in the same way that it exists during development. there may be an age at which becoming a fluent and natural user of a language is no longer possible. like vocabulary expansion and the organization of grammar. By the onset of puberty (around age 12). Our brains may be automatically wired to learn languages. it is usually a second language that a person is trying to acquire and not a first. case studies on abused. Sensitive period Language acquisition has been studied from the perspective of developmental psychology and neuroscience. as well as through some extreme cases of language deprivation. At this point.[40][41][42][43][44][45][46] Various studies have shown that the size of a child's vocabulary by the age of 24 months correlates with the child's future development and language skills.[31] As Christophe Pallier noted.

the human brain seeks patterns in its searching for meaning. retention and recall. that there may be a "grammar center". that is. There are interior and exposed components that require a medical procedure. the gene ROBO1 has been associated with phonological buffer integrity or length[48] Although it is difficult to determine without invasive measures which exact parts of the brain become most active and important for language acquisition. on average. Cochlear implants show growth of language through modality-specific and modality-general cognitive processes. Instead of verbal language.[50] Researchers continue to analyze the deaf in order to make necessary changes for the future. lecture usually results in the lowest degree of retention. the brain's working memory has a limited capacity.[47] The other nine to 14 word meanings need to be picked up in some other way. 2006. Development of words is comparable to the rest of society. and each brain is unique" (Sousa. p. known as sign language. such as: "learning engages the entire person (cognitive. practice [alone] does not make perfect.[51] Also. based on several neuroimaging studies.[51] According to research on the modality-specific cognitive. memorization is an advantage for hearing students.[3] Language acquisition and prelingual deafness Negative emotions are prominent towards language acquisition in the deaf community. 274). past experience always affects new learning. Studies found numerous results while analyzing neurocognitive processes that show improvements for those who receive cochlear implants earlier in life. and psychomotor domains).[52] After obtaining the average data for non-deaf individuals. children can use information in its context to correctly guess its rough area of meaning. when they meet an unfamiliar word. where language is primarily processed in the left lateral premotor cortex (located near the pre central sulcus and the inferior frontal sulcus). Due to recent advances in technology. but it is repeated at a slower rate. and social development.[51] . In terms of genetics.Language acquisition 115 Meaning Children learn. cochlear implants allow deaf people to interact with others more efficiently. neurocognitive research has confirmed many standards of language learning. Additionally. these studies proposed that first language and second-language acquisition may be represented differently in the cortex. speech processing occurs at a more rapid pace than traditional hearing aids. behavioral. emotions affect all aspects of learning. affective.[47] Neurocognitive research According to several linguists. Kuniyoshi Sakai proposed. speech can be expressed through hand movements. but only one of these words can be accounted for by direct instruction.[49] Their ability to learn language is greatly affected as well as cognitive. fMRI and PET technology has allowed for some conclusions to be made about where language may be centered. Results prove that language growth is exactly the same for normal individuals and those with cochlear implants. rehearsal is essential for retention. It has been proposed that children acquire these meanings with the use of processes modeled by latent semantic analysis. Sign language and hearing aids help to establish skills in settings such as school or work. 10 to 15 new word meanings each day. 23 children with cochlear implants were tested in the same research.

[19] Powers. [25] Saffran. A companion to cognitive science. J. The atoms of language. New York: Pantheon Books. Biological Foundations of Language. org/ 1148/ ). In Graham. .2007. Skinner's Verbal Behavior" (http:/ / cogprints. doi:10. (1999). PMID 21702816.). "Irrational Nativist Exuberance" (http:/ / hum. D. D . OCLC 51896575. OCLC 44958022.39.L. Brian Roche. [18] Tomasello.007.M. New York & Berlin: Springer. Daniel.1126/science. Current Directions in Psychological Science 12 (4): 110–114. F. PMID 16272114. The Emergence of Language.96. edu/ entries/ innateness-language/ #ChoCasAgaSki). Constructing a language: a usage-based theory of language acquisition. Plunkett. M . ac.M. Crain. edu/ faculty/ ogrady/ Innateness. . doi:10. E . David (2010). Bechtel. Cambridge.523. Hayes. uk/ bitstream/ 2438/ 731/ 1/ oi-paper-all. Michael (2008). Stainton. ac. [6] Kendra A. Harper Perennial Modern Classics. [22] "Innateness. ed. Language 35: 26–58. Robert J. Eric. Reflections on Language. OCLC 62782600.1926. Turk.1113530. Retrieved 23 December 2008. C. . [16] Chomsky.01243. ed.. doi:10._UG. Johnson. Gobet (2005). Parisi. sciencedirect. pdf). OCLC 799714148. Science 274 (5294): 1926–1928. [2] Tomasello. 1970. Karin. Contemporary Debates in Cognitive Science (Oxford / Basil Blackwell): 59–80. ISBN 0-631-21851-3. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science 1 (5): 677–684. . Trends in Cognitive Science 11 (7): 274–9. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. OCLC 778413074. Derivational complexity and order of acquisition in child speech._Emergentism.Aslin. edu/ entries/ innateness-language/ ) (Oxford University Press. [12] Baker. N.tics. Michael (2003). "Statistical language learning: mechanisms and constraints". Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. (1975). ISSN 19395078.1207/s15516709cog0000_47. ISBN 0-8058-3010-3. . Mass: MIT Press. [9] Brian MacWhinney. "Linking working memory and long-term memory: A computational model of the learning of new words" (http:/ / bura. [7] Noam. J. Psychology the Science of Behaviour. [28] Freudenthal. A . [29] Jones. "Language Acquisition and Brain Development". "Innateness and emergentism".1037/0033-295X. Dermot Barnes-Holmes. New York: Wiley.N. ed. Relational Frame Theory: A Post-Skinnerian Account of Human Language and Cognition (Hardcover). pp. ISBN 0-19-562515-3. Michael. New York). Oxford [Oxfordshire]: Oxford University Press. Machine Learning of Natural Language. [5] Matilal. "Understanding Human Language: An In-Depth Exploration of the Human Facility for Language" (http:/ / www. In Cognition and the development of language. Jenny. Roger and Camile Hanlon. Kuniyoshi L. edu/ ~jriggle/ SP05. OCLC 47008353. [8] Steven C. (1999): What's Within? Nativism Reconsidered (http:/ / plato. pdf). Mark Raphael (2002). R.274. William. [13] Brown.4. J.R. F. Paper presented at 'Rich Languages from Poor Inputs: A Workshop in Honor of Carol Chomsky'.. pdf). ISBN 0-306-46600-7. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. R. Cambridge. 2009—Lessons from a mute child. ISBN 0-06-133646-7. StudentPulse. K . Universal Grammar. Hayes. [23] Cowie.W. Retrieved 22 August 2012. "A distributed developmental model of word recognition and naming". (1989). uk/ bitstream/ 2438/ 618/ 1/ DevSci_revised-final. MIT. (2003). "Modelling the development of children's use of optional infinitives in English and Dutch using MOSAIC" (http:/ / bura. ISBN 0-631-19536-X. ed. Gobet. (1999). An introduction to linguistic theory and language acquisition. J . Science 310 (5749): 815–819. . 1967. Neil and Heth. "Statistical learning by 8-month-old infants" (http:/ / www. Pearson Education:New Jersey. Pine. OCLC 24041690. org/ cgi/ content/ full/ 274/ 5294/ 1926?ijkey=4tT5xXrt3zjSo). George. stanford. Oxford: Blackwell. PMID 2798649. [26] Seidenberg. OCLC 66740160. Plenum Press. [27] Saffran. hawaii.M. Palmer (2009). Diane C. sciencemag. ISBN 3-540-19557-2 and 0-387-19557-2. Gitcho. ling. stanford. Nicole (2007). F. [21] Ramscar. com/ science?_ob=ArticleURL& _udi=B6VH9-4NX8RMS-1& _user=145269& _rdoc=1& _fmt=& _orig=search& _sort=d& _docanchor=& view=c& _acct=C000012078& _version=1& _urlVersion=0& _userid=145269& md5=47ff435b0e447e46c2f65460d22fbc8d). [15] Stromswold. ISBN 0-674-01030-2. Stephen (1999). [24] Barbara Scholz and Geoffrey Pullum (2006). Donald (2007). doi:10.C. Cognitive Science 30 (2): 277–310. The word and the world: India's contribution to the study of language.S. doi:10.Language acquisition 116 References [1] Lightfoot.L. Mark S. [4] "Innateness and Language" (http:/ / plato. (2005).1111/1467-8721. "A Review of B. 11 December 2009. Origins of human communication. Gary. Karmiloff-Smith. studentpulse. . [17] Pinker. . OCLC 439979810. brunel. E. Oxford [Oxfordshire]: Oxford University Press. Elman. "Language acquisition and language change".05. [11] Lillo-Martin. .1002/wcs. [3] Sakai. Retrieved 2 April 2009. Pine (2007). doi:10. F. "Developmental change and the nature of learning in childhood" (http:/ / www. MA. [20] Bates. PMID 8943209. uchicago. New York: Wiley [14] Lenneberg.1126/science. Chomsky (1959). pdf). (2001). . The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language (P. ISBN 0-19-860632-X. Psychological Review 96 (4): 523–568. Jenny R.5294. 590–601. Cambridge. ISBN 0-262-20177-1. MA: Blackwell Publishers. Steven (2007). brunel. J. and Emergentism (2008)" (http:/ / www. ISSN 0963-7214. Developmental Science 10 (6): 853–873. [10] Carlson.1016/j. McClelland (1989). com/ articles/ 82/ 2/ understanding-human-language-an-in-depth-exploration-of-the-human-facility-for-language). Bimal Krishna (1990). Newport (1996).

Luciano.23. Jessica. Brain and Language 59 (2): 267–333. Jessica. 1146: 23–49. "Vocabulary acquisition and verbal short-term memory: Computational and neural bases". PMID 17973801.2008. Susan (1977).6. [30] Bannard C. Natl. (1 January 2012). A longitudinal study" (http:/ / cat.2007. . "Nonword repetition and word learning: The nature of the relationship" (http:/ / www. Pentland Alex P. [38] Gathercole SE (2006). (1989). M. "Modeling children's early grammatical knowledge".1017/S0142716406060383. PMID 19933137. [46] Yu Chen. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology. Physica A 388 (5): 732–746. [47] Landauer. [40] Gupta Prahlad. Martin. pp. Pisoni. Retrieved 2 April 2009.1016/j. org/ AAASGW/ Session2/ landauer_article.. Lichtbown P.01. . Neuron 67 (5): 713–27. chapter. Lond. Trans. "Learning words from sights and sounds: A computational model". (1995). PMID 20826304. [45] Fazly Afsaneh. "Evaluation of the role of phonological STM in the development of vocabulary in children. PMID 12804693. (1977). pp. Miyamoto. Stevenson Suzanne (2010).2009. Terry (2005). doi:10.OCLC 89395784 [37] Gathercole SE. George A. org/ papers/ Pallier. R. .08.7. Boston. David B. JR (1998). critical. doi:10. (1997). If. PMC 2765208. inist. Biol. doi:10. "The Ear Is Connected to the Brain: Some New Directions in the Study of Children with Cochlear Implants at Indiana University". • Hickok G. fr/ ?aModele=afficheN& cpsidt=7251627).1073/pnas. Chin. OCLC 3002566.0146. David B.1997. S.Language acquisition doi:10. "Speech phones are a replication code".neuron. PMC 2947444.23.011. "Neural mechanisms of language comprehension: challenges to syntax"..1016/j. doi:10. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly.. 106 (41): 17284–9. Cognitive Science 29: 819–865. 41. and why. Montgomery.1111/j. edtechpolicy. Sage Publications.042.12.A.2006. [48] T.1111/j. [34] Bloom L. (1974). [52] Houston.00638.1016/j. "A unified model of early word learning: Integrating statistical and social cues". doi:10. Cognition 92 (1-2): 67–99. 286–306. G. [42] Regier. "Emergent constraints on word-learning: A computational review". doi:10. Cristophe.1207/s15516709cog2601_4. Psychological review 104: 211–240.cognition. Steven B. Language Learning Practices with Deaf Children.neucom. [43] Hadzibeganovic Tarik. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.1016/j.. when. "A solution to Plato's problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition" (http:/ / www. Steven B. Hood L. New York: Seabury Press..brainres. Medland. pdf). PMC 2846315. "The Ear Is Connected to the Brain: Some New Directions in the Study of Children with Cochlear Implants at Indiana University". Dumais. ISBN 0-8164-9330-8.x. Boston: Academic Press. [51] McKinley. [39] Skoyles. uk/ res/ wml/ Gathercole06 Applied PsyLinguistics. TK. Tomasello M (October 2009).0905638106.01104. Proc. Miyamoto. G. • Kuperberg GR (May 2007). OCLC 3073433. pdf).2010. PMID 21564243. Imitation in language. doi:10.2006.1098/rstb.10. PMID 19805057. [33] Curtiss. 380–420.7. Ann (2000). J. Cognitive Science 34 (6): 1017–1063. "A Tsallis' statistics based neural network model for novel word learning". ac. Sci.2010.063. pallier. [44] Roy Deb K. [41] Regier Terry (2003). [31] Kuhl 2004 [32] Pallier. Derek M. Bates. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7 (6): 263–268. Ballard Dana H (2007). Lieven E. 252–263. doi:10. MacWhinney Brian (1997). M. Sci.1016/S1364-6613(03)00108-6. Bergeson. Cognitive Psychology 6. Acad.x.6.1007/s10519-010-9402-9 [49] McAnally. .. Genetic Variance in a Component of the Language Acquisition Device: ROBO1 Polymorphisms Associated with Phonological Buffer Deficits. (2010).1016/0749-596X(89)90044-2.2003. Soc. Beer.038.. Cognitive Science 26: 113–146. doi:10. "The emergence of words: Attentional Learning in Form and Meaning". "A Probabilistic Computational Model of Cross-Situational Word Learning". 364 (1536): 3633–47. Plunkett K (December 2009). Philos. 117 Further reading • Kuhl PK (September 2010). Bergeson. Richard T. Chin.3766/jaaa. ST. [36] Masur EF. PMID 9572572. Derek M. Richard T. Poeppel D (2004). doi:10.1016/j. doi:10. attrition.1819. Alishahi Afra.1006/brln.. Rose (1987). Tonya R. • Arias-Trejo N. C. doi:10.10. Infants' early verbal imitation and their later lexical development. (2002).physa. Spontaneous apprentices: children and language. pdf) (PDF). Baddeley AD. Tonya R.. B. Pisoni. Medical hypotheses 50 (2): 167–73. ISBN 0-12-196350-0. doi:10. PMID 15037127. period. "Dorsal and ventral streams: a framework for understanding aspects of the functional anatomy of language". E. doi:10. PMID 17400197. Cannas Sergio A (2009). The Effectiveness of Cochlear Implants for Children with Prelingual Deafness. york. Neurocomputing 70 (13–15): 2149–2165. .S. "Lexical-semantic priming effects during infancy". . 2007. "Critical periods in language acquisition and language attrition" (http:/ / www. U. (1 January 2012). "Brain mechanisms in early language acquisition". 34–40. Wright and N. doi:10. W. PMID 9299067. Genie: a psycholinguistic study of a modern-day "wild child".1467-7687. Journal of Memory and Language 28 (2): 200–213. Behav Genet10..3766/jaaa.1551-6709. [50] Houston. Brain Res. Applied Psycholinguistics 27: 513–543.OCLC  65013247 [35] Miller. Beer.034.

and interest from major academic publishers (e. Ferreira VS (May 2008). In 1990. 118 External links • Innateness and Language. evolutionary psychology.g. doi:10. "Structural priming: a critical review".[2] Since the late 1980s. runting is more common. History August Schleicher (1821–1868) and his Stammbaumtheorie are often quoted as the starting point of evolutionary linguistics. "Structural MRI studies of language function in the undamaged brain". Psychol Bull 134 (3): 427–59. Brain Struct Funct 213 (6): 511–23. This led to an abandonment of the field for more than a century. PMID 19618210. as a subfield of • Sprachsozialisation einiger nicht-europäischer Kulturen im Vergleich. • Richardson FM.[4] The Stammbaumtheorie proved to be very productive for comparative linguistics.427. a hotly debated dichotomy in linguistics. This development was further strengthened by the establishment (in 1996) of a series of conferences on the Evolution of Language (now known as "Evolang"). PMC 2749930. If both copies are damaged. Their paper is often credited with reviving the interest in evolutionary linguistics. heritable language dysfunction was found to have a defective copy of this gene. To what extent language's features are determined by genes. and pups die within weeks due to inadequate lung . Mutations of the corresponding gene in mice (FOXP2 is fairly well conserved. (http://kaltric. the Studies in the Evolution of Language series has been appearing with Oxford University Press since 2001) and scientific journals. Price CJ (October 2009). The question of the origin of language was abandoned as unsolvable.[3] He introduced the representation of language families as an evolutionary tree in articles published in 1853.1037/0033-2909. especially biology.1007/s00429-009-0211-y. Joseph Jastrow published a gestural theory of the evolution of language in the seventh volume of Science. the Purkinje layer (a part of the cerebellum that contains better-connected neurons than any other) develops abnormally. An English family with a severe.[1] The main challenge in this research is the lack of empirical data: spoken language leaves practically no traces. neurolinguistics. modern humans share the same allele as Neanderthals) cause reductions in size and vocalization rate. and cognitive sprachsozialisation/) Evolutionary linguistics Evolutionary linguistics is a cover term for the scientific study of both the origins and development of language as well as the cultural evolution of languages. but didn't solve the major problem of studying the origin of language: the lack of fossil records. the Société Linguistique de Paris in 1866 refused to admit any further papers on the subject. Schleicher was the first to compare languages to evolving species. has had new light shed upon it by the discovery of the FoxP2-gene. Famously. The field has re-appeared in 1988 in the Linguistic Bibliography. Recent developments Evolutionary linguistics as a field is rapidly emerging as a result of developments in neighboring disciplines.Language acquisition • Pickering MJ. PMC 2657366. the field has been revived in the wake of progress made in the related fields of psycholinguistics. Encyclopedia Entry (http://plato.3. evolutionary anthropology..134. Steven Pinker and Paul Bloom published their paper "Natural Language & Natural Selection"[5] which strongly argued for an adaptationist approach to language origins. 1886. Inspired by the natural sciences. promoting a scientific. PMID 18444704. doi:10. multidisciplinary approach to the issue.stanford.

[6] Additionally. with downregulation causing incomplete and inaccurate song imitation in zebra finches. Their research is based on the hypothesis that language is a complex adaptive system that emerges through adaptive interactions between agents and continues to evolve in order to remain adapted to the needs and capabilities of the agents. we must tackle it as part of a wider one — the evolutionary emergence of symbolic culture as such.[10] This is a purely descriptive approach to what we mean by "natural language" without attempting to address its emergence.[7] Another controversial dichotomy is the question of whether human language is solely human or on a continuum with (admittedly far removed) animal communication systems. according to this view. head of the research units of Sony CSL in Paris and the AI Lab at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel. If we are to explain language's evolution. combinatorial phonology and compositional semantics are now thought to be shared with at least some nonhuman animal species.[14] . Computational modeling is now widely accepted as an approach to assure the internal consistency of language-evolution scenarios. such as John McWhorter. evidence suggests that the protein is vital to neuroplasticity. Conversely. for the idea that FOXP2 is 'the grammar gene' or that it had much to do with the relatively recent emergence of syntactical speech. He and his team are currently investigating ways in which artificial agents self-organize languages with natural-like properties and how meaning can co-evolve with language. and the similarities in each languages process of nominalization (the process of verbs becoming nouns) as well as the reverse. and that any communication system that remotely resembles human language utterly relies on cognitive architecture that co-evolved alongside language. a formalism for construction grammars that has been specially designed for the origins and evolution of language. however. For instance. Finally there are those archaeologists and evolutionary anthropologists – among them Ian Watts. higher presence of FOXP2 in songbirds is correlated to song changes. There is little support. In general. where signals must be intrinsically reliable. Approximately one-third of all papers presented at the 2010 Evolution of Language conference [8] rely at least in part on computer simulations.Evolutionary linguistics development. In agreement with Amotz Zahavi. The approach of computational modeling and the use of robotic agents grounded in real life is claimed to be theory independent. Similarly. Studies in ethology have forced researchers to reassess many claims of uniquely human abilities for language and speech. It enables the researcher to find out exactly what cognitive capacities are needed for certain language phenomena to emerge. once held uniquely human traits such as formant perception. have analyzed the evolution and construction of basic communication methods such as Pidginization and Creolization. language's form and even its presence are extremely hard or impossible to deduce from physical evidence. Some linguists. whereas theoretical models often stay very vague. This research has been implemented in fluid construction grammar (FCG).[9] "Nativist" models of "Universal Grammar" are informed by linguistic universals such as the existence of pronouns and demonstratives. Tecumseh Fitch has argued that the descended larynx is not unique to humans. It also focuses the researcher in formulating hypotheses in a precise and exact manner. As it leaves no fossils.[11] Camilla Power[12] and Chris Knight (co-founder with James Hurford of the EVOLANG series of conferences) — who argue that 'the origin of language' is probably an insoluble problem. Derek Bickerton and others argue that the advent of abstract words provided a mental basis for analyzing higher-order relations.[13] Knight argues that language — being a realm of patent fictions — is a theoretical impossibility in a Darwinian world. the process of turning nouns into verbs. 119 Approaches One original researcher in the field is Luc Steels.

Liba. . (eds). In R. In R. Zhang Y. doi:10. ed. 10. ac. K. Frey. nl/ evolang2010. 2012 Kyoto.anthro. World Scientific. April 14–17. [12] Power. pdf) In Ulrich J. The Evolutionary Emergence of Language: Social function and the origins of linguistic form. [6] Shu W. The Cradle of Language. [14] Chris Knight. "Natural language and natural selection". 1998. The origins of symbolic culture. 2010. Smith. pages 171–193 (1993) [4] Jastrow J (1886). pp. Knight (eds). "The Evolution of Language". Bart de Boer. Japan. 2009. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Sexual selection models for the emergence of symbolic communication: why they should be reversed. Owl Books. chrisknight. ISBN 981-4295-21-3. P. "Evolutionary Linguistics" (http:/ / www. [13] Zahavi. 1998 London: Chris Knight. annualreviews.000 years ago. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cann 2009.Evolutionary linguistics 120 EVOLANG Conference The Evolution of Language International Conferences [15][16] have been held biennially since 1996. L. uu.1126/science. Guy. 62-92. anthro.176S. 2006 Rome: Angelo Cangelosi. The Cradle of Language. [18].. Cambridge University Press. [10] (2005) Deutscher. from the 1860s to the 1980s. R. 135-149. The Cradle of Language. pp. let.085156. body painting. PMID 17428829. World Scientific. C. J. [8] http:/ / evolang2010. The Evolution of Language: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference (EVOLANG9). [2] for about 12 decades. and Cartmill.37. [8]. and Tamariz. 2010 Utrecht. Oxford: Oxford University Press. World Scientific. Ramon Ferrer i Cancho "The Evolution of Language (EVOLANG 7)". Morrisey EE (May 2007). S. Marieke Schouwstra. Kenny Smith The Evolution of Language: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on the Evolution of Language. Botha and C. Smith.C. 1993. ISBN 981-256-656-2.1146/annurev.). Cambridge University Press. Berlin. doi:10. Kenny Smith "The Evolution of Language (EVOLANG 8)". 2002 Boston: J. nl/ history. 085156).Social and Cognitive Bases.ns-7. Fitch (eds. Charlotte Störmer and Kai P. editor. 2009. 9. php [17] http:/ / stel. 1. ub. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. co. & Knight C. 2. Lu MM. 2014 Vienna Notes [1] Croft. John. Random House Group. Hurford and Michael Studdert-Kennedy (eds). M. Desalles & L. Kenny Smith. 3.555. Knight (eds). 1146/ annurev.081407. 340: 227-230. William (October 2008). Evolutionary Ideas and "Empirical" Methods: The Analogy Between Language and Species in the Works of Lyell and Schleicher. T. 2010. E. A. ling. C. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on the Evolution of Language 5. The fallacy of conventional signalling. (2011). Tucker PW. (http:/ / www.A. doi:10. the Netherlands. [5] Pinker. 2004 Leipzig 6. uk/ evolang/ [16] http:/ / www. and language: interpreting the Blombos ochre. PMID 17778380. [11] Watts. M. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.1242/dev. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (4): 707. Red ochre. World Scientific. evolang. 193-211. L. 8. Scott-Phillips. JSTOR 1761264. 1996 Edinburgh: Hurford. and R. 257-280. [15] http:/ / www. M. "Foxp2 and Foxp1 cooperatively regulate lung and esophagus development". and Hurford. 2012. Andrew D.R. The Unfolding of Language. org/ doi/ abs/ 10.. Smith. March 13–16. Hurford & T. pp. 7. htm [18] http:/ / kyoto. British Journal for the History of Science 26. [3] Taub. J.1017/S0140525X00081061. Approaches to the Evolution of Language . pp. M. Homo Novus – A Human Without Illusions. uk/ wp-content/ uploads/ 2007/ 09/ The-Origins-of-Symbolic-Culture. Evidence against a genetic-based revolution in language 50. The Power of Babel: The Natural History of Language. 2008 Barcelona: [17] Andrew D.02846. 2000 Paris: J. org/ . [7] Diller. I. Bloom. 081407. Willführ (eds) 2010. Ghadakpour (eds. Botha and C. doi:10.). Andrew D. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on the Evolution of Language 4. edu/ evolang2008/ pro. nl [9] (2002) McWhorter. In R. Botha and C. Knight (eds). M. Studdert-Kennedy. James R.. 37. Development 134 (10): 1991–2000. Science 7 (176S): 555–557. Annual Review of Anthropology (Annual Reviews) 37: 219–234. Zhou D. ISBN 981-277-611-7. Ed. MA. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 5 (7): 288–295. Symbol and Structure: A Comprehensive Framework for Language Evolution. C.1016/S1364-6613(00)01683-1. and Lancaster. PDF (http:/ /www. J. Oxford University Press. Willführ (eds) 2010. by Leonid Grinin. S (1976). Harnad. S.bbsonline. and Andrey Korotayev. 2009. • Pinker. grammar. HarperCollins. meaning. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 280: 1–914. Chomsky N.Americana Corporation of Canada{1959}-Iceland-Language .1017/S0140525X00081061. Homo Novus – A Human Without Illusions. pp.pdf)</ref> • Komarova. Berlin.1. D. • M. R. doi:10. • Power. ISBN 0-304-33650-5 • Steels.. Mouton de Gruyer: Berlin. 164–179. "From hand to mouth: Some critical stages in the evolution of language In: Harnad. "Natural language and natural selection" (http://www. 33–57.1126/science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13: 707–784.. "The faculty of language: what is it. In: Cangelosi A. S. • Hurford. C. MIT Press. Kirby (eds.) Simulating the Evolution of Language (http://www. Deacon. Daniel Dor and Jablonka Eva (2001). Frey. 257–280.D. • Bickerton. The Cradle of amag/langev/) (1200+ related H. and Parisi D. (1976) (Eds) Origins and Evolution of Language and Speech" (http:// cogprints. Evolution of Communication 4 (1): 117–142. Ward.07can. Komarova. pp. Steklis. New York (2003).uk/soc/staff/angelo/book2001-TOC. Knight (eds).. • Steklis. KomKniga/URSS. html) Springer.4.pdf). • Lieberman. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. (2007).uiuc. doi:10. linguistics 121 References • Cangelosi. • Pinker. Charlotte Störmer and Kai P. (1997) The symbolic species: the coevolution of language and the brain. (2001). New York.uiuc. New York. The Language Mosaic and Its Evolution. M.chrisknight. New York • Knight. (1996) The evolution of communication. In: History & Mathematics (http://urss.isrl. Geoffrey: Evolutionary Language Understanding. pp.D. Fitch WT (2002). M.. J. de Munck. (1990). (2002) Foundations of language: brain. Bloom. PMID 11425617. Moscow. doi:10. pp 149– 193–211. (1994) The language instinct. T. Hauser. and Jablonka E. In Ulrich J. pp. H. Victor C. • Jackendoff.1075/eoc. Harnad.1569. • Nowak. (2010).298. doi:10. 252–271. (Eds.. Language Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag. PMID 12446899. Selection. list=1).org/documents/ a/00/00/04/99/index. S. pp.isrl. published 1996 by Cassel (London). Luc (2001) Grounding Symbols through Evolutionary Language Games. "The adaptive advantage of symbolic theft over sensorimotor toil: Grounding language in perceptual categories" (http://cogprints. who has it. In Tabant J.html). pp. and the Evolution of Language. (2001) From cultural selection to genetic selection: a framework for the evolution of language. and fulltext pointers) • Encyclopedia Americana. and how did it evolve?" (http://www3. 38–57. In R.. How language changed the genes. • Sampson. • • • • • Hauser MD. Norton. 1–3. Botha and C.A. Dor D.Motor Control. Sexual selection models for the emergence of symbolic communication: why they should be reversed. Language and Mathematics: An evolutionary model of grammatical communication. 77–93. org/Preprints/Jackendoff-07252002/Referees/) Oxford University Press. A. Speech.5598. The origins of symbolic culture. Christiansen and S. P. ISBN 978-0-19-924484-3... (2001). (editors). S. R. • See also the UIUC Language Evolution and Computation Bibliography/Repository (http://www. evolution (http://www.bbsonline. "Towards an evolutionary theory of language". ISBN 978-5-484-01001-1.). S. P.L. Science 298 (5598): 1569–

• Fitch. The Major Transitions in the Evolution of Language. and language: interpreting the Blombos ochre. Oxford University Press. • Atkinson QD.. C. Theoretical and Applied Linguistics. The computational nature of language learning and evolution MIT Press.uiuc. pp. and Edgar. Current studies in linguistics 43 (2006). Maggie (2005). Origins of language : constraints on hypotheses. Javier (2009). 122 Further reading • Botha. Horst D. [editors] (2009). • Tallerman. 2009. 2007. Jane. ISBN 978-0-670-03490-1. language. From Lucy to Language (Revised. OCLC 72440476. 1 (2007). New York. The First Word: The Search for the Origins of Language. ISBN 0-7432-8064-4. doi:10. Botha and C. PhD thesis. Tania Kuteva. and expanded ed. W. Science 319 (5863): 588. v. New York. R. The Cradle of Language.: Oxford University Press.. H.1126/science. I. PMID 18239118. 117. Origins and Evolution of Language and Speech. Bern et al. ISBN 0-19-927904-7. updated. mind and body London : Weidenfeld & Nicolson (2005). UK. • Johanson. Sverker. Stevan R.: Peter Lang. Lancaster.1149683. • Harnad. html) • Johansson. The evolution of language. ISBN 978-0-19-922776-1. ISBN 978-0-297-64317-3 • Partha Niyogi. Donald C. ISBN New York. Studies in the evolution of language vol. Amsterdam : Benjamins (2005). In R. "Languages evolve in punctuational bursts". The singing neanderthals : the origins of music. [editors] (1976). • Elvira. NY: Viking.. NY: Oxford University Press. Steven J. Language in the light of evolution. March).. Christine (2007). New York: New York Academy of Sciences. Oxford. Steklis. . • Mithen. Hurford.isrl. • Kenneally. Carstairs-McCarthy. The genesis of grammar : a reconstruction. University of Edinburgh (2005) (http://www. Meade A. • A. body painting. Evolución lingüística y cambio sintáctico. 5.. Knight. • Bernd Heine. Cambridge: Cambridge.. OCLC 80460757. Oxford Series in the Evolution of Language. Converging evidence in language and communication research vol.Evolutionary linguistics • Watts. The Evolution of Language. 280. ISBN 978-3-0343-0323-1. Venditti C. W. Tecumseh (2010). Blake (2006). Greenhill SJ. • James R. Oxford. ISBN 978-0-19-922777-8. issue 3 (2007. ISBN 978-0-19-954586-5. The Cradle of Language. Lingua vol. 62–92. Language Origins: Perspectives on Evolution. Knight (eds). Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. OCLC 60607214. NY: Simon and Schuster. • Zuidema. Pagel M (2008). ISBN 0-89072-026-6. Oxford University Press.). Fondo Hispánico de Lingüística y Filología. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Red ochre.

ed.[4] The Internet continues to play a significant role in both encouraging as well as diverting attention away from the usage of languages.Evolutionary linguistics 123 External links • Fluid Construction Grammar (http://arti.vub.[2] The four perspectives are effectively interlinked and affect one ) • Sony CSL Research (http://www. it changed the way people communicate and created new platforms with far-reaching social education.ecagents. According to Crystal (2005).sony.ling. This will benefit both linguists and web users. virtual worlds and the the 19th century when the telephone was invented and the 20th century when broadcasting began to penetrate our society. . Significant avenues include but are not limited to SMS Text Messaging. the educational perspective. It studies new language styles and forms that have arisen under the influence of the Internet and other New Media.[3] The study of Internet linguistics can be effectively done through four main • ECAgents: The Project on Embodied and Communicating Agents (http://www. experts have acknowledged that linguistics has a contributing role in it. through the Mass Media and Literary Works. chatgroups. the linguistics future of the Internet remains to be determined as new computer-mediated technologies continues to emerge and people adapt their languages to suit these new mediums. the stylistic perspective and the applied perspective.[2] Some examples include the iPhone and the BlackBerry. as seen in the 15th century when printing was introduced. e-mails. in terms of web interface and usability. CMC such as SMS Text Messaging and mobile emailing (push mail) has greatly enhanced instantaneous communication. such as Short Message Service (SMS) text messaging. stylistics and applied. In view of the increasing number of users connected to the Internet. Vrije Universiteit Brussel (http://arti.[1] The advent of the Internet has revolutionized communication in many ways.[1] Further dimensions have developed as a result of further technological advancements which include the development of the Web as Corpus and the spread and influence of the stylistic variations brought forth by the spread of the • ARTI Artificial Intelligence Laboratory.csl. these concerns are neither without grounds nor unseen in history – it surfaces almost always when a new technology breakthrough influences languages. University of Edinburgh (http://www. Sociolinguistic perspective This perspective deals with how society views the impact of Internet development on languages.[2] The evolution of these new mediums of communications has raised much concern with regards to the way language is being used.elinguistics. Studying the emerging language on the Internet can help improve conceptual organization. translation and web usability. sociolinguistics.[2] At a personal Internet linguistics Internet linguistics is a sub-domain of linguistics advocated by David • Blog about quantification of the genetic proximity between languages (http://www.[5] Main perspectives David Crystal has identified four main perspectives for further investigation – the sociolinguistic perspective.[1][2] Since the beginning of Human-computer interaction (HCI) leading to computer-mediated communication (CMC) and Internet-mediated communication (IMC).be/FCG/) • Language Evolution and Computation Research Unit.

impact of Internet lingo resulted in the 'death' of the apostrophe and loss of capitalization. For instance. 3. See below: Stylistic perspective 5. at Nanyang Technological University. It is commonplace for students in New York University to interact with “guest speakers weighing in via Skype. iTunes U in 2008 began to collaborate with universities as they converted the Apple music service into a store that makes available academic lectures and scholastic materials for free – they have partnered more than 600 institutions in 18 countries including Oxford.) 124 Educational perspective The educational perspective of internet linguistics examines the Internet's impact on formal language use. Metalanguage and folk linguistics – It involves looking at the way these linguistic forms and changes on the Internet are labelled and discussed (e. facilitated by technological developments in streamlining integrated features (push e-mail. Conversation discourse – It explores the changes in patterns of social interaction and communicative practice on the Internet. students engage in collaborative learning at the university’s portal – edveNTUre. it is a common sight for companies to have their computers and laptops hooked up onto the Internet (via wired and wireless Internet connection) and employees having individual email accounts. For instance.[7] At a professional level. Multilingualism – It looks at the prevalence and status of various languages on the Internet. but are not limited to. in 2008. 4. Classroom discussions are increasingly being brought onto the Internet in the form of discussion forums.[2] The rise and rapid spread of Internet use has brought about new linguistic features specific only to the Internet platform. these new CMCs that are made possible by the Internet have altered the way people use language – there is heightened informality and consequently a growing fear of its deterioration. where they participate in discussions on forums and online quizzes and view streaming podcasts prepared by their course instructors among others. Language change – From a sociolinguistic perspective. with emphasis on Internet lingo. Cambridge and Yale Universities. where constraints of technology on word count . and students accessing library resources from off campus. specifically on Standard English.g. conversation discourse and stylistic diffusion overlap with the aspect of language stylistics. Stylistic diffusion – It involves the study of the spread of Internet jargons and related linguistic forms into common usage.[6] In general. These include.[2] Themes The sociolinguistics of the Internet may also be examined through five interconnected themes. This greatly facilitates internal (among staffs of the company) and external (with other parties outside of one’s organization) communication.[6] These forms of academic social networking and media are slated to rise as educators from all over the world continue to seek new ways to better engage students.[8] 1. language change is influenced by the physical constraints of technology (e. However as David Crystal puts it. It explores the linguistic changes over time.”[7] This will affect the way language is used as students and teachers begin to use more of these CMC platforms. these should be seen positively as it reflects the power of the creativity of a language. Mobile communications such as smart phones are increasingly making their way into the corporate world. an increase in the use of informal written language. Apple announced their intention to actively step up their efforts to help companies incorporate the iPhone into their enterprise environment.g. which in turn affects language education. typed text) and the shifting social-economic priorities such as globalization. inconsistency in written styles and stylistics and the use of new abbreviations in Internet chats and SMS text messaging. library staffs providing support via instant messaging.Internet linguistics In schools. 2. calendar and contact management) using ActiveSync. it is not uncommon for educators and students to be given personalized school email accounts for communication and interaction purposes. As language changes.

a general expression of laughter). There is.[10] Linguists and professors like Eleanor Johnson suspect that widespread mistakes in writing are strongly connected to Internet usage. with the use of abbreviations such as "u" for "you" and "2" for "to" being the most common. In replying to emails. no scientific evidence to confirm the proposed connection. For example.[13] Though the use of the Internet resulted in stylistics that are not deemed appropriate in academic and formal language use.[2] It looks at the Internet as a medium through which new language phenomena have arisen.[14] 125 Stylistic perspective This perspective examines how the Internet and its related technologies have encouraged new and different forms of creativity in language. blogs. Baron (2008) argues in Always On that student writings suffer little impact from the use of Internet-mediated communication (IMC) such as internet chat. such as the usage of casual words like "guy" or the choice of the word "preclude" in place of "precede" in academic papers by students. There are also issues with spellings and grammar occurring at a higher frequency among students' academic works as noted by educators.[12] A recent study published by the British Journal of Developmental Psychology found that students who regularly texted (sends message via SMS using a mobile phone) displayed a wider range of vocabulary and this may lead to a positive impact on their reading development. omg (oh my god) and gtg (got to go). chat messengers. The Internet has proven in different ways that it can provide potential benefits in enhancing language learning. discussion forums. most significantly. This new mode of language is interesting to study because it is an amalgam of both spoken and written languages.[9] The educational perspective has been considerably established in the research on the Internet's impact on language education. however. providing for greater error corrections and better learning opportunities of standard language. There are concerns for the growing infiltration of informal language use and incorrect word use into academic or formal situations.[2] The communicative style of Internet language is best observed in the CMC channels below. it is to be noted that Internet use may not hinder language education but instead aid it.Internet linguistics contributed to the rise of new abbreviations. traditional writing is static compared to the dynamic nature of the new language on the Internet where words can appear in different colors and font sizes on the computer screen. In discussion forums. as there are often attempts to overcome technological restraints such as transmission time lags and to re-establish social cues that are often vague . one can start a new thread and anyone regardless of their physical location can respond to the idea or thought that was set down through the Internet.[14] IMC allows for greater interaction between language learners and native speakers of the language. people generally use the sender’s email message as a frame to write their own messages.[] Future research also includes new varieties of expressions that the Internet and its various technologies are constantly producing and their effects not only on written languages but also their spoken forms.[1] Such acronyms exist primarily for practical reasons — to reduce the time and effort required to communicate through these mediums apart from technological limitations. this new mode of language also contains other elements not found in natural languages. especially in literature. One example is the concept of framing found in emails and discussion forums. applied through the communication aspect (use of e-mails. They can choose to respond to certain parts of an email message while leaving other bits out.[15] Yet. etc. Examples of common acronyms include lol (for laughing out loud. especially in second or foreign language learning. in the process allowing the picking up of specific skills such as negotiation and persuasion.). SMS text messaging and e-mail. Language education through the Internet in relation to Internet linguisitics is. It is an important and crucial aspect as it affects and involves the education of current and future student generations in the appropriate and timely use of informal language that arises from Internet usage. its severity is however enlarged by the informal nature of the new media platforms.[11] Though there are valid concerns about Internet usage and its impact on student's academic and formal writing. This is something that is usually not found in written language. where educators have similarly reported new kinds of spelling and grammar mistakes in student works. Naomi S.

Internet linguistics in written text.[20] Virtual worlds Virtual worlds provide insights into how users are adapting the usage of natural language for communication within these new mediums. allowing them to find creative ways to improve their language skills. These novels are in their "raw" form as they do not go through editing processes like traditional novels.[22] Communication in niches such as role-playing games (RPG) of Multi-User domains (MUDs) and virtual worlds is highly interactive. As a result.[2] Blogs have become so popular that they have expanded beyond written blogs. the language used in blogs is "in its most 'naked' form". Virtual worlds are good tools for language learning among the younger learners because they already see such places as a "natural place to learn and play". There are often complex organization of sequences and exchange structures evident in the connection of conversational strands and short turns. usage of symbols such as the asterisk to enclose words as seen in *stress* and the creative use of punctuation like ???!?!?!?. These developments in interactive blogging have created new linguistic conventions and styles.[8] Besides contributing to these new forms in language. one of which is the "loss of emotivity".[2] The 160-character limit imposed by the cell phone has motivated users to exercise their linguistic creativity to overcome them. Despite the on-going debate. there has also been criticism regarding the novels’ "lack of diverse vocabulary" and poor grammar.[20] David Crystal stated that blogs were "the beginning of a new stage in the evolution of the written language".[16] The cell phone has also created a new literary genre – cell phone novels. similar to text-messaging. Examples of these include pwn and noob.[8] Mobile phones Mobile phones (also called "cell phones") have an expressive potential beyond their basic communicative functions. Some of the CMC strategies used include capitalization for words such as EMPHASIS.[18] Despite their popularity. This can be seen in text-messaging poetry competitions such as the one held by The Guardian. with more expected to arise in the future. audioblog and moblog. volatile. Emoticons are further examples of how users have adapted different expressions to suit the limitations of cyberspace communication. This is what makes blogs stand out because almost all other forms of printed language have gone through some form of editing and standardization.[2] published for the world to see without undergoing the formal editing process. readers’ ideas sometimes get incorporated into the storyline or authors may also decide to change their story’s plot according to the demand and popularity of their novel (typically gauged by the number of download hits). There have been debates as to whether these new abbreviated forms introduced in users’ Tweets are "lazy" or whether they are creative fragments of communication. CMC is generally more vibrant. A typical cell phone novel consists of several chapters which readers download in short installments. there is no doubt that Twitter has contributed to the linguistic landscape with new lingoes and also brought about a new dimension of communication.[21] with the emergence of photoblog.[23] 126 . with emphasis on speed. unstructured and open. which has a 140-character limit. brevity and spontaneity. They are written in short sentences. A similar example of new technology with character constraints is Twitter. The Internet language that has arisen through user interactions in text-based chatrooms and computer-simulated worlds has led to the development of slangs within digital communities. Unlike traditional novel writing. videoblog. Virtual world language learning provides students with simulations of real-life environments.[19] Blogs Blogging has brought about new ways of writing diaries and from a linguistic perspective. virtual worlds are also being used to teach languages.[17] Authors of such novels are also able to receive feedbacks and new ideas from their readers through emails or online feedback channels.

[20] 127 Applied perspective The applied perspective views the linguistic exploitation of the Internet in terms of its communicative capabilities – the good and the bad. However.[25] Instant messaging Like other forms of online communication. email is no longer confined to sending informal messages between friends and relatives. for language education" because email with its array of stylistic expressiveness can act as a domain for language learners to make their own linguistic choices responsibly. David Crystal argues that email is "not a threat.[25] It is often related to informality as it feels temporary and can be deleted easily. nationality and geography. The result of a move towards more formal usages will be a medium representing a range of formal and informal stylistics. which has expanded the stylistics of languages in many ways.[1] The Internet provides a platform where users can experience multilingualism. A study done on the linguistic profile of emails has shown that there is a hybrid of speech and writing styles in terms of format. albeit through a digital medium. There are also greater occurrences of stylistic variation because there can be a very wide age gap between participants.[26] With instant messaging. The Internet is thus a platform where minority and Source: Internet World Stats endangered languages can seek to revive their language use and/or create awareness. This can be seen in two instances where it provides these languages opportunities for progress in two important regards . Unlike chatgroups where participants come together with shared interests. Job seekers are also using emails to send their resumes to potential employers. the younger generation’s high propensity for using email may improve their writing and communication skills because of the efforts they are making to formulate their thoughts and ideas. Furthermore.[8] The Global Internet usage page provides some information on the number of users of the Internet by language. This multilingual environment continues to increase in diversity as more language communities become connected [27] to the Internet.[1] . business correspondences are increasingly being carried out through emails. This increased degree of intimacy allows greater informality in language and "typographical idiosyncrasies". instant messaging is quite different from email and chatgroups because it allows participants to interact with one another in real-time while conversing in private. instant messaging has also developed its own acronyms and short forms. as this medium of communication matures. speed and spontaneity. grammar and style. a granddaughter can catch up with her grandmother through instant messaging.[20] While email has been blamed for students’ increased usage of informal language in their written work.Internet linguistics Email One of the most popular Internet-related technologies to be studied under this perspective is email. there is an added dimension of familiarity among participants. For example. However. there is no pressure to conform in language here.[24] Email is rapidly replacing traditional letter-writing because of its convenience.language documentation and language revitalization. other languages are gradually increasing in their number of users. Instead. Although English is still the dominant language used on the Internet.

which the young generation think of as ‘cool’. Leoki (Powerful Voice). Foundations such as the Hans Rausing Endangered Languages Project (HRELP). The content. was established in 1994.[30] The graphical bulletin board system. the Internet facilitates language documentation. there has been an increase in crimes that involved the use of the Internet such as e-mails and Internet Relay Chat (IRC). The materials gathered are made available online under its Endangered Languages Archive (ELAR) program.[29] Similarly. it allows researchers to build on these materials and hence preserve endangered languages. the use of e-mails facilitates language revitalization in the sense that speakers of a minority language who moved to a location where their native language is not being spoken can take advantage of the Internet to communicate with their family and friends. By making resources and information of endangered languages and language documentation available on the Internet. In recent years. These methods provide reasons for using the minority languages by communicating in it. language revitalization through the internet is no longer restricted to literate users. in an attempt to preserve their language and culture.[32][33] In addition. While developing a chat room child protection procedure based on search terms filtering is effective. chat. funded by Arcadia also help to develop the interest in linguistic documentation. there are many potential areas to explore. Digital archives of media such as audio and video recordings not only help to preserve language documentation.[1] Hawaiian educators have been taking advantage of the Internet in their language revitalization programs.[1] Exploitation of the Internet See also: Forensic linguistics The Internet can also be exploited for activities such as terrorism. these virtual environments have helped to bridge the spatial distance between communicators. Occitan speakers have been taking advantage of the Internet to reach out to other Occitan speakers from around the world. Language revitalization Secondly.[28] Publicity about endangered languages. Also. In higher institutions such as colleges and universities where the Leoki system is not yet installed. The web version of Ethnologue also provides brief information of all of the world’s known living languages. thus maintaining the use of their native language. such as Webster (2003) has helped to spur a worldwide interest in linguistic documentation.Internet linguistics Language documentation Firstly. as it is relatively easy to remain anonymous. the Internet facilitates language revitalization. From e-mails. The HRELP is a project that seeks to document endangered languages. e-mails and the Web to connect students of Hawaiian language with the broader community. there is still minimal linguistically orientated 128 .[31] Another use of the Internet includes having students of minority languages write about their native cultures in their native languages for distant audiences. Other online materials that support language documentation include the Language Archive Newsletter which provides news and articles about topics in endangered languages. With the development and increasing use of telephone broadband communication such as Skype. Throughout the years. the use of digital technologies. From a forensic linguistic point of view. The use of e-mails has been adopted in language courses to encourage students to communicate in various styles such as conference-type formats and also to generate discussions. the educators make use of other software and Internet tools such as Daedalus Interchange. chats to instant messaging. internet fraud and pedophilia. It is installed throughout the immersion school system and includes components for e-mails. preserve and disseminate documentation materials among others. the digital environment has developed in various sophisticated ways that allow for virtual contact.[34] These conspiracies carry concerns for security and protection. but also allows for global dissemination through the Internet. dictionary and online newspaper among others. interface and menus of the system are entirely in the Hawaiian language. will appeal to them and in turn maintain their interest and usage of their native languages.

Foundations of Statistical Language Processing Hit counts were used for carefully constructed search engine queries to identify rank orders for word sense frequencies.Internet linguistics literature to facilitate the task. But the term “corpus” when used in the context of modern linguistics tends most frequently to have more specific connotations than this simple definition provides for. It was met with much controversy as they lacked theoretical integrity leading to much skepticism of their role in the field.[39] This method was further explored with the introduction of the concept of a parallel corpora where the existing Web pages that exist in parallel in local and major languages be brought together. . — Tony McEnery and Andrew Wilson. as an input to a word sense disambiguation engine. having more training data is normally more useful than any concerns of balance. which helps to prevent fraud.[4] To establish whether the Web is a corpus. the Web has been used to address data sparseness.[45] .[42] It used the assumption that within a domain. it is observed that the Semantic Web has been involved in tasks such as personal data protection. Manning and Schütze (1999. . Corpus Linguistics Relating closer to the Web as a Corpus.[44] In areas of information retrieval.[43] while Web document were used to seek a balance in the corpus.[4] Corpora were first formally mentioned in the field of computational linguistics at the 1989 ACL meeting in Vancouver. — Christopher Manning and Hinrich Schütze. The development of using the web as a data source for word sense disambiguation was brought forward in The EU MEANING project in 2002. The Web as a corpus With the Web being a huge reservoir of data and resources. a Web track was integrated as a component in the community’s TREC evaluation initiative.[41] Themes There has been much discussion about the possible developments in the arena of the Web as a corpus.[1] In other areas. machine-readable form. pp 120)[38] further streamlines the definition: In Statistical NLP [Natural Language Processing]. pp 21). compromising of largely documents in the . any collection of more than one text can be called a corpus. a standard reference. one commonly receives as a corpus a certain amount of data from a certain domain of interest.[37] In principle. In areas of language modeling. The sample of the Web used for this exercise amount to around 100GB. language scientists and technologist are increasingly turning to the web for language data. These may be considered under four main headings: sampling and representativeness. In such cases.[4] until the publication of the journal ‘Using Large Corpora’ in 1993[36] that the relationship between computational linguistics and corpora became widely accepted. Lexical statistics have been gathered for resolving prepositional phrase top level domain. finite size. . and that domains are identifiable on the Web. trends of language change on the Internet and conversation discourse. This was further explored by using Web technology to gather manual word sense annotations on the Word Expert Web site. without having any say in how it is constructed. The impacts of internet linguistics on everyday life are examined under the spread and influence of Internet stylistics.[35] 129 Dimensions of Internet linguistics The dimensions covered in this section include looking at the Web as a corpus and issues of language identification and normalization. and one should simply use all the text that is available.[40] It was demonstrated that it is possible to build a language-specific corpus from a single document in that specific language. words often have a single meaning. it is worthwhile to turn to the definition established by McEnery and Wilson (1996.

it often results in little concern for accuracy. general-language corpus[53] with the focus of being representative replaced with being balanced.[4] 130 . and combinations of words.[47][48] However. French (1.5%). followed by Japanese (6. It is found that there are substantial variations in model performance when the training corpus changes. which warrants much additional research such as the project currently being carried out by the British National Corpus to exploit its scale. rare meanings of common words. Croatian. Researchers find that probabilistic models of language based on very large quantities of data are better than ones based on estimates from smaller. and Swedish (0. for some other purposes.000 words. grammar and a wide array of different sublanguages. no data has been found. there are limitations on the applicability of any language model as the statistics for different types of text will be different. German (5. Because the bulk of the lexical stock occurs less than 50 times in the British National Corpus. As Web texts are easily produced (in terms of cost and time) and with many different authors working on them. and Turkish have more than one hundred million words on the Web. The number of words in the British National Corpus (ca 100 million) is sufficient for many empirical strategies for learning about language for linguists and lexicographers.1%). indicating the significant size of the English corpus available on the Web.8%). The next is German.[4] The multilingual Web The Web is clearly a multilingual corpus. they should be included.035. Nonetheless.Internet linguistics British National Corpus See also: British National Corpus The British National Corpus contains ample information on the dominant meanings and usage patterns for the 10.[49] A test to find contiguous words like ‘deep breath’ revealed 868. it is not until recently that it became a viable option.[4] The issue of whether sublanguages should be included remains unsettled.718. Chinese (1. as an outcome of the Zipfian nature of word frequencies.[4][46] and is satisfactory for technologies that utilize quantitative information about the behavior of words as input (parsing). it is insufficient for statistically stable conclusions about such words. The massive size of text available on the Web can be seen in the analysis of controlled data in which corpora of different languages were mixed in various proportions.598.[50] This reveals the potential strength and accuracy of using the Web as a Corpus given its significant size. The number found through the search engines are more than three times the counts generated by the British National Corpus. it will result in an impoverished view of language.9%). However.1%). Spanish (1.[51] When a language technology application is put into use (applied to a new text type).[4] The desiderata and criteria used for the British National Corpus serves as a good model for a general-purpose.850.000 words that forms the core of English. it is insufficient. Since language is made up of lexicons. with 7. Striking a middle ground by including some sublanguages is contentious because it’s an arbitrary issue of which to include and which not.631 Web pages containing the terms in AlltheWeb. Italian (0. Malay. and it has been done so with pragmatism.7%). it is not certain that the language model will fare in the same way as how it would when applied to the training corpus.[4] Challenges In areas of language modeling. cleaner data sets. It is estimated that 71% of the pages (453 million out of 634 million Web pages indexed by the Excite engine) were written in English. Proponents of it argue that with all sublanguages removed. The estimated Web size in words by AltaVista saw English at the top of the list with 76. Even languages with fewer hits on the Web such as Slovenian.[4] The decision of what to include in a corpus lies with corpus developers. Furthermore for some rarer words.[52] This lack of theory types limits the assessment of the usefulness of language-modeling work.8%). it may still be useful even with some noise. Grammatical and typographical errors are regarded as “erroneous” forms that cause the Web to be a dirty corpus.000 words alongside with 6 other languages with over a billion hits.

the best solution is for linguists to attempt to correct these problems by themselves.[1] It is also common to witness such errors in mass media works. with results varying according to search engine load and many other factors. including but not limited to. More businesses have adopted the use of Internet slang in their advertisements as the more people are growing up using the Internet and other CMC platforms. Mass media There has been instances of television advertisements using Internet slang.[4] Representation Despite the sheer size of the Web.[56] The very nature of commercial films being screened at public cinemas allows for the wide exposure to the mainstream mass audience. making access to films more easily available for the public.[54] Such commercials have received relatively enthusiastic feedback from its audiences. it progressively infiltrates into everyday language use. Though primarily screened at film festivals. Apart from internet slang. or word class. This includes the limited instances that are presented by the search engines (1. Jill") were used. the huge quantities of text. acronyms such as "BFF Jill" (which means "Best Friend Forever. DVDs of independent films are often available for purchase over the internet including paid-live-streamings. in an attempt to relate and connect to them better. there presents a number of challenges.[58] . The latest commercial film is titled "LOL" (acronym for Laugh Out Loud or Laughing Out Loud). in numerous languages and language types on a huge range of topics makes it a good starting point that opens up to large number of possibilities in the study of corpora. reinforcing the penetration of Internet stylistics in everyday language use. such as the citation form for a word.000 or 5. resulting in a faster and wider spread of Internet slangs. As users of the Internet gets accustomed to these errors. from typographical errors in news articles to grammatical errors in advertisements and even internet slang in drama dialogues. films.000 maximum). For example.Internet linguistics Search engines such as Google serves as a default means of access to the Web and its wide array of linguistics resources. insufficient context for each instance (Google provides a fragment of around ten words). This will then lead to a large number of possibilities opening in the area of harnessing the rich potential of the Web. significantly seen in popular music. inability to allow searches to be specified according to linguistic criteria.[57] This movie is a 2011 remake of the Lisa Azuelos' 2008 popular French film similarly titled "LOL (Laughing Out Loud)". in view of the conflicts of priorities among the different stakeholders. At present. However for linguists working in the field of corpora. A recent example is Trey Songz's lyrics for "LOL :-)". The infiltration of Internet stylistics is important as mass audiences are exposed to the works.[54] The use of Internet lingo has also spread into the arena of music. music and literary works. starring Miley Cyrus and Demi Moore. unreliability of statistics. in both written and spoken forms. results selected according to criteria that are distorted (from a linguistic point of view) as search term in titles and headings often occupy the top results slots. reinforcing certain Internet specific language styles which may not be acceptable in standard or more formal forms of language. it may still not be representative of all the languages and domains in the world.[4] 131 Impact of its spread and influence Stylistics arising from Internet usage has spread beyond the new media into other areas and platforms. which incorporated many Internet lingo and mentions of Twitter and texting. grammatical errors and typographical errors are features of writing on the Internet and other CMC channels. However. in the Cingular commercial in the United States. and neither are other corpora.[55] The spread of Internet linguistics is also present in films made by both commercial and independent filmmakers.

pcworld. Peter (7 March 2008). speakers of minority languages may be encouraged to learn the more common languages that are being used on the Web in order to gain access to more resources. "Introduction to the Special Issue on the Web as Corpus" (http:/ / www. [5] Cunliffe. Retrieved 2010-10-31.[61] minority languages are also affected by the more common languages used on the Internet (such as English and Spanish). possible references to different languages may continue to increase.1162/089120103322711569. As seen from 2000 to 2010. davidcrystal. similar to how cross-language interaction has resulted in English language's infiltration into Chinese and Korean languages to form new slangs. PC World. doi:10.[59] 132 Linguistic future of the Internet With the emergence of greater computer/Internet mediated communication systems. the Internet provides a form of education and promotion for minority languages. . coupled with the readiness with which people adapt to meet the new demands of a more technologically sophisticated world. Multimedia and the Web" (http:/ / www. Herring. These individual differences among Internet users will significantly impact the future of Internet linguistics. References [1] "Language Development via The Internet" (http:/ / www. Adam. "iPhone Takes on the BlackBerry" (http:/ / www. html).[4] As the number of Internet users increase rapidly around the world. (December 2005). learnchinese1on1. As global users interact with each other. David (2005). . the cultural background. pdf).[61] At current state. doi:10. . aclweb.Internet linguistics The use of internet slangs is not limited to the English language but extends to other languages as well. However. The Korean language has incorporated the English alphabet in the formation of its slang. . 2005. resulting in formation of new Internet stylistics that spans across languages. [2] Crystal. 2005). htm). Chinese and Korean languages have already experienced English language's infiltration leading to the formation of their multilingual Internet lingo. users attempting to learn the minority language may opt to read and understand about it in a majority language and stop there. Computational Linguistics (MIT Press) 29 (3): 333–347. "Linguistics and web usability" (http:/ / www. nosolousabilidad. linguistic habits and language differences among users are brought into the Web at a much faster pace. com/ smpp/ section?content=a727453066& fulltext=713240928#references). Gregory (September 2003).Internet World Stats with a wider variety of languages being used. . New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia (Informa world) 11 (2): 131–137. pdf). com/ article/ 143187/ iphone_takes_on_the_blackberry. the interaction between English and other languages will be an important area of study. informaworld. org/ anthology-new/ J/ J03/ J03-3001. Daniel. Grefenstette. [6] Cohen. While language interaction can cause a loss in the authentic standard of minority languages. The new Korean slang is further reinforced and brought into everyday language use by television shows such as soap operas or comedy dramas like “High Kick Through the Roof” released in 2009. . com/ DC_articles/ Internet2.[60] resulting in more languages apart from English penetrating the Web. "Introduction to Minority Languages. The Internet is on its way to becoming a more diverse multilingual Web.[63] The future of endangered minority languages in view of the spread of Internet remains to be observed. Susan C. . notably in the aspect of the multilingual web. Research Paper 4. [3] Martín del Pozo. paper presented at the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting. it is expected that users will continue to remain under pressure to alter their language use to suit the new dimensions of communication.1080/13614560512331392186.[62] Also. while others were formed from common misspellings arising from fast typing. [4] Kilgarriff. India and Africa. and in turn leading to a decline in their usage of their own language. "The Scope of Internet Linguistics" (http:/ / www. Retrieved 2010-11-12. resulting in a loss instead of gain in the potential speakers of the minority language. Internet penetration has experienced its greatest growth in non-English speaking countries such as China. Global Internet Users.[5] For example. February 28. familiarity of the majority language can also affect the minority languages in adverse ways. Also. com/ articulos/ linguistics. ISSN 1886-8592. Maria Angeles (May 8. com). Retrieved 2010-10-21. . ScienceDaily.

[27] http:/ / www. O. 287–289. Race in Cyberspace. html).. . Retrieved 2010-11-10. htm [28] Johnson. Language Policy 6 (2): 203–224. Virtual Reality (Springer) 3 (1): 16–24. . Asher. com/ 2010/ 03/ 31/ education/ 31iht-riedsoc. html). html).. . yourdictionary. San (18 March 2003). poynter. ISBN 978-0-521-86859-4. [11] Abrams. "The Internet and Language" (http:/ / faculty. London: SOAS. Associated Press (Melbourne). xdocs. com/ english/ news/ science-technology/ Experts-Divided-Over-Internet-Changes-to-Language-81898572. . bbc. ucc. [29] Singhal.1007/s10993-007-9050-y. org/ column. ISBN 0-19-531305-4. edu/ jar/ NNL/ NNL_4. Retrieved 2010-11-06. Peter K. [14] Xie. asp?id=78& aid=169118). or How to Build a Better Corpus" (http:/ / www. stm). The Seattle Times. [32] Wright. (2006-11-26). [8] Thurlow. Retrieved 2010-11-06. [13] "Texting 'improves language skill'" (http:/ / news. . nau. . 2. (2003). Retrieved 2010-11-10. CNET News. american. Retrieved 2010-11-06. [34] British Association for the Advancement of Science (8 September 2008). [12] Naomi. R. Heidi (2004). The Age. The New York Times. [21] Francisco. uk/ 2/ hi/ technology/ 7910075. gse.. The New York Times. pdf). edu/ lfs/ tesol/ Letters by Phone 1. Retrieved 2010-11-06. 53–57. pp. edu/ thurlow/ papers/ Thurlow(2001)-EofSLX. html). "Globalization and Language Education" (http:/ / learningchineseonline. [16] Clark. . "Sustaining Indigenous Languages in Cyberspace" (http:/ / jan. The Internet TESFL Journal III (6). nytimes. net/ PPT/ Globalization/ globalization_and_lang_ed. theage. .1016/S0271-5309(98)00005-6. html). 2009-02-25. New York: Routledge. Tim (June 2008).139. . Language and Communication (London: Pergamon) 18 (2): 133–70. Retrieved 2010-10-19. R. [30] Warschauer. Retrieved 2010-10-19.. uwa. Associated Press. arts. [19] Galbraith. com/ library/ article010. Presentation. uci. Retrieved 2010-11-08. [22] Cicognani. .com. rs/ lap/ lap2006/ lap2006-03. edu. internetworldstats. edu/ person/ warschauer_m/ revitalization. Retrieved 2010-11-06. com/ 2008/ 01/ 20/ world/ asia/ 20japan. doi:10. com/ Say-so-long-to-traditional-letter-writing/ 2009-1025_3-6204248. Oxford University Press. .. com/ content/ rj6211470t19x33n/ ). 140–153. Retrieved 2010-10-19. "Letters by phone or speech by other means: the linguistics of email" (http:/ / www1. japantoday. Courtney B. VOANews. co. "No LOL Matter: Cyber lingo shows up in academia" (http:/ / seattletimes. Retrieved 2010-11-08. [15] Cook. . [23] "Language Teaching Gains Second Life: Virtual Worlds Offer New Methods to Teach Languages" (http:/ / www. Retrieved 2010-10-31. "Success of blogs heralds an even bigger future" (http:/ / www. Norimitsu (20 January 2008). . ni. pdf). L. "Thumbs Race as Japan’s Best Sellers Go Cellular" (http:/ / www. [24] Baron. pdf). In Mesthrie. London: Pergamon. J. Law and Politics 4 (1): 23–27. ppt). Retrieved 2010-11-06. . au/ MP1901mw. com/ stats7. In Reyhner. [26] The EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative (November 2005). com/ releases/ 2008/ 09/ 080908073841. com/ category/ entertainment-arts/ view/ cell-phone-novels-come-of-age). . . Retrieved 2010-11-04. Patrick W (2010). "Language Documentation and Archiving. Retrieved 2010-11-08. Ani. . "Txt Crimes. Avatar English. Mark (2000). . nytimes. . junis. html). cnet. . pp. doi:10. In Austin. identity. Flagstaff: Northern Arizona University.. S.1. Gridchin. "Language. "Experts divided over Internet changes to Language" (http:/ / www. Cambridge University Press. [17] Onishi. Peter (30 March 2010).1007/BF01409794. Nurturing Native Languages. "7 Things You Should Know About Instant Messaging" (http:/ / net. com. Franklin (2001). Trujillo. Metropolis Magazine. Retrieved 201-11-06. Crispin (2001). au/ articles/ 2003/ 03/ 18/ 1047749747469. Retrieved 2010-11-08. 18 March 2005. .. yourdictionary. "The Internet and Foreign Language Education: Benefits and Challenges" (http:/ / iteslj. ISBN 0-08-043726-5. html). Language and the Internet. ScienceDaily. sciencedaily.. Always On. . Retrieved 2010-10-21. Sue (2007). [20] Crystal. "Cell phone novels come of age" (http:/ / www. htm). [25] Olsen. "The Influence of Internet on Language and "Email Stress"" (http:/ / facta. Sex Crimes And Murder: The Science Of Forensic Linguistics" (http:/ / www. Poynter Online. 2007. nwsource. . [10] Hayslett. Suri. R. Naomi S. wired. et al. "From Telegraph to Twitter: The Language of the Short Form" (http:/ / www. Language Documentation and Description. Mark (1998). doi:10. [9] Nazaryan.55. Sabena (24 August 2007). [18] "Cell Phones Put to Novel Use" (http:/ / www. (EDUCAUASE Learning Initiative). [33] Cazden. pp. Retrieved 2010-11-08. Retrieved 2010-11-07. hrelp. educause. Retrieved 2010-11-09. pdf). [31] Warschauer. com/ gadgets/ miscellaneous/ news/ 2005/ 03/ 66950). "On The Linguistic Nature of Cyberspace and Virtual Communities" (http:/ / www. com/ html/ nationworld/ 2003448269_student26. "Linguists See Internet Lingo as Cultural Catalyst" (http:/ / www. Aleksandr (2006). Canadian Modern Language Review 55 (1): 140–161. 133 . html?_r=1). 7 Things You Should Know About. . Meena (June 1997). Anna (1998). "Universities Use Social Media to Connect" (http:/ / www. and the Internet" (http:/ / motspluriels. html). springerlink. "Technology and Indigenous Language Revitalization: Analyzing the Experience of Hawai'i" (http:/ / www. Concise Encyclopedia of Sociolinguistics. Retrieved 2010-11-06.Internet linguistics [7] Cohen. pdf). washington. Baron (2008). "Say so long to traditional letter writing" (http:/ / news. org/ events/ workshops/ eldp2008_6/ resources/ johnson. com/ doc/ 2569361/ Language-Teaching-Gains-Second-Life-Virtual-Worlds-Offer-New-Methods-to-Teach-Languages) (Press release). Stefanie. Roy Peter (4 September 2009). doi:10. David (2006). voanews. pdf). (1998).3138/cmlr. Chandra M. ac. Rachel (2010-01-16). edu/ ir/ library/ pdf/ ELI7008. Carrasco. Retrieved 2010-11-10. html). "The Right to Speak One's Own Language: Reflections on Theory and Practice". BBC. org/ Articles/ Singhal-Internet.

com/ stats. Christopher. Na. [38] Manning. Trey. John (1997). pp. (2000). Digithum: the Humanities in the Digital Era (UOC) (12). 2003. [54] Pawelski. Maui. public. Ghani (2000). googleusercontent. Hong Kong. Satshi (1997). Lisa. David (2003). Nioche. Paris. Mercer. Retrieved 2010-11-08. Dan (1999). Robert (1993). [40] Resnik. Ostler. uoc. wikipedia. Bailey. Voorhees. edu/ ~napan/ works/ A Comparison of English and Chinese Internet Language. 152–158. College Park. Proceedings of COLING-ACL. [37] McEnery. [43] Volk. Tony.". Agirre. Hong Kong. Jessica M. .The Movie (http:/ / www. LOL . Gregory. Anna (2000). "Multilingual search on the World Wide Web". Retrieved 2010-11-07. Retrieved 2010-11-12. Retrieved 2010-11-11. [61] Butterfield. France: Azuelos. Ellen. com/ ) (Movie). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. J. ISBN 0-7486-0808-7. pdf). "Exploiting the WWW as a corpus to resolve PP attachment ambiguities". Douglas (1993). England. Bernardo. Computational Linguistics (MIT Press) 19 (2): 219–242. Proceedings of Corpus Linguistics 2001. DC. John (2002). "Using Internet Slang in Spoken Conversation: LOL!" (http:/ / amandapawelski. "The domain dependence of parsing". pp. 96–102. . Taiwan. Juan Pablo Martinez (May 2010). 134 . Taipei. "Using semantically motivated estimates to help subcategorization acquisition". pp. pp. pdf). Colin. [52] Sekine. . Craswell. "Using register-diversified corpora for general language studies". Andrew (1996).Internet linguistics [35] Lee. Lowe. Computational Linguistics (MIT Press) 19 (1): 1–24.1. "A Comparison of English and Chinese Internet Language" (http:/ / www. . Retrieved 2010-11-11. Sue. Rada. Personal Data Protection in the Semantic Web (http:/ / www. Santiago Jorge Paricio. Lisa (Director) (2008). 216–223. com/ InternetSlang. abstract). "Introduction to the special issue on computational linguistics using large corpora". com/ title/ tt1194616/ )]] (Movie). doi:10. . Proceedings of the 37th Meeting of ACL. [58] Azuelos. Joe. Gil (29 October 2010). Philip (1999).World Internet Users and Population Stats" (http:/ / www. Statistics. Pan. Proceedings of the Fifth Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing. org/ 2002/ 01/ pedal/ thesis. Song. Maryland. Proceedings of COLING Workshop on A Roadmap for Computational Linguistics. [55] Songz. treysongz. pp. "LOL :-) Ft. jhtml). 29–36. Retrieved 2010-11-06. Rosie. [56] Swanberg. [63] Crystal. Moldovan. David. w3. . [47] Briscoe. Kenneth. htm). Nicholas (January 1992). [45] Hawking. 356–363. . pp. oxfordjournals. "Internet Usage Statistics . Proceedings of the fifth Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing. Research Paper. Schütze. John (1998). [48] Korhonen. America: Swanberg. Taiwan. 86–90. . imdb. Wikipedia Article. . Carroll. 393–401. Literary and Linguistic Computing (Oxford Journals) 7 (1): 1–16. com/ search?q=cache:Mdz6uCZm5aMJ:www. [50] Grefenstette. Proceedings of the Student Workshop of the 38th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. internetworldstats. Martin (2001). Hinrich (1999).L. Corpus Linguistics (http:/ / icame. [49] Xu. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. iastate. Cambridge: MIT Press.. org/ wiki/ Korean_Language_in_Contemporary_Society). Jeremy. Charles. Fourth International Conference on Intelligent Text Processing and Computational Linguistics (CICLing-2003). English as a Global Language. [41] Jones. Julien (2000). Washington. Lancaster. Nick. "Miley Cyrus' Movie 'LOL' Picked Up By Distributor" (http:/ / www. Clear. [57] Kaufman. Ryan (2002). . "Estimation of English and non-English use on the WWW". no/ ij21/ meyer. Joe(Director) (2006). Gaithersburg. Rayid. Retrieved 2010-11-08. Proceedings of the Eighth Text Retrieval Conference. "New ways to revitalise minority language: the impact of the Internet in the case of Aragonese" (http:/ / webcache. com/ news/ articles/ 1651097/ 20101029/ cyrus__miley. pdf). [59] "Korean Language in Contemporary Society" (http:/ / en. Cortés. Peter (1999). pp. "A method for word sense disambiguation of unrestricted text". Montreal. ISBN 0-262-13360-1. html) (PhD thesis). Washington. [51] Biber. "Meaning: A roadmap to knowledge technologies. . [42] Rigau. "A method for word sense disambiguation of unrestricted text". MTV News (MTV). 237–246. "Automatically building a corpus for a minority language from the Web". Carroll. Research Paper. "Automatic extraction of subcategorization from corpora". uib. Amanda. Taipei. . 152–158. pp. [36] Church. lolthemovie. Fillmore. Gucci Mane & Soulja Boy Tell 'Em" (http:/ / www. edu/ ojs/ index. Proceedings of the Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in NLK and Very Large Corpora.1. mtv. Eneko. Hawaii.1093/llc/7. com/ music/ lol-ft-gucci-mane-soulja-boy/ ). DC. Magnini. "Corpus design criteria" (http:/ / llc. Proceedings of the 37th Meeting of ACL. "The Berkeley FrameNet Project". College Park. php/ digithum/ article/ viewDownloadInterstitial/ n12-paricio-martinez/ n12-paricio-martinez-eng+ New+ ways+ to+ revitalise+ minority+ language:+ the+ impact+ of+ the+ Internet+ in+ the+ case+ of+ Aragonese& cd=1& hl=en& ct=clnk). org/ content/ 7/ 1/ 1. German. Trey Songz. Proceedings of the Hawaii International Conference on System Science (HICSS-33). [44] "A corpus balancing method for language model construction". Maryland. Ted. pp. [39] Mihalcea. [53] Atkins. [60] Internet World Stats (2010-06-30). Proceedings of the RIAO (Recherche d’Informations Assiste ́e par Ordinateur). Miniwatts Marketing Group. Retrieved 2010-11-08. Foundations of Statistical Natural Language Processing. Retrieved 2010-11-06. "Overview of the TREC8 Web track". [[LOL (Laughing Out Loud) (http:/ / www. Retrieved 2010-11-08. Wilson. Maryland. [62] Martín. [46] Baker. United States: Colorado State University.

D.. Cyberlines 2. New Media Language. & Hundt. C. ISBN 3-8334-9729-7 • Enteen. P. J. ISBN 0-7456-3312-9 • Crystal. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. D. (2004). (2005). ISBN 978-0-521-86859-4 • Crystal. (2009). (2006). ISBN 3-8258-7613-6 • Thurlow. The Netherlands: Rodopi. M. (2006). ISBN 0-415-18685-4 • Beard. D.). B. Virtual English: Internet Use. and Global Subjects. J. Webliteralität: Lesen und Schreiben im World Wide Web.. C. Nesselhauf. Lengel. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. (2007). L. & Tomic. (2005). & Krause. (2011). Australia: James Nicholas Publishers. D. World Englishes: A Resource Book for Students. & Lewis. K. (2003). ISBN 0-415-97724-X • Gerrand.. United Kingdom: Polity Press Ltd. L. London and New York: Routledge. (Eds.: Languages and Cultures of the Internet. London and New York: Routledge. (2004). (2010). ISBN 978-0-415-60271-6 • Dieter.). ISBN 0-7619-4954-2 . London and New York: Routledge.Internet linguistics 135 Further reading • Aitchison. (2004). Language. ISBN 0-415-25806-5 • Macfadyen. A. (Eds. (2006). N. Corpus Linguistics and the Web. A Glossary of Netspeak and Textspeak. P. (Eds. N.). VDM Verlag.. ISBN 0-7486-1982-8 • Crystal. D.0. A. J. London: Sage Publications. Internet Linguistics: A Student Guide.. The Language Revolution (Themes for the 21st Century). S. ISBN 0-415-32854-3 • Crystal. Alphabet to Email: How Written English Evolved and Where It’s Heading. Lit Verlag. Language Change. ISBN 3-639-19111-0 • Gibbs. Minority Languages on the Internet: Promoting the Regional Languages of Spain. J. ISBN 0-415-32056-9 • Biewer. (2000). S. & Doff.. The Language of Websites. London and New York: Routledge. D. (2003). M. M. New York: Routledge. (2004).. New York and London: Routledge. London and New York: Routledge. Computer Mediated Communication: Social Interaction and the Internet. Communicating Across Cultures in Cyberspace : A Bibliographical Review of Intercultural Communication Online.). Language and the Internet (2nd Ed. ISBN 90-420-2128-4 • Boardman. Roche. J. ISBN 0-415-28303-5 • Baron. ISBN 1-875408-42-8 • Jenkins..

John Clark (USA). ETS. New technology has also made a presence in the field: Versant's English and Dutch assessments use phone technology to record the speaking and automated scoring of their speaking tests. New Jersey. In Europe. is still in use although it is now only available in the internet-based format (now called the TOEFL iBT[3]). Dan Douglas (USA). the University of Michigan's Michigan English Language Assessment Battery (MELAB) and the University of Cambridge. D. and the ETS is currently experimenting with automated scoring of their writing tests. college. Tim McNamara (Australia). Liz Hamp-Lyons (UK). and the STEP Eiken in Japan. The earliest large scale assessment in the US was the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) that was launched in 1961 by Educational Testing Service. These language assessments are generally known as proficiency or achievement assessments.C. the home of the TOEFL. and a public forum for the discussion of important matters. the Pearson Language Test's Pearson Test of English (PTE). Other modern English language tests developed include The General English Proficiency Test (GEPT) in Taiwan. Many tests from other companies.Language assessment 136 Language assessment Language assessment or language testing is a field of study under the umbrella of applied linguistics. and assessment of language in the immigration. All of these associations have developed Codes of Ethics and Practice that all language . and the University of Illinois. non-profit and other organizations such as the Center for Applied Linguistics. and John Oller (USA). the conference will be in Hangzhou. In 2008. like the University of California. Educational Testing Service. Its main focus is the assessment of first. New Jersey. In the US. This test. Teachers College. and Language Testing International.[2] History The earliest works in language assessment in the US date back to the 1950s to the pioneering studies and test created by Robert Lado and David Harris. universities and agencies compete for this market: iTEP (International Test of English Proficiency). and asylum contexts. Merrill Swain (Canada). offers an annual outstanding Doctoral Dissertation Award in Second or Foreign Language and the University of Cambridge. Many universities too. ILTA's Lifetime Achievement Award winners include: Alan Davies (UK). or university context. workshops. China. or greater weightage may be given to one aspect or the other. Princeton. second or other language in the school.[1] The assessment may include listening. NY have developed language tests that are used by many public and private agencies. which is used widely around the world. speaking. Carol Chapelle (USA). Charles Alderson (UK) and Elana Shohamy (Israel). Princeton. Gui Sihuan (China). the Canadian English Language Proficiency Index Program (CELPIP) Test. This test was designed to assess the English language ability of students applying for admission to US and Canadian colleges and universities. also offers an annual outstanding Masters Degree Award in second language testing. Organizations The International Language Testing Association (ILTA) is one of the many organizations that organizes conferences. the College English Test in China. ILTA's major annual conference is the Language Testing Research Colloquium. Columbia University. writing or cultural understanding. Los Angeles. Bernard Spolsky (Israel). and in 2009 in Denver. the British Council and the Australian IDP's International English Language Testing System (IELTS). citizenship. Equal weightage may be placed on knowledge (understanding how the language works theoretically) and proficiency (ability to use the language practically). reading. have developed English (and other) language tests to assess the abilities of their students and teaching assistants. there are two organizations: the Association of Language Testers of Europe (ALTE) and the European Association for Language Testing and Assessment (EALTA). Colorado. Urbana-Champaign. Other well-known scholars who have not yet won the award include Kenji Ohtomo (Japan). Lyle Bachman (USA). assessment of language use in the workplace. UK. Washington. White Plains.

and Taiwan. Language Learning. etc. Classroom assessment. Sara Weigle's Assessing Writing. Universities that have regular courses and programs that focus on language assessment at the Ph. Penn State University. latent growth modeling. structural equation modeling. Prague. Antony John Kunnan's Validation in Language Assessment. Japan. structural equation modeling. Northern Arizona University. Spain (2002). San Jose. Teachers College. The field has exploded in the last twenty years in terms of textbooks and research publications. USA (2004). there are regional meetings in China. at the MA level include California State Universities at Fullerton. University of Cambridge. University of Lancaster. and Statistical Analyses for Language Assessment. psychometric qualities of tests. Urbana-Champaign. language assessment in Asia. The most popular books include: Lyle Bachman's Fundamental considerations in language testing. Spain (2007). Berlin. China (2008). 137 Annual conferences There are many annual conferences on general or specific topics. or TESL. John Read's Assessing Vocabulary. and Lisbon. or educational linguistics. TESOL. and politics and language policy issues. Hangzhou. Manoa. and commentaries.D. Lyle Bachman and Adrian Palmer's Language Testing in Practice and Language Assessment in Practice. McGill University. level include UCLA. California. These programs are known as MA or PhD programs in Applied Linguistics. Michigan (2011). brief reports. and Lyle Bachman and Charles Alderson's Cambridge Language Assessment Series. James Purpura's Assessing Grammar. Korea. Budapest. The focus of most courses is on test development. and classical true score measurement theory. which has been held every year since 1978. Georgia State University. qualitative analysis of test performance data such as conversation and discourse analysis. Cyril Weir. University of Bristol. Colorado (2009). Charles Alderson's Assessing Reading.Language assessment assessment professionals are expected to adhere to. Similarly. G theory. Germany (2005). Gary Buck's Assessing Listening. ALTE's official conferences too are held in different cities in Europe: Barcelona. Columbia University. . Among the most important conferences is ILTA's official conference: the Language Testing Research Colloquium (LTRC). University of Illinois. Canada (2005). Los Angeles. and book and test reviews. Publications There are two premier journals in the field: Language Assessment Quarterly (published by Routledge/Taylor & Francis) currently edited by Antony John Kunnan and Language Testing (published by Sage Publications) currently edited by Glenn Fulcher and Cathie Elder that publishes major findings from researchers. English as a second or foreign language. TESOL Quarterly. and Fairness in Language Assessment. Long Beach. Courses Language assessment or language testing courses are taught as required or elective courses in many graduate and doctoral programs. Melbourne. and University of Bedfordshire. Sofia. University of Hawai'i. validity. Barcelona. Educational Linguistics. TEFL. and Lynda Taylor's Studies in Language Testing series. English for Speakers of Other Languages. Ottawa. In the last few years. University of Toronto. Cambridge (2010) and Ann Arbor. and Denver. Assessing Writing. The most popular book series are Michael Milanovic. Other journals that publish articles from the field include Applied Linguistics. Some of these journals have special issue volumes on Ethics in language assessment. Both these journals are indexed in Thompson's SSCI list. it has been held in different parts of the world: Temecula. and San Francisco. and System. particularly in the subjects of applied linguistics. and edited volumes: Alister Cumming's Valdiation in Language Testing. Australia (2006). UK (2008) with regional conferences in Perugia. Cambridge. Additional courses focus on item response theory. reliability and fairness of tests. factor analysis.

org/) • Association of Language Testers of Europe (http://www.iltaonline. such as the statistical learning theories suggested by Saffran. proposed by Noam Chomsky. and books.. org/ • Language Testing Resources (http://languagetesting. and a nativist approach by which some principles of syntax are innate and are transmitted through the human genome. Some research has shown that the earliest learning begins in utero when the fetus starts to recognize the sounds and speech patterns of its mother's voice. Theoretical frameworks of language development Language development is thought to proceed by ordinary processes of learning in which children acquire the forms. productive language is considered to begin with a stage of preverbal communication in which infants use gestures and vocalizations to make their intents known to others. Usually. so that children learn words to express the same communicative functions which they had already expressed by preverbal means. Shohamy. yet by 4 months of insufficient to explain how they come to learn language. as witnessed by the number of articles in journals.Language assessment 138 References [1] Hornberger. There are two major approaches to syntactic development. His claim is based upon the view that what children hear .their linguistic input .org/) • Language Testing International (http://www.ealta. The empiricist theory suggests.tandf. The nativist theory. that there is enough information in the linguistic input that children receive.languagetesting.alte. apec. ets. an empiricist account by which children learn all syntactic rules from the linguistic Some researchers in this tradition employ a methodology involving the construction of computational models that learn aspects of language and/or that simulate the type of linguistic output produced by children. ISBN • Language Testing (http://ltj. . Volume 7: Language Testing and Assessment. [2] http:/ / hrd. and therefore there is no need to assume an innate language acquisition device (see above).co. php/ Language_Assessment APEC Human Resources Development Working Group [3] About the TOEFL iBT Test http:/ / www. Chomsky says that all children have what is called an LAD. org/ toefl/ ibt/ about/ Retrieved 23 November 2010 External links • International Language Testing Association (http://www. argues that language is a unique human accomplishment. Nancy[2] such as connectionist models and chunking theories. While this view has dominated linguistic theory for over fifty years and remains highly influential. the major debate is how the rules of syntax are acquired. contra Chomsky. new forms then take over old functions. an innate language acquisition device that allows children to produce consistent sentences once vocabulary is Language development Language development is a process starting early in human • Language Assessment Quarterly (http://www. Infants start without language. Berlin: • Language Testing in Asia (http://www. Elana (2008). Encyclopedia of Language and Education. meanings and uses of words and utterances from the linguistic input. The method in which we develop language skills is universal[1] however. babies can discriminate speech sounds and engage in babbling.sagepub. According to a general principle of development.asp?issn=1543-4303& subcategory=ED200000) • European Association for Language Testing and Assessment (http://www.

.[8] However.Language development Other researchers embrace an interactionist perspective.[4] Some empiricist theory accounts today use behaviorist models. In such approaches. is experiencing a resurgence. many researchers claim that the ability to acquire such a complicated system is unique to the human species. 18 and over. linguist Noam Chomsky has argued for the hypothesis that children have innate. Chomsky has reduced the elements of universal grammar which are in his opinion to be prewired in humans to just the principle of recursion. This perspective has not been widely accepted at any time. language-specific abilities that facilitate and constrain language learning. In addition. learning language forms for meaningful moves of communication. Hahn and Haynes 2004). a female advantage was obvious. consisting of social-interactionist theories of language development. Skinner suggested that language is learned through operant conditioning. it seems that the female advantage may be task dependent. It has also recently been suggested that the relatively slow development of the prefrontal cortex in humans may be one reason that humans are able to learn language. have hypothesized that language learning results from general cognitive abilities and the interaction between learners and their human interactants. However. boys between 2 and 6 years as a group did not show higher performance in language development over their girl counterparts on experimental assessments. children learn language in the interactive and communicative context. In particular. but by some accounts.[5] Other relevant theories about language development include Piaget's theory of cognitive development.[3] An older empiricist theory. the behaviorist theory proposed by B. Seltzer. often referred to as universal grammar. whereas other species are not. One hotly debated issue is whether the biological contribution includes capacities specific to language acquisition. which considers the development of language as a continuation of general cognitive development[6] and Vygotsky's social theories that attribute the development of language to an individual's social interactions and growth. F.[7] 139 Biological preconditions Evolutionary biologists are skeptical of the claim that syntactic knowledge is transmitted in the human genome. his latest version of theory of syntactic structure.[9] Researchers who believe that grammar is learned rather than innate. When infants between the age of 16 to 22 months were observed interacting with their mothers. For fifty years. and Lyons 1991). arguing that children are born with a Language Acquisition Device (LAD). since he developed the Minimalist Program. Depending on the task provided. The ability to speak and understand human language requires a specific vocal apparatus as well as a nervous system with certain capabilities. Bryk. namely. thus voiding most of the nativist endeavor. by imitation of stimuli and by reinforcement of correct responses . Non-biologists also tend to believe that our ability to learn spoken language may have been developed through the evolutionary process and that the foundation for language may be passed down genetically. Haight. The females in this age range showed more spontaneous speech production than the males and this finding was not due to mothers speaking more with daughters than sons (Huttenlocher. In studies using adult populations.[10][11] Gender Differences Children versus adults It seems as if during the early years of language development females exhibit an advantage over males of the same age. These theories focus mainly on the caregiver's attitudes and attentiveness to their children in order to promote productive language habits. a female advantage may or may not be present (Bornstein. he has proposed that humans are biologically prewired to learn language at a certain time and in a certain way.

" Labeling is identifying the names of objects[8] If a child points to an object such as a couch the mother may say "couch" in response. Adults use strategies other than child-directed speech like recasting. Ernest Moerk and Michael Tomasello. One component of the young child's linguistic environment is child-directed speech (also known as baby talk or motherese). many linguists think that it may aid in capturing the infant's attention and maintaining communication. Catherine Snow. Speech by adults to children help provide the child with correct language usage repetitively. what a child has said. Anat Ninio. Andrew Meltzoff. this motherese speech allows the child the ability to discern the patterns in language and to experiment with language. the mother talks to the child and responds back to the child. these results may also be task dependent as well as time dependent (Kansaku and Kitazawa 2001). Studies on patients with unilateral lesions have provided evidence that females are in fact more bilateralized with their verbal abilities. a child may say "car move road" and the parent may respond "A car drives on the road. Jerome Bruner who laid the foundations of this approach in the 1970s. Data shows that children raised in highly verbal families had higher language scores than those children raised in low verbal families.Language development 140 Lateralization effect on language It is currently believed that in regards to brain lateralization males are left lateralized. For example. perhaps turning it into a question or restating the child's immature utterance in the form of a fully grammatical sentence. expanding. Although the importance of its role in developing language has been debated. For example. Environmental influences on language development are explored in the tradition of social interactionist theory by such researchers as Jerome Bruner. it is concluded that children exposed to extensive vocabulary and complex grammatical structures more quickly develop language and also have a more accurate syntax than children raised in environments without complex grammar exposed to them.[12] When children begin to communicate with adults. . while females are bilateralized. whether it be a babble the child made or a short sentence. in a linguistically sophisticated form. Throughout research done. However. With motherese. Environmental Influences The environment a child develops in has influences on language development. This motherese speech will also catch the child's attention and in situations where words for new objects are being expressed to the child this form of speech may help the child recognize the speech cues and the new information provided. Roy Pea. Continuously hearing complicated sentences throughout language development increases the child's ability to understand these sentences and then to use complicated sentences as they develop. While doing this. Alison Gopnik. If a male has a lesion in the left hemisphere his verbal abilities are greatly impaired in comparison to a control male of the same age without that damage (Frith and Vargha-Khadem 2001). and labeling: Recasting is rephrasing something the child has said. It seems that when a female has experienced a lesion to the left hemisphere she is better able to compensate for this damage than a male can. emphasized that adult "scaffolding" of the child's attempts to master linguistic communication is an important factor in the developmental process. The environment provides language input for the child to process. which is language spoken in a higher pitch than normal with simple words and sentences. Studies have shown that students enrolled in high language classrooms have two times the growth in complex sentences usage than students in classrooms where teachers do not frequently use complex sentences. a child saying "cookie now" a parent may respond with "Would you like a cookie now?" Expanding is restating. the adult is prompting the child to continue communicating which may help a child develop language sooner than children raised in environments where communication is not fostered.

There are a few different theories as to why and how children develop language. Children experience many problems such as underextensions. However. Phonological development From shortly after birth to around one year. children usually have difficulty using words correctly. is the use of grammatical markers (indicating tense. is the rules in which words are arranged into sentences. By 3–5 years. children can master syllable stress patterns which helps distinguish slight differences between similar words. Babies understand more than they are able to say. At around four months. Semantic development From birth to one year. Some strategies include repeating the first consonant-vowel in a multisyllable word ('TV'--> 'didi') or deleting unstressed syllables in a multisyllable word ('banana'-->'nana'). There is about a 5 month lag in between the two. Functional explanations look at the social processes involved in learning the first language. 'car' for 'van'). children coin words to fill in for words not yet learned (for example. the baby starts to make speech sounds. taking a specific word and applying it too generally (example. taking a general word and applying it specifically (for example. For language acquisition to develop successfully. babies can recognize the correct pronunciation of familiar words. . which includes fast mapping. Psychological explanations focus on the mental processes involved in childhood language learning. active or passive voice etc. Fast mapping is the babies' ability to learn a lot of new things quickly. Babies have an innate preference to listen to their mother's voice. The first. There is a vocabulary spurt between 18–24 months. • Pragmatics involves the rules for appropriate and effective communication. morphology. Babies can recognize familiar words and use preverbal gestures. • Semantics consists of vocabulary and how concepts are expressed through words. demanding etc. • Grammar involves two parts. The two most accepted theories in language development are psychological and functional. staying on topic Each component has its own appropriate developmental periods. phonological awareness continues to improve as well as pronunciation. The majority of the babies' new vocabulary consists of object words (nouns) and action words (verbs). The second.Language development 141 Social preconditions It is crucial that children are allowed to socially interact with other people who can vocalize and respond to questions. From 1–2 years. the baby will engage in cooing. From 1–2 years. Children can also understand metaphors. comprehension (the language we understand) develops before production (the language we use). Pragmatics involves three skills: • using language for greeting. vocabulary grows to several hundred words. The most popular—and yet heavily debated—explanation is that language is acquired through imitation. syntax. There are four main components of language: • Phonology involves the rules about the structure and sequence of speech sounds.). • changing language for talking differently depending on who it is you are talking to • following rules such as turn taking. someone is a cooker rather than a chef because a child will not know what a chef is). By 3–5 years. 'blankie') and overextensions. cooing turns into babbling which is the repetitive consonant-vowel combinations. At around two months. By 6–10 years. children must be in an environment that allows them to communicate socially in that language. Babies will also use phonological strategies to simplify word pronunciation. which mostly consists of vowel sounds.

. children can understand meanings of words based on their definitions. they can engage in conversational turn taking and topic maintenance. By 1–2 years. Folk-language etc. Fast mapping continues. which are two word combinations. By 3–5 years. shading occurs. Different Connotation of "Development"(Economics) “Development” as it is deployed in Economics is also followed by Sociolinguists.Language development From 6–10 years. Pragmatics development From birth to one year. Their questions are: What is developed language and what is under/un-developed language? The popular notions of “good” standard language vis a vis dialect. Grammatical morphemes get added as these simple sentences start to emerge. which is changing the conversation topic gradually. Pidgin. which are used in the classroom discourse also. Children are able to communicate effectively in demanding settings. They also are able to appreciate the multiple meanings of words and use words precisely through metaphors and puns. 142 Grammatical development From 1–2 years. babies can engage in joint attention (sharing the attention of something with someone else). By 6–10 years.[15] An E-language is developed if and only if the capital-relationship established through the investment of money-sign. Babies also can engage in turn taking activities. are contested by some post-structuralists following Phillipson. At ages 3–5. children can master illocutionary intent.[14] The cultural convention of using these terms in an epistemological discipline is approximated by the extra-linguistic socio-economic condition. Simple sentences follow adult rules and get refined gradually. which are 3 word sentences. patois. By age 6-10. for example 'wet diaper'. which is turning the conversation over to another person. children continue to add grammatical morphemes and gradually produce complex grammatical structures. Brown (1973)[13] observed that 75% of children's two-word utterances could be summarised in the existence of 11 semantic relations: Eleven important early semantic relations and examples based on Brown 1973: • • • • • • • • Attributive: 'big house' Agent-Action: 'Daddy hit' Action-Object: 'hit ball' Agent-Object: 'Daddy ball' Nominative: 'that ball' Demonstrative: 'there ball' Recurrence: 'more ball' non-existence: 'all-gone ball' • Possessive: 'Daddy chair' • Entity + Locative: 'book table' • Action + Locative: 'go store' At around 3 years. children refine the complex grammatical structures such as passive voice. children start using telegraphic speech. . such as on the telephone. Creole. children engage in simple sentences. knowing what you meant to say even though you might not have said it and turnabout.

doi:10. [3] Poll. "Cognition without control: When a little frontal lobe goes a long way" (http:/ / psych.011. Trends Cogn. PMID 15037127. psychologicalscience. Down Syndrome Research and Practice 1 (3): 101–106. C. (2003). "No Matter What the Language.1569. doi:10. (1991).00027. and Hearing Services in Schools 42 (4): 580–591. Language Development". Plunkett.. PMID 17560161. and how did it evolve?" (http:/ / www. Developmental Psychology.Language development 143 Reference list • Frith U. . org/ reviews/ 20/ reviews-20. S.. "Applying Vygotskian Developmental Theory to Language Intervention". doi:10. Lorenzo G. [12] Mani.2007. stanford. Kim (2010). info/ articles/ 20021122. • Hickok G. • Campbell R (March 2008). [4] Roediger.1016/j. M. B. • Berk. [13] Brown. A first language: The early stages. Bryk. Child development. T.4061/2011/382679.1098/ (2004). [5] Ramscar M. pdf). R. ISSN 15250008. Chrysikou EG (2009). . PMC 3123707. Biol. pdf). (2001). Jennifer (15 September 2004). Are there sex differences in the brain basis of literacy related skills? Evidence from reading and spelling impairments after early unilateral brain damage. 39. Sci. [2] Saffran.1111/j.. Cognition 92 (1-2): 67–99. R. PMID 17827105. R. W. "Increasing the Odds: Applying Emergentist Theory in Language Intervention. Vargha-Khadem F. 41. PMID 20401341. Lond. 333-337. (1973).2003.tics. doi:10. (2007). . doi:10. "The archaeological record speaks: bridging anthropology and linguistics". J. A Topical Approach to Lifespan Development. M. "Statistical language learning: mechanisms and constraints".007. 236-248.10. doi:10. Current Directions in Psychological Science 12 (4): 110–114. Nivedita.298. edu/ ~michael/ papers/ Ramscar_tics. edu/ ~michael/ papers/ Ramscar_control.1111/1467-8721. "The processing of audio-visual speech: empirical and neural bases". Toddlers Learn it the Same Way". [1] Corbett Dooren. Chomsky N. Phyllis. Language. A. "Developmental change and the nature of learning in childhood" (http:/ / psych. Benítez-Burraco A. • Bornstein. [7] Schneider. Science 298 (5598): 1569–79. PMID 12446899. 1485-1488.01243. Fitch WT (November 2002). edu/ ~michael/ papers/ ramscar-and-yarlett-lwof. Uriagereka J (2011). doi:10. stanford.5598. [11] Ramscar M. Longa VM. Philos. O. chomsky.05. doi:10.1016/j.1992. "The faculty of language: what is it. Speech & Hearing Services in Schools 27 (2): 157–170. John (October 1993). Specific and general language performance across early childhood: Stability and gender considerations. Speech. "9. Ruth (April 1996). Haight. Trans. Gerard H. K. pdf). Watkins. Poeppel D (2004). OCLC 637146042.2009.cognition. PMC 2606792. ISBN 0-205-61559-7. "Twelve-Month-Olds Know Their Cups From Their Keps and Tups". [6] Clibbens. Neuropsychologia..1080/03640210701703576. PMID 21635323. Camps M. 24(3).1111/j. Imaging studies on sex differences in the lateralization of language.1126/science. (2004) " What happened to Behaviorism (http:/ / www. ISBN 0-07-338264-7. . Curr Dir Psychol Sci 18 (5): 259–263. Language.x. (2001). Retrieved 2012-11-20.1532-7078. Harvard University Press. pdf). John W. • Kansaku. (October 2011)." American Psychological Society. Infancy 15 (5): 445–470. "From theory to practice in child language development" (http:/ / www.. PMID 21716806.] [15] Understanding Semantics of Language Development (http:/ / ssrn. First Language.) 11 (7): 274–9. Laura E. Seltzer. org/ observer/ getArticle. 363 (1493): 1001–10. doi:10. (Regul. who has it. ISSN 0963-7214.pdf).. Soc. Ed.. 267-303. [9] Hauser MD.hamilton. [14] [Phillipson. "Dorsal and ventral streams: a framework for understanding aspects of the functional anatomy of language" (https://hpc. "Linguistic self-correction in the absence of feedback: a new approach to the logical problem of language acquisition" (http:/ / psych. cfm?id=1540). Gitcho N (July 2007). . down-syndrome. Yarlett D (November 2007). Neuroscience Research. [10] Thompson-Schill SL. stanford. & Haynes. Wall Street Journal. Cogn Sci 31 (6): 927–60. Ramscar M. 27(2).Linguistic Imperialism. Jenny R. Sci.2007.R. PMC 2855545. Boston: Pearson Education/Allyn & Bacon. McGraw-Hill Humanities/Social Sciences/Languages. (2009).".2155. pdf). & Kitazawa.01648. OCLC 171151508. Int J Evol Biol 2011: 382679. . Early vocabulary growth: Relation to language input and gender.1467-8721. com/ abstract=2029127) Further reading • Balari S. & Lyons. Hahn. [8] Santrock.2009. • Huttenlocher.

The study of Latin diminished from the study of a living language to be used in the real world to a subject in the school curriculum. (September 2011). et al. Language education is a branch of applied linguistics. According to GAO (2010).1007/s00429-009-0211-y. Trans.asha. the origins of modern language education are in the study and teaching of Latin in the 17th century. PMID 21896765. Sci. U. Price CJ (October 2009). 2009). "Learning to see words". doi:10. PMC 3228885. John Amos Comenius was one of many people who tried to reverse this trend. culminating in his Opera Didactica Omnia.htm • http://www. "Structural MRI studies of language function in the undamaged brain". Padden D. and the Philippines use a second official language in their governments. History of foreign language education Ancient to medieval period Although the need to learn foreign languages is almost as old as human history itself. tourism. R. 363 (1493): 979–1000.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100434. technology. As a result. PMC 3179044. Rivera-Gaxiola M. and the study of Latin . international relations. and failing that. PMID 19618210. • Richardson FM.2154. Italian. Brain Struct Funct 213 (6): 511–23. 1657. Conboy BT.1073/pnas. Rauschecker AM.niu. In this work. he also published the world's first illustrated children's book. Teaching must be oral. Scifo P.Language development • Kuhl PK. 1998) and China (Kirkpatrick & Zhichang. doi:10.htm Language education Language education is the teaching and learning of a foreign or second covering the entire school curriculum. 108 (38): 16056–61. Orbis Sensualium Pictus. He is one of the first theorists to write systematically about how languages are learned and about pedagogical methodology for language acquisition. especially the English Language. Latin had for many centuries been the dominant language of education. Lond. Nelson T (March 2008). Saccuman MC. commerce. Such decline brought about a new justification for its study. PMID He composed a complete course for learning Latin. doi:10. B. The schoolroom should have models of things. Acad. pictures of them. Many countries such as Korea (Kim Yeong-seo. some countries such as India. • Perani D. Biol. Japan (Kubota. The uses of common languages are in areas such as trade. Pakistan. and government in much of the Western world. Soc. doi:10. Philos. PMC 2749930. Natl. Malaysia. Yeatman JD (January 2012).A. but it was displaced by French. Comenius also outlined his theory of language acquisition. "Phonetic learning as a pathway to language: new data and native language magnet theory expanded (NLM-e)". • Wandell BA. 2002) frame education policies to teach at least one foreign language at the primary and secondary school levels.. Sci. 144 External links • http://www3. Need for language education Increasing globalization has created a large need for people in the workforce who can communicate in multiple languages.1102991108. PMC 2606791.S. religion. He held that language acquisition must be allied with sensation and experience. and English by the end of the 16th century. Singapore.1098/rstb.2007. Annu Rev Psychol 63: 31–53. It was then claimed that its study developed intellectual abilities. However. Coffey-Corina S. and science. media. "Neural language networks at birth". Proc. PMID 17846016. China has recently been putting enormous importance on foreign language learning.

It is also often inferred or even stated that older methods were completely ineffective or have died out completely when even the oldest methods are still used (e. For example. but they left many of the specific practical details for others to devise. Henry Sweet (1845–1912).[2] However. the Berlitz version of the direct method).Language education grammar became an end in and of itself. and Harold Palmer (1877–1949).[2](p.S.[1] Those looking at the history of foreign-language education in the 20th century and the methods of teaching (such as those related below) might be tempted Henry Sweet was a key figure in establishing the applied linguistics to think that it is a history of failure. Advanced students continued grammar study with the addition of rhetoric. "Grammar schools" from the 16th to 18th centuries focused on teaching the grammatical aspects of Classical Latin. Based on the purely academic study of Latin. They worked on setting language teaching principles and approaches based on linguistic and psychological theories. Older methods and approaches such as the grammar translation method or the direct method are dismissed and even ridiculed as newer methods and approaches are invented and promoted as the only and complete solution to the problem of the high failure rates of foreign language students. One reason for this situation is that proponents of new methods have been so sure that their ideas are so new and so correct that they could not conceive that the older ones have enough validity to cause controversy.[1] 145 18th century The study of modern languages did not become part of the curriculum of European schools until the 18th century. as the authors generally give no credence to what was done before and do not explain how it relates to the new method. 5) . This was in turn caused by emphasis on new scientific advances. anecdotal evidence for successful second or foreign language learning is easy to find. often ending with the author's new method. and students were instead required to memorize grammatical rules and apply these to decode written texts in the target language. leading to a discrepancy between these cases and the failure of most language programs. However. Heinrich Gottfried Ollendorff (1803–1865). there is significant evidence to the contrary. Even a number of famous linguists are monolingual. It led to a number of different and sometimes conflicting methods. each trying to be a major improvement over the previous or contemporary methods.g. which has tended to blind researchers to precedents in older work. These new methods are usually presented as coming only from the author's mind. studying grammatical rules and translating abstract sentences. universities tradition in language teaching who have a foreign language as a major manage to reach something called "minimum professional proficiency". descriptive linguists seem to claim unhesitatingly that there were no scientifically based language teaching methods before their work (which led to the audio-lingual method developed for the U. Most books on language teaching list the various methods that have been used in the past. Army in World War II). Oral work was minimal. This tradition-inspired method became known as the 'grammar-translation method'. Even the "reading knowledge" required for a PhD degree is comparable only to what second-year language students read and only very few researchers who are native English speakers can read and assess information written in languages other than English. which helps make the research of second language acquisition emotionally charged. Very few students in U. students of modern languages did much of the same exercises.S. Otto Jespersen (1860–1943). The earliest applied linguists included Jean Manesca.[1] 19th–20th century Innovation in foreign language teaching began in the 19th century and became very rapid in the 20th century.

with little communication or cooperation between them. 1. the Silent Way. how the content is to be selected and organized. who promote mimicry and memorization with pattern drills. Examples of researchers on the empiricist side are Jesperson. Given that human languages share many common traits.D. In order for an approach to be translated into a method. and Leonard Bloomfield. While sometimes confused. focusing on patterns of moves. The interactive view sees language as a vehicle for the creation and maintenance of social relations. still others have a small following. There are three principal "approaches": 1. and these have almost completely separate histories. On the theoretical side are. Such can be related to second language acquisition theory. The rivalry of the two camps is intense. the series method. the terms "approach". This approach has been fairly dominant since the 1980s. grammar). Teaching Proficiency through Reading and Storytelling and Dogme language teaching. Examples of structural methods are grammar translation and the audio-lingual method. communicative language teaching. These have led to a wider variety of teaching methods ranging from the grammar-translation method to Gouin's "series method" to the direct methods of Berlitz and de Sauzé. with each gaining ground over the other at one point in time or another.[1] . Palmer. but offer useful insights. negotiation and interaction found in conversational exchanges.g. An approach is a set of assumptions about the nature of language and language learning. language learning is seen as basically the same as any other learning in any other species.[1] A method is a plan for presenting the language material to be learned and should be based upon a selected approach. In its most extreme form. Francois Gouin. This allows us to create sentences that we have never heard before but that can still be immediately understood by anyone who understands the specific language being spoken. "method" and "technique" are hierarchical concepts. such as requesting something. With these methods. Such are derived from the controlling method. 2. from the approach. acts. M. an instructional system must be designed considering the objectives of the teaching/learning. but does not involve procedure or provide any details about how such assumptions should translate into the classroom setting. 3. the Natural Approach. language immersion.Language education There have been two major branches in the field of language learning. the empirical and theoretical. A technique (or strategy) is a very specific. This follows from the rationalist position that man is born to think and that language use is a uniquely human trait impossible in other species.[2] 146 Teaching foreign language in classrooms Language education may take place as a general school subject or in a specialized language school. Total Physical Response. Berlitz. and Elime de Sauzé. for example. Examples of functional methods include the oral approach / situational language teaching. whose rationalist theories of language acquisition dovetail with linguistic work done by Noam Chomsky and others. concrete stratagem or trick designed to accomplish an immediate objective. the idea is that humans share a universal grammar which is built into our brain structure. the roles of students and the roles of teachers. human language being essentially the same as communication behaviors seen in other species. the types of tasks to be performed. Suggestopedia. There are many methods of teaching languages. 3. Examples of interactive methods include the direct method. Some have fallen into relative obscurity and others are widely used. These methods follow from the basic empiricist position that language acquisition basically results from habits formed by conditioning and drilling. The structural view treats language as a system of structurally related elements to code meaning (e. 2. and less directly. students generate original and meaningful sentences to gain a functional knowledge of the rules of grammar. The functional view sees language as a vehicle to express or accomplish a certain function.

[4] Some recordings have pauses for the learner to speak. 3. receptionists. rather than formal grammar or writing skills. texts and software. The only language in such software is the target language. Language books have been published for centuries. teaching vocabulary and grammar. More complete books include more vocabulary. just as classroom teachers do. maintained and marketed for other purposes: 1. Language exchange websites essentially treat knowledge of a language as a commodity. cooks.[6] The only language in such recordings is the target language. until the concepts are mastered. 4. Language exchanges tend to benefit oral proficiency. films) and as a result. for a range of costs. Some software runs on the web itself.[7] 2. Others are continuous so the learner speaks along with the recorded voice. and one strength is helping learners improve their accent. Software can present additional exercises in areas where a particular learner has difficulty. Some sites are designed specifically for learning languages: 1. from scores of publishers. With the help of the internet. Language exchanges have also been viewed as a helpful tool to aid language learning at language schools. and writing practice. It is comprehensible regardless of the learner's native language. Internet and software Software can interact with learners in ways that books and audio cannot: 1. The simplest books are phrasebooks to give useful short phrases for travelers. television shows. tapes. Users typically contact each other via chat. 3. Some publishers use the web to distribute audio. Some websites offer learning activities such as quizzes or puzzles to practice language concepts. exercises. teachers are taking heed of the internet's influence and are searching for ways to .[3] The course itself acts as a teacher and has to choose a methodology.[5] Audio recordings for self-study use many of the methods used in classroom teaching. and have been produced on records. or others who need specific vocabulary. it was noted that the use of technology and media has begun to play a heavy role in facilitating language learning in the classroom. DVDs and websites. fiction. Most audio recordings teach words in the target language by using explanations in the learner's own language. and gives feedback. with the advantage of avoiding downloads. etc. All countries have websites in their own languages. analyzes the pronunciation. which learners elsewhere can use as primary material for study: news. Software can pronounce words in the target language and show their meaning by using pictures[8] instead of oral explanations. voice-over-IP. songs. Language exchange sites connect users with complementary language skills. and vernacular usage. or email. students are readily exposed to foreign media (music videos. Many other websites are helpful for learning languages. even though they are designed. videos. and the disadvantage of requiring an internet connection. using a variety of methods. and provide a market like environment for the commodity to be exchanged. for use offline. translation. similar to learning a song. fluency. An alternative is to use sound effects to show meaning of words in the target language. CDs. Websites provide various services geared toward language education. such as a native Spanish speaker who wants to learn English with a native English speaker who wants to learn Spanish. colloquial vocabulary acquisition. 2.Language education 147 Online and self-study courses Hundreds of languages are available for self-study. In a study conducted by the Center for Applied Linguistics. Some software records the learner. and they are comprehensible regardless of the learner's native language. grammar. Audio recordings and books Audio recordings use native speakers.

students. It is particularly effective for students whose native language is English. 4. wherein the student uses the target language as much as possible but reverts to their native language for any element of an utterance that they are unable to produce in the target language (as. Learning strategies Code switching Code switching. Some people.Language education combine this exposure into their classroom teaching. playing a card game that requires calling for cards may allow blended learning of numbers (1 to 10). If viewed as a learning strategy. 6. Course development and learning management systems such as Moodle are used by teachers. including language teachers. Some Internet content is free. Players of computer games can practice a target language when interacting in Massively multiplayer online games and virtual worlds. Web conferencing tools can bring remote learners together. then it has the advantages that it encourages fluency development and motivation and a sense of accomplishment by enabling the student to discuss topics of interest to him or her early in the learning process—before requisite vocabulary has been memorized. Some requires a payment.. 3. [13] Teaching strategies Blended learning Blended learning combines face-to-face teaching with distance education.[10][11] In addition. often use it. e. changing between languages at some point in a sentence or utterance. It has been a major growth point in the ELT (English Language Teaching) industry over the last ten years. sometimes with entire businesses being developed. with no or minimal ads. frequently electronic. is a commonly used communication strategy among language learners and bilinguals. Book2. with pronunciation similar to a native speaker. in Wolfgang Butzkamm's concept of enlightened monolingualism). .[9] Translation sites let learners find the meaning of foreign text or create foreign translations of text from their native language. Speech synthesis or text to speech (TTS) sites and software let learners hear pronunciation of arbitrary written text. either computer-based or web-based.g. Some is ad-supported. often from government and nonprofit sites such as BBC. Elluminate Live. While traditional methods of formal instruction often discourage code switching. 5. due to the high probability of a simple English word or short phrase being understood by the conversational partner. For example. the virtual world Second Life started to be used for foreign language tuition.g. e. A list of educational projects (including some language schools) in Second Life can be found on the second life Educational wiki. 148 2. though. Spain’s language and cultural institute Instituto Cervantes has an "island" on Second Life. such as newspapers and YouTube. especially those placed in a language immersion situation. use the phrase 'Blended Learning' to refer to learning taking place while the focus is on other activities. that is. Foreign Service Institute. In 2005. or the SimTeach [12] site.

" Students: "Let me try. especially with polysyllabic or difficult words. When modeling a dialogue sentence for students to repeat. The mother tongue equivalent can be given almost as an aside. is transient and improvised (thus harder to assess and teach through rote imitation).lass mich mal versuchen .let me try.[16] For example. more socially based skills have been identified more recently such as summarizing. However. In addition. Such activities also provide opportunities for peer teaching. and then the teacher continues. Pair and group work give opportunities for more students to participate more actively. describing. the student repeats. and have the student repeat it. This could be due to the fact that it is considered a less-academic skill than writing. it can only be used to the extent that it remains intelligible to the learner. sometimes the entire class. Back-chaining Back-chaining is a technique used in teaching oral language skills. The aim is to make foreign constructions salient and transparent to learners and. in order to convey meaning as rapidly and completely as possible." Mother tongue mirroring Mother tongue mirroring is the adaptation of the time-honoured technique of literal translation or word-for word translation for pedagogical purposes. the four basic ones are: listening. However. where weaker learners can find support from stronger classmates.[14] In the 1970s and 1980s.[14] Sandwich technique In foreign language teaching. the four basic skills were generally taught in isolation in a very rigid order. and all that remains is the first syllable: Mus-sorg-sky. in many cases. the teacher not only gives an oral mother tongue equivalent for unknown words or phrases. More recent textbooks stress the importance of students working with other students in pairs and groups. more general learning skills such as study skills and knowing how one learns have been applied to language classrooms.attached before: -sorg-sky. leading to more integrated exercises. other. unless it is combined with a normal idiomatic translation. For example. it has been recognized that we generally use more than one skill at a time. speaking.[15] The teacher pronounces the last syllable. It differs from literal translation and interlinear text as used in the past since it takes the progress learners have made into account and only focuses upon a specific structure at a time. with a slight break in the flow of speech to mark it as an intruder. narrating etc. since then. to teach the name ‘Mussorgsky' a teacher will pronounce the last syllable: -sky.Language education 149 Skills teaching When talking about language skills. the sandwich technique is the oral insertion of an idiomatic translation in the mother tongue between an unknown phrase in the learned language and its repetition. As a didactic device. such as listening before speaking. but repeats the foreign language phrase before students imitate it: L2 => L1 => L2. Then the teacher will repeat it with -sorg. supervision of pairs and groups is important to make sure everyone participates as equally as possible. reading and writing. . However. spare them the technical jargon of grammatical analysis.[14] Speaking is a skill that often is underrepresented in the traditional classroom. working backwards from the end of the word to the beginning. a German teacher of English might engage in the following exchange with the students: Teacher: "Let me try .

0 (the use of web 2. Minority language education Minority language education policy The principle policy arguments in favor of promoting minority language education are the need for multilingual workforces. audios and videos. Language study holidays are popular across Europe and Asia due to the ease of transportation and variety of nearby countries.Language education 150 Language education by region Practices in language education vary significantly by region.[20] Language learning 2. teaching methods tend to differ by region. leisure activities. With the increasing prevalence of international business transactions. and a homestay.0 tools for language education)[21] offers opportunities for material development for lesser-taught languages and to bring together geographically dispersed teachers and learners. whereas the most popular language to be learned in Australia is Japanese. intellectual and cultural benefits and greater inclusion in global information society. Spanish is the most popular language to be learned. Language study holidays An increasing number of people are now combining holidays with language study in the native country. as well as the majority language concerned. Language immersion is popular in some European countries. First. These holidays have become increasingly more popular in Central and South America in such countries as Guatemala. Also. This enables the student to experience the target culture by meeting local people.[17] Access to education in a minority language is also seen as a human right as granted by the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. it is now important to have multiple languages at one's disposal. cultural excursions. • • • • • ALL: Apprenticeship Language Learning CALL: computer-assisted language learning CLIL: content and language integrated learning CELI: Certificato di Conoscenza della Lingua Italiana CLL: community language learning • DELE: Diploma de Español como Lengua Extranjera • DELF: diplôme d'études en langue française • EFL: English as a foreign language . but is not used very much in the United States. This is also evident in businesses outsourcing their departments to Eastern Europe. in order to promote both the use and appreciation of the minority language. in the United States. Such a holiday often combines formal lessons. Ecuador and Peru. the languages being learned differ. The internet offers opportunities to access a wider range of texts.[18] Bilingual Education has been implemented in many countries including the United States. which has led to calls for the increased development of materials for minority language teaching.[19] Materials and e-learning for minority language education Suitable resources for teaching and learning minority languages can be difficult to find and access. the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages and the UN Human Rights Committee. perhaps with time to travel in the country afterwards.[22] Acronyms and abbreviations See also: English language learning and teaching for information on language teaching acronyms and abbreviations which are specific to English.

Problems. from http:/ / www. Mourad (2009). "Study and teach in Second Life" (http:/ / www. php?title=Institutions_and_Organizations_in_SL [13] Butzkamm. Retrieved 15 July 2007. . Lang1234. I. English language teaching.81-99. [10] Dorveaux. 1591253497. pp. uk/ community). [9] "What We Can Learn From Foreign Language Teaching In Other Countries" (http:/ / www. Notes [1] Richards. TEFLA: teaching English as a foreign language to adults TESOL: teaching English to speakers of other languages TPR: Total Physical Response TPRS: Teaching Proficiency through Reading and Storytelling 151 • UNIcert is a European language education system of many universities based on the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. routesintolanguages. its-teachers. Retrieved 17 July 2012. Retrieved 26 June 2009. Mexico City: DELTI. Retrieved 17 July 2012. usingenglish. ISBN 912066-22-9. pdf). Theodore S. . McPake. uk/ e-learning/ conference_proceedings_2009. 1591253519 [7] "Scoring Your Pronunciation" (http:/ / lastly. com/ watch?v=130bOvRpt24). [4] "Good Accents" (http:/ / lastly. org). [8] "Language Guide" (http:/ / Languageguide. pp. [19] National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning (1999-07). International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 1:2. 1591253500. com). 2009. . com/ 3/ post/ 2012/ 08/ pronunciation. mother tongue L2: second language (or any additional language) LDL: Lernen durch Lehren (German for learning by teaching) LOTE: Languages Other Than English SLA: second language acquisition TELL: technology-enhanced language learning TEFL: teaching English as a foreign language N. uk/ think/ knowledge-wiki/ backchaining [17] Sachdev. Susan. Retrieved April 4. . org/ journal/ features/ 2004/ minority_education/ edminlang). "Community Languages in Higher Education: Towards realising the potential" (http:/ / www. [15] "Backchaining.B. [6] Amazing Hear-Say. simteach. html). teachingenglish. com/ wiki/ index. [2] Diller. 76. 1591253535. fr/ web/ article/ 0. [20] Sachdev. "Community Languages in Higher Education: Towards realising the potential" (http:/ / www. Center for Applied Linguistics. [5] "Shadowing Step by Step" (http:/ / www. Center for Applied Linguistics. The Language Teaching Controversy. . com/ destinations/ second_life/ second_life03. lemonde. org. weebly. uk/ community). Retrieved 26 June 2009. Retrieved April 4.0 in action: web . weebly. Retrieved 5 August 2012. "Two-Way Bilingual Education Programs in Practice: A National and Local Perspective" (http:/ / www. Retrieved 26 June 2009. Lang1234. ForeignLanguageExpertise. Xavier (15 July 2007).1-0. Retrieved 8 May 2012. org/ resources/ digest/ 0106pufahl. [12] http:/ / www. [21] Diouri. . Rowley. Lang1234. Karl Conrad (1978). ." Glossary. from http:/ / www. J (2008). "Code-Switching in a Bilingual History Lesson: The Mother Tongue as a Conversational Lubricant".0 tools to enhance language learning" (http:/ / www2. . Massachusetts: Newbury House. I. 2009. . html). ISBN 0-521-00843-3. ac. Jack C. com/ glossary/ backchaining. [11] Dorveaux. . [18] de Varennes. iT's Magazines. Retrieved 15 July 2007. Rodgers (2001). Xavier (15 July 2007). Fernand (2004). native language. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press. routesintolanguages. Language Guide. . youtube. Retrieved 26 June 2009. [14] Holden. Retrieved 5 August 2012. Penton Overseas Inc. EUMAP: EU Monitoring and Advocacy Program Online Journal. "The right to education and minority language" (http:/ / www. Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. J (2008). ac. com/ 2/ category/ accent/ 1." Teaching English. "Apprendre une langue dans un monde virtuel" (http:/ / www. cal.36-935560. html). ISBN 968-6820-12-4. Ratings" (http:/ / Lang1234. Retrieved 17 July 2012..0. isbn: 560156775. Wolfgang (1998). . cal. This article is about travel-teaching. McPake. Retrieved 26 June 2009. Routes into Languages. pp. plymouth. org/ resources/ Digest/ ed379915.. Routes into Languages. . by Donald Rivera. 61–62. Le Monde. ac. . html [16] "Backchaining. html). asp).Language education • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ELL: English language learning ELT: English language teaching FLL: foreign language learning FLT: foreign language teaching HLL: heritage language learning L1: first language. 4th Plymouth e-Learning Conference 2009. Mickey Rodgers (1998). html). "Language learning 2. [3] "Reviews of Language Self-Study Courses: Comparison.

152 References • Gao. F. Second language learning through immersion: A review of U. K (1998) “Ideologies of English in Japan” World Englishes Vol. • Lindholm-Leary. The National Centre for Languages ( & Johnson. Review of Educational Research. Vol. K. Learning Through Two Languages: Studies of Immersion and Bilingual Education. • Kirsten. • Genesee.Multilingual Matters:Canada. R. Swain (Eds..). Christopher (14 March 2009). Immersion education: International perspectives (pp. 55(4). Clevedon. (Ed. • Swain.dmoz. England: Multilingual Matters.Language education [22] Ikeda. A. A & Zhichang. Xuesong (Andy). 1st International Conference on Language Documentation and Conservation (ICLDC). K. (1997). pp. (1997) at the Open Directory Project • CILT UK. E. NY: Cambridge University Press. Immersion education: A category within bilingual education. • The REALIA Project (http://www. immersion programs: Two decades of experience. 243–264). B. 295–306.S. • Genesee. UK: Cambridge University Press. CAELA Network Briefs. • Kubota.realiaproject.Strategic Language Learning.lmp. . Swain (Eds.: Newbury House Publishers. No. CAELA and Center for Applied Linguistics • • UCLA Language Materials Project (http://www. Cambridge.cilt. E. "Phraseology in foreign language learning and teaching" (http://books. Mass. Fanny.) (1992). Ltd. Further reading • Bernhardt. "New Roles for Technology in Language Maintenance and Revitalization" (http:/ / hdl. 541–561. Facilitating Adult Learner Interactions to Build Listening and Speaking Skills (http://www. 21. Amsterdam and Philadelphia : John Benjamins Publishing Company. K. In R. google. programs.3. World Englishes. Retrieved 26 June 2009. 2010 • Kim Yeong-seo (2009) "History of English education in Korea" • Kirkpatrick. Granger. Lessons from U.html). (1985). Sylviane. Theoretical and conceptual foundations for dual language education programs. Immersion education: International perspectives (pp. In K. Cambridge. In R. Dual language education (pp. pp. Johnson & M. Sharon. 2008 • Met. Sho.S. Johnson & M. (1987). Clevedon. Doty. 1–16). (2001). 39–58). net/ 10125/ 5011). & Lorenz. (2010).ucla. M.”Chinese pragmatic norms and “China English”. X (2002). External links • Language Education (http://www.17. Life in language immersion classrooms. . handle. 269–279. England: Multilingual Matters Ltd. F.

now known as "anthropological linguistics. and develops a common cultural representation of natural and social worlds. and has grown over the past 100 years to encompass almost any aspect of language structure and use. The second.) Much attention was devoted to speech events in which performers were held accountable for the form of their linguistic performance as such.[5][6] Hymes also pioneered a linguistic anthropological approach to ethnopoetics. for example—so that a dinner is not a speech event. known as "linguistic anthropology. In any case." engages in theoretical studies of language use. The field was devoted to themes unique to the subdiscipline—linguistic documentation of languages then seen as doomed to extinction (these were the languages of native North America on which the first members of the subdiscipline focused) such as: • Grammatical description. The first.[1] Linguistic anthropology explores how language shapes communication. which is a separate academic discipline on most university . Whereas the first paradigm focused on ostensibly distinct "languages" (scare quotes indicate that contemporary linguistic anthropologists treat the concept of "a language" as an ideal construction covering up complexities within and "across" so-called linguistic boundaries). A new unit of analysis was also introduced by Hymes.[2] Historical development As Alessandro Duranti has noted. It is a branch of anthropology that originated from the endeavor to document endangered languages. hypothesis-driven model of science. organizes large-scale cultural beliefs and ideologies.[4] "Linguistic anthropology" Dell Hymes was largely responsible for launching the second paradigm that fixed the name "linguistic anthropology" in the 1960s. though he also coined the term "ethnography of speaking" (or "ethnography of communication") to describe the agenda he envisioned for the field. three paradigms have emerged over the history of the subdiscipline. but a speech situation. it was Harry Hoijer (Sapir's student) who coined the term. including new forms of mechanical recording. forms social identity and group membership." (The speech event is an event defined by the speech occurring in it—a lecture." focuses on the documentation of languages. whereas "anthropological linguistics" conveys a sense that the primary identity of its practitioners was with linguistics. all three paradigms are still practiced today. studies questions related to other subfields of anthropology with the tools of linguistic inquiry. the unit of analysis in the second paradigm was new—the "speech event. Though they developed sequentially. and • The unresolved issue of linguistic relativity (associated with Edward Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf but actually brought to American linguistics by Franz Boas working within a theoretical framework going back to European thinkers from Vico to Herder to Humboldt). Hymes had hoped to link linguistic anthropology more closely with the mother discipline. although as it and its surrounding fields of study matured it came to be known as "anthropological linguistics". • Typological classification (see typology). developed over the past two or three decades. The so-called Sapir–Whorf Hypothesis is perhaps a misnomer insofar as the approach to science taken by these two differs from the positivist. A third paradigm. It would involve taking advantage of new developments in technology.[3] "Anthropological linguistics" The first paradigm was originally referred to as "linguistics". a situation in which speech may or may not occur.Linguistic anthropology 153 Linguistic anthropology Linguistic anthropology is the interdisciplinary study of how language influences social life. The name certainly stresses that the primary identity is with anthropology.

Christian (Catholic) identity. but that children acquire language and culture together in what amounts to an integrated process. Several areas related to the third paradigm. 'transvestite') sex workers shame clients. the argument goes. with the direction it was held vis-à-vis a caregiver's body. (Linguistic anthropologists use "indexical" to mean indicative. instead of continuing to pursue agendas that come from a discipline alien to anthropology. and foreigners become members of a community. Ochs and Schieffelin demonstrated that members of all societies socialize children both to and through the use of language.[10] They discovered that the processes of enculturation and socialization do not occur apart from the process of language acquisition. Popular areas of study in this third paradigm include investigations of social identities. through naturally occurring stories told during dinners in white middle class households in southern California. Ochs and Taylor uncovered how. are particularly rich areas of study for current linguistic anthropologists. Hymes' ambition in a sense backfired. linguistic anthropologists have systematically addressed themselves to problems posed by the larger discipline of anthropology—but using linguistic data and methods. in a series of settings. though some indexical signs create their indexical meanings on the fly. However.Linguistic anthropology campuses today (not in the days of Boas and Sapir). The travesti community. for example. first in a village called Gapun in Papua New Guinea.[9] Socialization In a series of studies. for example. ends up at least making a powerful attempt to transcend the shame the larger Brazilian public might try to foist off on them—again. 154 Anthropological issues studied via linguistic methods and data In the third paradigm. learning to participate in its culture). through loud public discourse and other modes of performance. Kulick demonstrates that certain loud speech performances called *um escândalo*. Linguistic anthropologist Don Kulick has done this in relation to identity. Ochs and Schieffelin demonstrated that baby talk is not universal. that the direction of adaptation (whether the child is made to adapt to the ongoing situation of speech around it or vice versa) was a variable that correlated. Identity A great deal of work in linguistic anthropology investigates questions of sociocultural identity linguistically. linguistic anthropologists Elinor Ochs and Bambi Schieffelin addressed the important anthropological topic of socialization (the process by which infants. and Tok Pisin (the widely circulating official language of New Guinea).[8]) To speak the Taiap language is associated with one identity—not only local but "Backward" and also an identity based on the display of *hed* (personal autonomy). To speak Tok Pisin is to index a modern. Brazilian travesti (roughly.[3] Areas of interest Contemporary linguistic anthropology continues research in all three of the paradigms described above. the second paradigm in fact marked a further distancing of the subdiscipline from the rest of anthropology. In many societies caregivers hold a child facing outward so as to orient it to a network of kin whom it must learn to recognize early in life. using linguistic as well as ethnographic methods. which has emerged since the late 1980s.[7] Kulick explored how the use of two languages with and around children in Gapun village—the traditional language (Taiap) not spoken anywhere but in their own village and thus primordially "indexical" of Gapuner identity. children. both mothers and fathers participated in replicating male dominance (the "father knows best" syndrome) by the distribution of participant roles such as protagonist (often a child but sometimes mother and almost never the father) and "problematizer" (often the father. the study of anthropological issues. broadly shared ideologies. and the construction and uses of narrative in interaction among individuals and groups. In later work. so to speak. that is an identity linked with the will and the skill to cooperate. who raised uncomfortable questions or challenged the competence of the protagonist). based not on *hed* but on *save*. When mothers collaborated with children to get their .

or the systematic practice of alternating linguistic varieties within a conversation or even a single utterance. the gospel of Mark. the oldest language spoken in what is now the United States. but also b) Spanish. in fact. Schieffelin's more recent research has uncovered the socializing role of pastors and other fairly new Bosavi converts in the Southern Highlands. in her overview of "code switching". that English is "part of our blood. including the dropping of "thee" and "thou" from everyday English usage.[20] Social space In a final example of this third paradigm. This extends to the widespread impression. became emissaries. so to speak. Republican of Tennessee (in regards to a recently passed measure making English the "official" language of the U.[22] Errington demonstrated how the Javanese *priyayi*.[13] And they have struggled with and largely resisted those parts of the Bible that speak of being able to know the inner states of others (e.e. Papua New Guinea community she studies. representing throughout Java the highest example of 'refined speech." Much research on linguistic ideologies probes subtler influences on language. finds the underlying question anthropologists ask of the practice—Why do they do that?—reflects a dominant linguistic ideology.[14] 155 Ideologies In a third example of the current (third) paradigm. He feels. are certainly informed by linguistic ideologies. Duranti published a ground breaking article on Samoan greetings and their use and transformation of social space.[19] Thus Alexander is attempting to "naturalize" language and national identity via the metaphor of "blood. even though it pertains to Tewa Indians in Arizona rather than Indonesians..e.S.' The work of Joel Kuipers further develops this theme vis-a-vis the island of Sumba. such as the pull exerted on Tewa — a Kiowa-Tanoan language spoken in certain New Mexico Pueblos as well as on the Hopi Reservation in Arizona — by "kiva speech. there has been an efflorescence of work done by linguistic anthropologists on the major anthropological theme of ideologies[15]—in this case "language ideologies"." discussed in the next section. Michael Silverstein opened the way. whose ancestors served at the Javanese royal courts. long after those courts had ceased to exist.[18] Attitudes toward languages such as Spanish and English in the U. And. i. He generalizes the notion in the following manner. It is the ideology that people should "really" be monoglot and efficiently targeted toward referential clarity rather than diverting themselves with the messiness of multiple varieties in play at a single time. arguing that "there are wider-scale institutional 'orders of . if made openly.Linguistic anthropology stories told they unwittingly set themselves up to be subject to this process.[17] Woolard.).[21] Prior to that.[11][12][13][14] Pastors have introduced new ways of conveying knowledge— i. Senator Lamar Alexander. sometimes defined as "shared bodies of commonsense notions about the nature of language in the world. Paul Kroskrity's argument that speech forms originating in the Tewa kiva (or underground ceremonial space) forms the dominant model for all Tewa speech can be seen as a rather direct parallel. Indonesianist Joseph Errington — making use of earlier work by Indonesianists not necessarily concerned with language issues per se—brought linguistic anthropological methods (and semiotic theory) to bear on the notion of the "exemplary center.S."[16] Silverstein has demonstrated that these ideologies are not mere false consciousness but actually influence the evolution of linguistic structures. chapter 2. Indonesia. Silverstein tries to find the maximum theoretical significance and applicability in this idea of exemplary centers. new linguistic epistemic markers[11]—and new ways of speaking about time. since Roman Jakobson's student. this invocation of blood implies that English reflects the deepest vein of the nation's ancestry." To Horwitz. verses 6-8). would be doubly absurd.g. ignoring a) all of the Native American languages severely impacted by the arrival of Europeans." or the center of political and ritual power from which emanated exemplary behavior. a group of linguistic anthropologists has done very creative work on the idea of social space. that the exemplary center idea is one of linguistic anthropology's three most important findings.S. the language of a rather sizable number of European explorers and settlers across the length and breadth of what is now the United States. Such a claim. created by statements such as that by U.

[10] Ochs. Marking time: The dichotomizing discourse of multiple temporalities. Ochs. Hoijer. 1992. MA: Blackwell. Twelve Annual Conference on Language. Kroskrity. 1981 [1975] Breakthrough into Performance. [13] Schieffelin. Hofbauer. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.A. and linguistic ideology. Self."[23][24] 156 References [1] Duranti. Agency and Power. Hymes. 1990." in Language in culture: Conference on the interrelations of language and other aspects of culture. Orlando: Academic Press. [4] Hoijer. Alessandro. 1525/ aa. Companion to Linguistic Anthropology (http:/ / books. pp. Albuquerque: School of American Research. Hobson. Jane. p. • Hill. University of California. K. 92–105. (http:/ / www. pp. Michael. Bambi B. July 9. Language as Culture in U. (http:/ / dx. often. Within such large-scale. University of New Mexico Press. Word. and Culture. 219-259. [16] Rumsey. Mertz and R. [17] Silverstein.S. • . 02a00070) American Anthropologist 94:657-691. Shweder and R. 13. Alessandro."[23] Current approaches to such classic anthropological topics as ritual by linguistic anthropologists emphasize not static linguistic structures but the unfolding in realtime of a "'hypertrophic' set of parallel orders of iconicity and indexicality that seem to cause the ritual to create its own sacred space through what appears. ed. 431-449. Don. 293-327. 94. New York Times. synchronized. Michael. Duranti. 1988. and Bruce Mannheim. Pp. 11-56. org/ 10. 2004. Language Shift and Cultural Reproduction: Socialization. Bambi B. In Semiotic Mediation: Sociocultural and Psychological Perspectives. 1984. [2] Society for Linguistic Anthropology. in-effect ritual centers of semiosis come to exert a structuring. In Meaning in Anthropology. org/ 10. Verbal Art as Performance. [6] Hymes. and P. [8] Silverstein. [5] Bauman. 1976. 2006. In Regimes of Language. eds. 103-122. [3] Duranti. New York: Oxford University Press. The “Father Knows Best” Dynamic in Dinnertime Narratives. Pp. [9] Kulick. W. 1992. Malden. 2006. Harry. Language and the Culture of Gender: At the Intersection of Structure. Pragmatics 5(2):225-244. 1992.A. D. "Language and Worldview. eds. linguisticanthropology. pp. New York: Cambridge University. Alan. Elinor. E. • Schieffelin. Dell. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 2001. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Selby. [20] Kroskrity. [15] Silverstein. Oxford. eds. PNG. Cline. Introducing Kaluli Literacy: A Chronology of Influences. 2002. 73-94. org/ about/ ) Accessed 7 July 2010. 2003. value-conferring influence on any particular event of discursive interaction with respect to the meanings and significance of the verbal and other semiotic forms used in it. Shifters. 1985. and C. doi. 1998. Usage. ed. 1990. Schieffelin. 2006. R. Klein. In Companion to Linguistic Anthropology. Michael. In Culture Theory: Essays on Mind. Current Anthropology 44(3):323-348. doi. [18] Woolard. Pp. Week in Review. doi. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press. 2006. [12] Schieffelin. (http:/ / dx.B. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Woolard.' historically contingent yet structured. Current Anthropology 43(Supplement):S5-17. Kathryn A. Don. Bambi B.d. Language and Bodies in Social Space: Samoan Greetings. R. Pp. Interaction. Los Angeles. 215-238. Malden: Blackwell.A. 02a00060) American Anthropologist 92(2):346-361. Language Structure and Linguistic Ideology. Malden. Linguistic Categories. Alessandro. 1977. 92. Culture and language development: Language acquisition and language socialization in a Samoan village. google. Elinor. 1975. Tony. In Linguistic Anthropology: A Reader. [7] Kulick. 2. Pp. Language Acquisition and Socialization: Three Developmental Stories and Their Implications. 3. eds. ed. to be the magic of textual and nontextual metricalizations. and Bambi Schieffelin. 02a00030) American Anthropologist 77:290-311. and Emotion. B. eds. Edited by H. Kroskrity. Codeswitching. 2000. ed. macrosocial orders. Richard. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [14] Schieffelin. 2003. org/ 10." Annual Reviews in Anthropology 21:381-406. Anthropology: Three Paradigms. and Ideology. 1990. Bambi B. 1992. [11] Schieffelin. Basso and H. [21] Duranti. 276-320. • Ochs. Pp. ed. A. K. 193-247. About the Society for Linguistic Anthropology. Pp. 1954. Elinor. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. 2. (http:/ / dx. ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 77. 2004. 1979. n. 1525/ aa. LeVine. Pp. com/ books?id=3jMmmQjssaEC). Self and Syncretism in a Papua New Guinea Village. and Cultural Description. In Recognition Struggles and Social Movements: Contested Identities. Scandalous Acts: The Politics of Shame among Brazilian Travesti Prostitutes. PLENARY ADDRESS: Found in translating: Reflexive language across time and texts in Bosavi. "The Sapir–Whorf hypothesis. Duranti. Creating evidence: Making sense of written words in Bosavi. [19] Horwitz. B. and Charles H. In In Vain I Tried to Tell You: Essays in Native American Ethnopoetics. Pp. Paul V. 1525/ aa. P. MA: Blackwell. 79-141. A. Parmentier. 1995. In Language ideologies: Practice and theory. Arizona Tewa Kiva Speech as a Manifestation of Linguistic Ideology.Linguistic anthropology interactionality. Pp. In The Elements: A Parasession on Linguistic Units and Levels. Bambi B. Immigration—and the Curse of the Black Legend (Op-Ed). The Give and Take of Everyday Life: Language Socialization of Kaluli Children. Hanks. and Carolyn Taylor. meaning.

2011. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. MA: Wiley-Blackwell. & society. Language. [24] Wilce.ucla. and Ronald K.htm) Bambi Schieffelin's publications (http://homepages. • Duranti. • Duranti. culture. J. Prospect Heights.sscnet.sscnet. Michael. Joseph. MA: Blackwell. ed. S. Donald. Macaulay. 1996.Linguistic anthropology [22] Errington. and communication: The meaning of messages. Language. Malden. 47(6):891-914. 2006.nau. Westview Press. [23] Silverstein. James M. Current Anthropology 45(5):621-652. Alessandro.ucc. Ben G. Alessandro. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.html) . External links Downloadable publications of authors cited in the article • • • • • Alessandro Duranti's publications (http://www. "Cultural" Concepts and the Language-Culture Nexus. Current Anthropology.gwu. 1988.ucla. 1997. Middlesex: Penguin Books. Boulder: Westview.nyu. • Brenneis.htm) Joel Kuipers' publications (http://home. ed. Pier Paolo. Malden. Nancy. IL: Waveland. 1993. 157 Further reading • Ahearn. • NJ: Prentice Hall. Structure and Style in Javanese: A Semiotic View of Linguistic Etiquette. The matrix of language: Contemporary linguistic anthropology. Language. 2001. Laura M. 1972. Linguistic Elinor Ochs' publications (http://www. Linguistic Anthropology: A James Wilce's publications (http://jan. Magical Laments and Anthropological Reflections: The Production and Circulation of Anthropological Text as Ritual Activity. Englewood Cliffs. 2004. • Salzmann. 1995. Language and social context: Selected readings. Culture. • Bonvillain. Living Language: An Introduction to Linguistic Anthropology. • Giglioli. Zdenek. and Society: A Book of Readings.

Surface of the human brain. communication disorders. and found that most of them had brain damage (or lesions) on the Broca's area and Wernicke's area left frontal lobe. neuropsychology. Much work in neurolinguistics is informed by models in psycholinguistics and theoretical linguistics. Researchers are drawn to the field from a variety of backgrounds. Phrenologists had made the claim in the early 19th century that different brain regions carried out different functions and that language was mostly controlled by the frontal regions of the brain. production.[3][4] and has been described as "epoch-making"[5] and "pivotal"[3] to the fields of neurolinguistics and cognitive science. but Broca's research was possibly the first to offer empirical evidence for such a relationship. the study of linguistic deficits (aphasias) occurring as the result of brain damage.[2] One of the first people to draw a connection between a particular brain area and language processing was Paul Broca. using aphasiology. electrophysiology. and acquisition of language. and computer modeling. and computer science.[1] a French surgeon who conducted autopsies on numerous individuals who had speaking deficiencies. neurobiology. bringing along a variety of experimental techniques as well as widely varying theoretical perspectives. cognitive science. As an interdisciplinary field. with Brodmann areas numbered An image of neural pathways in the brain taken using diffusion tensor imaging History Neurolinguistics is historically rooted in the development in the 19th century of aphasiology. linguistics. in an area now known as Broca's area.Neurolinguistics 158 Neurolinguistics Neurolinguistics is the study of the neural mechanisms in the human brain that control the comprehension. brain imaging. Neurolinguists study the physiological mechanisms by which the brain processes information related to language. and evaluate linguistic and psycholinguistic theories. . neurolinguistics draws methodology and theory from fields such as neuroscience. and is focused on investigating how the brain can implement the processes that theoretical and psycholinguistics propose are necessary in producing and comprehending language.[1] Aphasiology attempts to correlate structure to function by analyzing the effect of brain injuries on language processing.

. proposed that different areas of the brain were specialized for different linguistic tasks. are still widely used in neuroscience today. such as Janet Fodor and Lyn Frazier's "serial" model. known as Brodmann areas. in recent years the field has broadened considerably.[13][15] Much work in neurolinguistics involves testing and evaluating theories put forth by psycholinguists and theoretical linguists. and there is much collaboration between the two fields.[1][2] The work of Broca and Wernicke established the field of aphasiology and the idea that language can be studied through examining physical characteristics of the brain. dividing it up into numbered areas based on each area's cytoarchitecture (cell structure) and function. and neurolinguists analyze brain activity to infer how biological structures (populations and networks of neurons) carry out those psycholinguistic processing algorithms. who "mapped" the surface of the brain.[14] 159 Neurolinguistics as a discipline Interaction with other fields Neurolinguistics is closely related to the field of psycholinguistics.[6] these areas.[17] and Theo Vosse and Gerard Kempen's "Unification model. and P600 brain responses to examine how physiological brain responses reflect the different predictions of sentence processing models put forth by psycholinguists.[7] The coining of the term "neurolinguistics" has been attributed to Harry Whitaker. and since its discovery EEG and MEG have become increasingly widely used for conducting language research.Neurolinguistics Later. who founded the Journal of Neurolinguistics in 1985. thanks in part to the emergence of new brain imaging technologies (such as PET and fMRI) and time-sensitive electrophysiological techniques (EEG and MEG).[12][13] The N400 was the first language-relevant brain response to be identified. which seeks to elucidate the cognitive mechanisms of language by employing the traditional techniques of experimental psychology. Carl Wernicke."[18] Neurolinguistics research is carried out in all the major areas of linguistics. and how neurolinguistics addresses them. and Wernicke's area handling auditory speech comprehension. In general. with Broca's area handling the motor production of speech. which can highlight patterns of brain activation as people engage in various language tasks."[15] Neurolinguists can also make new predictions about the structure and organization of language based on insights about the physiology of the brain. psycholinguistic and neurolinguistic theories often inform one another. emerged as a viable method for the study of language in 1980 with the discovery of the N400.[16] For example. after whom Wernicke's area is named. the main linguistic subfields. in particular. a brain response shown to be sensitive to semantic issues in language comprehension. are given in the table below. psycholinguists propose models and algorithms to explain how language information is processed in the mind.[8][9] Although aphasiology is the historical core of neurolinguistics. by "generalizing from the knowledge of neurological structures to language structure. N400. experiments in sentence processing have used the ELAN.[4] Early work in aphasiology also benefited from the early twentieth-century work of Korbinian Brodmann.[1][10][11] electrophysiological techniques. theoretical linguists propose models to explain the structure of language and how language information is organized. today.

investigated the locations of specific language "modules" within the brain. for example.[20] how different brain regions interact with one another in language processing. and how neurophysiology can contribute to speech and language pathology. how structural and semantic information is used in understanding sentences Semantics Topics considered Neurolinguistics research investigates several topics. including where language information is processed. when adults learn a new language. Research questions include what course language information follows through the brain as it is processed. like Broca's and Wernicke's early studies. and some neurolinguistics research attempts to find correlations between stages of language development and stages of brain development. N400. one neurolinguistic theory of sentence parsing proposes that three brain responses (the ELAN.[22][23][24] Time course of language processes Another area of neurolinguistics literature involves the use of electrophysiological techniques to analyze the rapid processing of language in time.[26] Research in first language acquisition has already established that infants from all linguistic environments go through similar and predictable stages (such as babbling). how language processing unfolds over time.[1] The temporal ordering of specific patterns of in brain activity may reflect discrete computational processes that the brain undergoes during language processing. how brain structures are related to language acquisition and learning. Localizations of language processes Much work in neurolinguistics has.[25] Language acquisition Another topic is the relationship between brain structures and language acquisition. and P600) are products of three different steps in syntactic and semantic processing.Neurolinguistics 160 Subfield Phonetics Description the study of speech sounds Research questions in neurolinguistics how the brain extracts speech sounds from an acoustic signal.[21] and how the locations of brain activation differs when a subject is producing or perceiving a language other than his or her first language.[28] .[19] whether or not particular areas specialize in processing particular sorts of information. how the brain separates speech sounds from background noise how the phonological system of a particular language is represented in the brain Phonology the study of how sounds are organized in a language the study of how words are structured and stored in the mental lexicon the study of how multiple-word utterances are constructed the study of how meaning is encoded in language Morphology and lexicology Syntax how the brain stores and accesses words that a person knows how the brain combines words into constituents and sentences.[27] while other research investigates the physical changes (known as neuroplasticity) that the brain undergoes during second language acquisition.

is poor. as a function of linguistic exposure. or BOLD. the technology used for experiments is highly relevant to the study of neurolinguistics. respectively. These techniques provide high spatial resolution. blood is sent to supply that area with oxygen (in what is known as the Blood Oxygen Level-Dependent. which shows the neural pathways that connect different brain areas.Neurolinguistics Language pathology Neurolinguistic techniques are also used to study disorders and breakdowns in language—such as aphasia and dyslexia—and how they relate to physical characteristics of the brain. Modern brain imaging techniques have contributed greatly to a growing understanding of the anatomical organization of linguistic functions. are the most active in these recordings. and methods that stimulate the cortex directly. on the other hand. electrophysiological methods.[1] temporal resolution (or information about the timing of brain activity). The red areas and the yellow areas. Since one of the focuses of this field is the testing of linguistic and psycholinguistic models. response).[1][23] Brain imaging methods used in neurolinguistics may be classified into hemodynamic methods. which show which areas of the brain are activated by certain tasks.[22][28] In addition to PET and fMRI. Functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) is another hemodynamic method used in language tasks. since the BOLD response happens much more slowly than language processing. Hemodynamic Hemodynamic techniques take advantage of the fact that when an area of the brain works at a task.[11][30] In addition to demonstrating which parts of the brain may subserve specific language tasks or computations. researchers also use diffusion tensor imaging (DTI).[20][25] hemodynamic methods have also been used to demonstrate how the structure of the brain's language architecture and the distribution of language-related activation may change over time.[31] thus providing insight into how different areas interact.[23][27] 161 Brain imaging Images of the brain recorded with PET (top) and fMRI (bottom).[29] Such techniques include PET and fMRI.[32] . allowing researchers to pinpoint the location of activity within the brain.

while MEG measures the magnetic fields that are generated by these currents. For example. which is important in studying processes that take place as quickly as language comprehension and production. violation-based studies.[30] the mismatch negativity.[44][45] For example. rather than where. amplitude (how high or low the peak is). it has been used to test how speakers perceive sounds and organize stimuli categorically.[42][43] Since the MMN is elicited only in response to a rare "oddball" stimulus in a set of other stimuli that are perceived to be the same.Neurolinguistics 162 Electrophysiological Electrophysiological techniques take advantage of the fact that when a group of neurons in the brain fire together. providing excellent temporal resolution. mismatch design.[40] in which brain activation in a task thought to involve some aspect of language processing is compared against activation in a baseline task thought to involve similar non-linguistic processes but not to involve the linguistic process. .[39] Experimental design Experimental techniques Neurolinguists employ a variety of experimental techniques in order to use brain imaging to draw conclusions about how language is represented and processed in the brain. These techniques include the subtraction paradigm. Subtraction Many language studies. they create an electric dipole or current. or activations while participants read syntactically complex sentences may be compared to baseline activations while participants read simpler sentences. Research using EEG and MEG generally focuses on event-related potentials (ERPs). and direct stimulation of the brain. electrocorticography has also been used to study language processing.[14][38] and the lateralized readiness potential. use the subtraction paradigm. The technique of EEG measures this electrical current using sensors on the scalp. the location of brain activity can be difficult to identify in EEG.[36][41] It is an electrophysiological response that occurs in the brain when a subject hears a "deviant" stimulus in a set of perceptually identical "standards" (as in the sequence s s s s s s s d d s s s s s s d s s s s s d).[33] On the other hand. activations while participants read words may be compared to baseline activations while participants read strings of random letters (in attempt to isolate activation related to lexical processing—the processing of real words). Studies using ERP may focus on each ERP's latency (how long after the stimulus the ERP begins or peaks). or topography (where on the scalp the ERP response is picked up by sensors).[30] which are distinct brain responses (generally realized as negative or positive peaks on a graph of neural activity) elicited in response to a particular stimulus.[33] In addition to these non-invasive methods. a landmark study by Colin Phillips and colleagues used the mismatch negativity as evidence that subjects. Mismatch paradigm The mismatch negativity (MMN) is a rigorously documented ERP component frequently used in neurolinguistic experiments.[35] Some important and common ERP components include the N400 (a negativity occurring at a latency of about 400 milliseconds). particularly in fMRI. this technique is used primarily to how Brain waves recorded using EEG language processes are carried out. various forms of priming.[37] the P600.[36] the early left anterior negativity (a negativity occurring at an early latency and a front-left topography). These techniques are able to measure brain activity from one millisecond to the next.[30][34] consequently.

and is thus only used on individuals who are already undergoing a major brain operation (such as individuals undergoing surgery for epilepsy).[37] Violation techniques have been in use since at least 1980.[58] As such. this type of crossing-violation study has been used extensively to investigate how syntactic and semantic processes interact while people read or hear sentences. which can be used for similar types of research but requires that the subject's scalp be removed. the mismatch negativity has been used to study syntactic processing and the recognition of word category.[53] If a subject is presented with a "target" word such as doctor and then a "prime" word such as nurse.[47] which violates an English phrase structure rule. often elicit a brain response called the early left anterior negativity (ELAN).e.[58] It is a method of exciting or interrupting brain activity in a specific and controlled location. in 1992. for example. For example.[1] direct cortical stimulation and cortical recording (recording brain activity using electrodes placed directly on the brain) have been used with macaque monkeys to make predictions about the behavior of human brains. composed of similar parts).[37] when Kutas and Hillyard first reported ERP evidence that semantic violations elicited an N400 effect.[56] Stimulation Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). it is a less invasive alternative to direct cortical stimulation. then that region must be somehow implicated in that language function. and thus is able to imitate aphasic symptoms while giving the researcher more control over exactly which parts of the brain will be examined.[59] The logic behind TMS and direct cortical stimulation is similar to the logic behind aphasiology: if a particular language function is impaired when a specific region of the brain is knocked out. perceived all the sounds as either /t/ or /d/ in spite of the acoustic variability.[20] Another common use of violation designs is to combine two kinds of violations in the same sentence and thus make predictions about how different language processes interact with one another. Lee Osterhout first reported the P600 response to An event-related potential syntactic anomalies.Neurolinguistics when presented with a series of speech sounds with acoustic parameters.[49] Violation designs have also been used for hemodynamic studies (fMRI and PET): Embick and colleagues.[50][51] Priming In psycholinguistics and neurolinguistics.[42] In addition. priming refers to the phenomenon whereby a subject can recognize a word more quickly if he or she has recently been presented with a word that is similar in meaning[52] or morphological makeup (i.[36][41][46] Violation-based Many studies in neurolinguistics take advantage of anomalies or violations of syntactic or semantic rules in experimental stimuli. used grammatical and spelling violations to investigate the location of syntactic processing in the brain using fMRI.[54] Priming is used to investigate a wide variety of questions about how words are stored and retrieved in the brain[53][55] and how structurally complex sentences are processed. but only the abstract phonemes. suggesting that the human brain has representations of abstract phonemes—in other words.[48] Using similar methods.. uses powerful magnetic fields that are applied to the brain from outside the head. sentences beginning with phrases such as *the garden was on the worked. a new noninvasive[57] technique for studying brain activity. and analyzing the brain responses elicited when a subject encounters these violations.[60] 163 . Few neurolinguistic studies to date have used TMS. if the subject has a faster-than-usual response time to nurse then the experimenter may assume that word nurse in the brain had already been accessed when the word doctor was accessed. the subjects were "hearing" not the specific acoustic features.

but also are instructed to perform some sort of task in response to the stimuli. subjects do not simply sit and listen to or watch stimuli. one study had subjects listen to non-linguistic tones (long beeps and buzzes) in one ear and speech in the other ear. this supposedly caused subjects not to pay explicit attention to grammatical violations in the speech stimuli."[63] Probe verification Some studies use a "probe verification" task rather than an overt acceptability judgment. ensures that subjects are reading or listening attentively. but may avoid some of the additional processing demands of acceptability judgments.Neurolinguistics 164 Subject tasks In many neurolinguistics experiments. Another related form of experiment is the double-task experiment.[54] Truth-value judgment Subjects may be instructed not to judge whether or not the sentence is grammatically acceptable or logical. One experiment showed that when subjects were instructed to judge the "acceptability" of sentences they did not show an N400 brain response (a response commonly associated with semantic processing). this kind of experiment has been used to investigate the use of working memory in language processing. each experimental sentence is followed by a "probe word"."[65] Experimental evidence has shown that the instructions given to subjects in an acceptability judgment task can influence the subjects' brain responses to stimuli.[54][65] This task. and instructed subjects to press a button when they perceived a change in the tone. usually in order to ensure that they are paying attention to the stimuli.[68][69] Active distraction and double-task Some experiments give subjects a "distractor" task to ensure that subjects are not consciously paying attention to the experimental stimuli.[70] . have subjects make a decision about the "acceptability" (usually grammatical acceptability or semantic acceptability) of stimuli. but that they did show that response when instructed to ignore grammatical acceptability and only judge whether or not the sentences "made sense. It is frequently used in priming studies. in which a subject must perform an extra task (such as sequential finger-tapping or articulating nonsense syllables) while responding to linguistic stimuli. and subjects must answer whether or not the probe word had appeared in the sentence.[63] Lexical decision The lexical decision task involves subjects seeing or hearing an isolated word and answering whether or not it is a real word.[52][53][54] Grammaticality judgment.[63][64][65][66][67] Such a task is often used to "ensure that subjects [are] reading the sentences attentively and that they [distinguish] acceptable from unacceptable sentences in the way the [experimenter] expect[s] them to do. For example. and may be used no matter what type of violation is being presented in the study.[61] Subjects perform these tasks while recordings (electrophysiological or hemodynamic) are being taken. regardless of attention[36]—or at least that subjects were unable to consciously separate their attention from the speech stimuli. especially violation-based studies. like the acceptability judgment task. suggesting that the processing of the grammatical errors was happening automatically. in this paradigm. This task is commonly used in psycholinguistic studies of child language. but whether the proposition expressed by the sentence is true or false. this may be done to test whether a certain computation in the brain is carried out automatically. acceptability judgment Many studies.[62] At least one study has suggested that the task the subject does has an effect on the brain responses and the results of the experiment. The subjects showed a mismatch response (MMN) anyway. since subjects are known to make a lexical decision more quickly if a word has been primed by a related word (as in "doctor" priming "nurse"). regardless of whether the subject devotes attentional resources to it.

2003. ISBN 0-8264-8734-3. which discusses how three brain responses reflect three stages of Fodor and Frazier's model. edu/ pylkkanen/ Neural_Bases/ 01_Intro. htm). . Introduction to Neurolinguistics [71]. PMID 14614812. 280.09. 293. E. [5] "Pierre Paul Broca" (http:/ / www. (1985). Christopher J (2005). abstract?ck=nck). p. Colin M. doi:10. Laurence. Cabanis (2007). [9] Peng. . (2002). html). Neuroscience on the Web. p. [20] Embick. "How the brain solves the binding problem for language: a neurocomputational model of syntactic processing". Continuum International Publishing Group. Journal of Neurolinguistics 1 (1): 7. Brain 130 (Pt 5): 1432–3. springer. Kuniyoshi L. csuchico.100098897. cfm/ 1982. Alec Marantz. p. nature. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 8 (5): 393–402. Wayne O'Neil. California State University. Gregory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 97 (11): 6150–6154. Patrick (2008). [75] . lsadc. "The cognitive neuroscience of language. Harry A. Some relevant journals include the Journal of Neurolinguistics [74] and Brain and Language subscription access journals. . "Brodmann's" (http:/ / www. [7] Garey. Retrieved 25 January 2009.2003. psych.09. Swallowing and Language" (http:/ / www. The Boundaries of Babel. pp. . and Joy Hirsch (2003). David Poeppel (2007). "Language and the brain" (http:/ / mind. Sakai (2005). Peter. html). Retrieved 22 February 2009. "Pierre-Paul Broca" (http:/ / www. .013. com/ nrn/ journal/ v8/ n5/ abs/ nrn2113. pp. 166–169. Muskingum College. M.1038/nrn2113. [14] Hagoort." in Brown & Hagoort. [6] McCaffrey. pp. Kamil (12 August 2007). Theresa (May 2000). Kuniyoshi L. . [15] Hagoort.. 1441. Yearbook of Science and Technology.C. Peter (2003). p. doi:10. whonamedit. Plaisant. pdf). "Neurolinguistics" (http:/ / www. c. 274.1073/pnas. . doi:10.C. Lee Osterhout (1999). pp. PMID 14597293. pnas. Handbook of Neurolinguistics [73]. [18] Weisler (1999). "Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing". Angela D. [12] Hagoort. for example. N. ac.1016/S0911-6044(85)80003-8.neuroimage. com/ doctor. doi:10. 788. oxfordjournals. 2. doi:10. PMID 10811887. "fMRI evidence for cortical modification during learning of Mandarin lexical tone". . Peter (2003). NeuroImage 20: S18–29. McGraw-Hill Publishers. 280. and Peter Hagoort (1999). PMID 17431404. MIT Press. [10] Brown. PMC 18573. Colin. ISBN 978-0-262-13498-9. Iba-Zizen. Allard Jongman. 6. jp/ Sakai_Lab_files/ Staff/ KLS_Paper/ KLS2005. F. doi:10. PMID 14597293. p. • Stemmer. doi:10. NeuroImage 20: S19–S20. Elisabeth (2006). edu/ ~pmccaffrey/ syllabi/ CMSD 320/ 362unit4. Retrieved 25 January 2009. Sereno.1016/S1364-6613(00)01839-8.. Colin M. [21] Brown. Both are Notes [1] Phillips. Retrieved 18 December 2008.. John Benjamins Publishing Company.1093/brain/awm042.1162/089892903770007407. org/ cgi/ reprint/ 130/ 5/ 1432). "Opinion: The cortical organization of speech processing" (http:/ / www. u-tokyo. Lise. cfm). p. though some abstracts may be generally available.1016/j. [3] Dronkers. Who Named It?. 257. Chico. htm). . [13] Hall. 7. Brown. Yasushi Miyashita. p. "Neurolinguistics" (http:/ / www. [8] Ingram (2007). The Brain and the Enigma of Impossible Languages [72]. doi:10. [19] Hickock. Retrieved 25 January 2009. html). "What is neurolinguistics?". "What is neurolinguistics?" (http:/ / www. [17] See. Colin M.1016/j. 212. nyu. [2] Wiśniewski. Whitaker (1998). ISBN 90-272-3233-4. The Neurocognition of Language. org/ info/ ling-fields-neuro. An Introduction to Language and Linguistics (http:/ / books. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 15 (7): 1019–1027. . . Retrieved 22 February 2009. .Neurolinguistics 165 Further reading • Ahlsén. ISBN 0-12-666055-7. The Neurocognition of Language. "A syntactic specialization for Broca's area" (http:/ / www. "CMSD 620 Neuroanatomy of Speech. "How the brain solves the binding problem for language: a neurocomputational model of syntactic processing".neuroimage.A. Joan A. . muskingum. pdf). [4] Teter. PMID 17405763. [23] Menn. O. "The neurocognition of syntactic processing. com/ ?id=RWspkUKj274C& pg=PA69& lpg=PA69& dq=neurolinguistics+ and+ psycholinguistics). [22] Wang Yue. Academic Press. and Peter Hagoort (1999). Linguistic Society of America. tlumaczenia-angielski. Sakai (2000). Język angielski online. Brigitte.T. Andrea (2008). p. Friederici. "Paul Broca's historic cases: high resolution MR imaging of the brains of Leborgne and Lelong" (http:/ / brain. The Neurocognition of Language." in Brown & Hagoort. "The cognitive neuroscience of language. Retrieved 31 January 2009. Retrieved 31 January 2009.013. 3. [11] Weisler (1999). Liina. info/ linguistics/ neurolinguistics.F. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences 6 (2): 78. com/ biomed/ neuroscience/ book/ 978-0-387-26917-7). edu/ ~psych/ psycweb/ history/ broca. org/ content/ 97/ 11/ 6150.. David." in Brown & Hagoort. google. • Moro. [16] Pylkkänen.

T.Neurolinguistics [24] "The Bilingual Brain" (http:/ / www. PMID 17335388. Ana Inés. Carlyon (2008).3. Michael D. Pellathy. (1997). doi:10. "Electrophysiology reveals memory use in language comprehension". Angela D. [36] Pulvermüller. Colin Phillips. "Functional near-infrared spectroscopy: Looking at the brain and language mystery from a different angle". Language Experience in Second Language Speech Learning.1016/j. Yue Wang (2007). algorithms and methods. [26] Caplan (1987). Yury.1016/S1364-6613(00)01839-8. Jamie (2006). Cheour. . Antti. PMID 16678138. K. [52] "Experiment Description: Lexical Decision and Semantic Priming" (http:/ / psych. doi:10. Lee. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences 4 (12).19. "Repair. [33] Pylkkänen. [44] Näätänen. cs. [51] Frisch. [38] Kaan. Psychophysiological Brain Research: 299–302. S. Society for Neuroscience. Hillyard (1980). [31] Filler AG. Science 280 (5363): 572–4. doi:10. "Word category and verb–argument structure information in the dynamics of parsing". Tsuruda JS. 27 June 2005. Friedmann Pulvermüller (2004).03. org/ index. [32] Ansaldo. Anja Hahne.1016/j. Yellin.009.386. Brain and Language 104 (3): 244–253. PMID 12590846. 1–27. ISBN 0-19-852135-9. A. Risto. [35] Coles. [27] Caplan (1987). The Student's Guide to Cognitive Neuroscience. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 19 (3): 386–400.03126. Brain Briefings. doi:10. Richards TL. (2002). Pilar Casadoa. "Event-related Potentials Elicited by Grammatical Anomalies". Retrieved 1 February 2009. "Auditory cortex accesses phonological category: an MEG mismatch study". "Behavioral and cortical effects of learning a second language: The acquisition of tone". 425-461. Anna S.03. Minna. Mietta.2003. Retrieved 14 December 2008.009. "Tracking the time course of word recognition with MEG". Alec Marantz (2003). Cyma.bandl. "Distributed neuronal networks for encoding category-specific semantic information: the mismatch negativity to action words".2007. Science 207 (4427): 203–205. 1992. Roland Nigbura. [47] Example from Frisch et al. doi:10. (2004: 195). doi:10. Brain Research 6 (1): 178–189. Investigating language with functional neuroimaging. Hagoort. Barbara (2006). PMID 7350657.1162/jocn. Nature 385 (6615): 432–434. shtml?sso=true).0953-816X. doi:10.09. Martti. Marta. Joan A. [48] Kutas.H. doi:10. "The imaged brain".1016/S1364-6613(03)00092-5. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 15 (1): 98–110. Friedemann. M. Manuel. doi:10. Yury Shtyrov. [30] Kutas. Olaf Hauk. CA.1162/089892903321107855. Kotz. Sonja A. cfm?pagename=brainBriefings_thebilingualbrain). "Semantics prevalence over syntax during sentence processing: a brain potential study of noun–adjective agreement in Spanish". "Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing". Colin.280. Poeppel.001. "Neural localization of semantic context effects in electromagnetic and hemodynamic studies". "The influence of meaning on the perception of speech sounds". revision. Nina. PMID 17624417. doi:10.1016/j. A. Friederici (2004). Werner Sommer (2006). [37] Frisch. Karima. Colin M (1998). Phillip J. Howe FA: Images. Holcomb (1992).cognition.09.002. Luka. [46] Hasing. Kahlaoui. ISBN 1-84169-534-3.” (2000). "Language-specific phoneme representations revealed by electric and magnetic brain responses". Roberts (2001). [29] Ward. doi:10. Paavo et al. Stefan. [39] van Turrenout. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.2007. M. D. In Ocke-Schwen Bohn and Murray J. Friederici (2004). Angela D.. Kara D. Michael G. Miranda. Peter. sfn. "Syntax as a reflex: neurophysiological evidence for the early automaticity of syntactic processing". Vainio. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences 6 (2): 78–84. [50] Martín-Loeches. and complexity in syntactic analysis: an electrophysiological differentiation". PMC 3020137.1016/j. athabascau. p. "Setting the stage for automatic syntax processing: the mismatch negativity as an indicator of syntactic priming".094.1016/j. T. "Reading senseless sentences: brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity". [34] Van Petten. "Brain activity during speaking: from syntax to phonology in 40 milliseconds". doi:10. Huotilainen. Anne. pp. colorado. [49] Osterhout. Annette Hohlfeldc. "Event-related brain potentials: an introduction" (http:/ / l3d. Federmeier (2002).1038/385432a0. Brain and Language 121 (2). doi:10. Wexler. "Word category and verb–argument structure information in the dynamics of parsing". GB 9216383. Stefan. Angela D. Brown. Electrophysiology of Mind. UK Patent Office. 12.. Anja Hahne.brainres. T. p. PMID 9554845. Yury Shtyrov (2003). pdf). PMID 15168895.1016/S1053-8119(03)00261-1. Rugg (1996). doi:10. Robert P. Cognition 91 (3): 191–219. NeuroImage 20 (1): 159–172. [25] Friederici. . 11. Lehtokoski. doi:10. Liina.2004. [40] Grabowski. PMID 15009156. E. Friederici (2007). Psychology Press. Lennes. Cognition 91 (3): 191–219. Friedemann. Joanette. doi:10. "Automatic processing of grammar in the human brain as revealed by the mismatch negativity". [42] Phillips. Edith.2012. [43] Shtyrov. Yves (2011). apparatus. [28] Sereno. ca/ html/ Psych355/ Exp/ lexical. 166 .1126/science. Marantz.5363.05. Oxford Scholarship Online Monographs. Marie. Hasting.1126/science. Iivonen.bandl. PMID 14527578. McGinnis. Angela D.1073/pnas. San Diego. European Journal of Neuroscience 19 (4): 1083–1092. PMID 15168895.572.2006.cognition. [41] Pulvermüller. Tamara (2003).1111/j. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 12 (6): 1038–1055. William Idsardi (2006).7350657. US: Academic Press.x.A. February 2008.2003. [45] Kazanina.1162/08989290051137567. Brain and Language (96): 281. Anna S. 14. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 103 (30): 11381–11386. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences 7 (5): 187–189.0604821103. edu/ ~ctg/ classes/ lib/ cogsci/ Rugg-ColesChp1... Alku. Munro. PMID 9009189. . Athatbasca University. Swaab. PMID 16849423. and Damasio.

doi:10.1162/089892903322370807. . McDaniel. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 101 (41): 14984–14988. "On the brain response to syntactic anomalies: manipulations of word position and word class reveal individual differences". com/ wps/ find/ journaldescription. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 2: 14. Angela D.1016/j. com/ wps/ find/ journaldescription.2007. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 15 (6): 883–899. Ramin Assadollahi (2007). "Morphology and the internal structure of words". "Grammar or serial order?: discrete combinatorial brain mechanicsms reflected by the syntactic mismatch negativity". . Angela D. com/ ?id=jVR1AAAACAAJ& dq=Introduction+ to+ Neurolinguistics [72] http:/ / mitpress. elsevier.2003. PMID 9299074. Anja. columbia. Solomon. "Interplay between syntax and semantics during sentence comprehension: ERP effects of combining syntactic and semantic violations". Stefan. [59] A. com/ ?id=4tkFAAAACAAJ& dq=Handbook+ of+ Neurolinguistics [74] http:/ / www.09.1997. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 19 (6): 971–980. org/ Content/ ContentGroups/ Helpline1/ Transcranial_Magnetic_Stimulation_(rTMS). doi:10. PMC 2572210. doi:10. PMID 16054419. Peter. edu. Paul M. in which subjects are often instructed to watch a silent movie or otherwise not pay attention actively to the stimuli. [69] Crain.3758/BF03211539. for example: • Pulvermüller. Memory & Cognition 27 (3): 438–453. "A comparison of lexical and sentence-level context effects in event-related potentials". [63] Hahne.1016/j. Friederici (2004). PMID 17536967. C. Wyler. com/ health/ transcranial-magnetic-stimulation/ MY00185/ DSECTION=risks). Joseph T. E. Yue-jia Luo. Friederici.3171/jns. [54] Friederici.085. [60] Hagoort. Peter (2005).. cws_home/ 622799/ description#description • .brainres. Bushell (1993).cognition. "Differential task effects on semantic and syntactic processes as revealed by ERPs". htm).1016/j.1006/brln.19. then Every Child Knows (http:/ / www.004. PMID 7299464.1162/jocn. Brain and Language 45 (3): 448–464. See. nami. "An on-line analysis of syntactic processing in Broca's and Wernicke's aphasia". edu/ upload/ pg328/ TRUTHVALUECHAPT. Matthews. A. elsevier.0904. Laura M. Cognition 91 (3): 200–201. [64] Zheng Ye. and Utako Minai. David Poeppel (2007). PMID 18958214.2008. . "Semantic and syntactic processing in Chinese sentence comprehension: evidence from event-related potentials". "On Broca. Journal of Neurosurgery 55 (6): 904–8. doi:10. Sentence Comprehension. [67] Hagoort. Angela D.971. Cyma (1993). Angela D.B. "The Truth-Value Judgment Task" (http:/ / faculty. Robert.. 1.1016/S0926-6410(01)00127-6. PMID 15358857. Mayo Clinic.07. [65] Frisch. Peter (2003). [56] Zurif.6. William Matchin. In D. P. edu/ catalog/ item/ default. Retrieved on 14 December 2008. NeuroImage 20 (1): 159–172.6. doi:10. doi:10. Ward.Risks" (http:/ / www. Helen L. Xiaolin Zhou (2006). [61] One common exception to this is studies using the mismatch paradigm. cws_home/ 866/ description#description [75] http:/ / www. mit. Corianne. Karsten Steinhauer. Gonnerman (2004).009. [71] http:/ / books.1981.1054. Friedemann.R. PMID 15168895.2005.1016/j. "Broca's Area.014. PMID 8269334. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences 9 (9): 416–23. brain. google. Prather. maccs. mayoclinic. [68] Gordon. "Lexical integration: sequential effects of syntactic and semantic information". [58] "Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS)" (http:/ / www. Anja Hahne.3389/neuro.tics. Stefan Frisch (1999). Jamison. Lee (1997). tc. doi:10.009.1016/S1053-8119(03)00261-1. PMC 522020. Brain Research 1071 (1): 186–196. Yury Shtyrov (2003).11." University of Maryland at College Park. Methods for assessing children's syntax. Retrieved 15 December 2008. Brain and Language 103: 8–249. PMID 14527578. Cognitive Brain Research 13 (3): 339–356. and Working Memory: An fMRI Study". J. Response to direct cortical stimulation". p. Retrieved 15 December 2008. [62] Van Petten. "Automatic processing of grammar in the human brain as revealed by the mismatch negativity". [57] "Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation . Language and Cognitive Processes 8 (4): 490–91. google. "Processing of compound words: an MEG study". pdf). mq.Neurolinguistics [53] Fiorentino. Brain and Language 59 (3): 494–522.09. "Word category and verb–argument structure information in the dynamics of parsing". au/ ~scrain/ papers/ GALA'04. " If Everybody Knows. doi:10.A. McKee.. H. Friedemann. D. doi:10.0403766101. Swinney. and binding: a new framework". Gregory Hickok (2008). doi:10. doi:10.1006/brln.1993. Jr (1981).07. [70] Rogalsky. PMID 14511541.bandl. pdf).2007. Luisa Meroni. PMID 16412999. Stephen. [66] Osterhout.1073/pnas. doi:10. asp?ttype=2& tid=11488 [73] http:/ / books. doi:10.2005. "Neurons in human epileptic cortex. Cairns. National Alliance on Mental Illness.55. Friederici (2002). C. doi:10.1793. 167 Pulvermüller. Cambridge: MIT Press. [55] Devlin.

pp. • Ingram. Stephen. • Developmental psycholinguistics studies children's ability to learn language. ISBN 0-521-31195-0. .sfn. and (4) how do adults acquire a new language (second language acquisition)? Subdivisions in psycholinguistics are also made based on the different components that make up human language. • • Syntax is the study of the patterns which dictate how words are combined to form sentences. MIT Press. Milekic (1999). Psycholinguistics covers the cognitive processes that make it possible to generate a grammatical and meaningful sentence out of vocabulary and grammatical structures. especially the relationships between related words (such as dog and dogs) and the formation of words based on rules (such as plural formation). but these topics can generally be divided into answering the following questions: (1) how do children acquire language (language acquisition)?. neuroscience. Linguistics-related areas: • Phonetics and phonology are concerned with the study of speech sounds. pp. External links • Society for Neuroscience (SfN) (http://www. and information theory to study how the brain processes language. Slavoljub P. research focuses on how the brain processes and understands these sounds. • Morphology is the study of word structures. linguistics. Cambridge University Press. Psycholinguists study many different topics. (2007).com/?id=CQ8agSNL9MYC). ISBN 0-262-73125-8. ISBN 0-521-79190-1. Where syntax is concerned with the formal structure of Modern research makes use of biology. blog by neurolinguists Greg Hickock and David Poeppel Psycholinguistics Psycholinguistics or psychology of language is the study of the psychological and neurobiological factors that enable humans to acquire.Neurolinguistics 168 References • Colin M. • Talking Brains (http://talkingbrains. New York: Oxford University Press. text. neurolinguistics has become a field in its own right. Areas of study Psycholinguistics is an interdisciplinary field. Theory of Language. The Neurocognition of ?id=wIaGLUFHtxsC&pg=PA273&lpg=PA273&dq=what+is+neurolinguistics).L. (1999). it is studied by researchers from a variety of different backgrounds. comprehend and produce language. use. (2) how do people process and comprehend language (language comprehension)?. cognitive science. Within psycholinguistics. ed. (3) how do people produce language (language production)?.google. such as psychology. There are a number of subdisciplines with non-invasive techniques for studying the neurological workings of the brain. • Semantics deals with the meaning of words and sentences. John C. words. Brown and Peter Hagoort. pp. Neurolinguistics: An Introduction to Spoken Language Processing and Its Disorders (http://books. semantics deals with the actual meaning of sentences. and speech and language pathology. cognitive science. • Pragmatics is concerned with the role of context in the interpretation of meaning. Hence. for example. Initial forays into psycholinguistics were largely philosophical ventures. "Brain and Language" (http://books. Cambridge University Press. Neurolinguistics and Linguistic Aphasiology: An Introduction (http://books. 420. due mainly to a lack of cohesive data on how the human brain functioned. David (1987). as well as the processes that make it possible to understand utterances. linguistics. ?id=E3XrTCsU7bkC). 344.

morphological. according to the innateness hypothesis. in fact.[3] This ability may have resulted from a favorable mutation or from an adaptation of skills evolved for other purposes. The pro view still holds that the human ability to use language (specifically the ability to use recursion) is qualitatively different from any sort of animal ability. yet at the time there was no evidence that children receive sufficient input to learn all the rules of their language (see poverty of the stimulus). Language comprehension One question in the realm of language comprehension is how people understand sentences as they read (also known as sentence processing). that is to say. there must be some other innate mechanism that endows a language ability to humans. then an innate mechanism is no longer necessary to explain language acquisition. hence it is learned. Skinner) puts forth the point of view that language is a behavior shaped by conditioned response. Language acquisition There are essentially two schools of thought as to how children acquire or learn language. The second view states that the abstract system of language cannot be learned. children acquiring a language have a vast search space to explore among all possible human grammars. The view that language must be learned was especially popular before 1960 and is well represented by the mentalistic theories of Jean Piaget and the empiricist Rudolf Carnap. and there is still much debate as to which theory is the correct one. innate ability for language and that complex syntactic features.F. The first theory states that all language must be learned by the child. Developmental psycholinguistics study infants' and children's ability to learn and process language. According to Chomsky. even syntax. These abilities are thought to be beyond the grasp of the most intelligent and social non-humans. what defines human language and makes it different from even the most sophisticated forms of animal communication. some influential theories are discussed for each of the fundamental questions listed in the section above. Chomsky posited humans possess a special. If this is true.[2] This review helped to start what has been termed "the cognitive revolution" in psychology. Likewise. it can't be tested. Experimental research has spawned a number of theories about the architecture and mechanisms of sentence comprehension. The field of linguistics and psycholinguistics since then has been defined by reactions to Chomsky. Typically these theories are concerned with what types of information contained in the sentence the reader can use to build meaning. This view challenges the "innate" view as scientifically unfalsifiable. but that humans possess an innate language faculty. The view that language can be learned has had a recent resurgence inspired by emergentism. and at what point in reading does that information become available to the reader. the school of psychology known as behaviorism (see Verbal Behavior (1957) by B. phonological. or an access to what has been called universal grammar. and semantic information from patterns in printed text. pro and con. The innatist perspective began with Noam Chomsky's highly critical review of Skinner's book in 1959. researchers have been able to simulate language acquisition using neural network models.[4] These models provide evidence that there may. With the amount of computer power increasing since the 1980s.[1] 169 Theories In this section. are "hard-wired" in the brain. Such a language faculty is. A researcher interested in language production might study how words are prepared to be spoken starting from the conceptual or semantic level. be sufficient information contained in the input to learn language. Issues such as "modular" versus "interactive" processing have been theoretical divides in the field. . such as recursion.Psycholinguistics A researcher interested in language comprehension may study word recognition during reading to examine the processes involved in the extraction of orthographic. Hence.

Beginning with Rayner (1978)[10] the importance and informativity of eye-movements during reading was established. for example. eye tracking has been used to study online language processing. Under this "syntax first" theory. we know from experience that evidence can rarely if ever examine something. He asked participants to make decisions about whether two strings of letters were English words. such as a constraint-based lexical approach[7] assumes that all available information contained within a sentence can be processed at any time. language processing can be studied by monitoring eye movements while a subject is presented auditorily with linguistic input. the garden-path theory. whereby a "priming" word or phrase appearing in the experiment can speed up the lexical decision for a related "target" word later. For example. reproduce the stimulus. (1995)[11] used the visual-world paradigm to study the cognitive processes related to spoken language.g.[5] states that syntactic analysis takes place first. especially earlier on. It is only later that the reader will recognize that he or she needs to revise the initial parse into one in which "the evidence" is being examined. semantic information is processed at a later stage. they may be asked to make a judgment about a word (lexical decision). the reader would be able to make use of plausibility information in order to assume that "the evidence" is being examined instead of doing the examining. In this example. This facilitation suggests that semantic relatedness can facilitate word encoding. 170 Methodologies Behavioral tasks Many of the experiments conducted in psycholinguistics. cat-dog) while others were unrelated (e. are behavioral in nature. Later. subjects are presented with linguistic stimuli and asked to perform an action. Under an interactive account.[8] As an example of how behavioral methods can be used in psycholinguistics research. In contrast to a modular account.Psycholinguistics A modular view of sentence processing assumes that the stages involved in reading a sentence function independently in separate modules. or name a visually presented word aloud). There are data to support both modular and interactive accounts. Sometimes the strings would be actual English words requiring a "yes" response. the semantics of a sentence (such as plausibility) can come into play early on in order to help determine the structure of a sentence." by the time the reader gets to the word "examined" he or she has committed to a reading of the sentence in which the evidence is examining something because it is the simplest parse.[6] This reanalysis is costly and contributes to slower reading times... Hence.[9] Eye-movements Recently. Fischler found that related word pairs were responded to faster when compared to unrelated word pairs. which account is the correct one is still up for debate. This is done without any input from semantic analysis or context-dependent information. This commitment is made despite the fact that it results in an implausible situation. Assuming that eye movements are closely linked to the current focus of attention. in the sentence "The evidence examined by the lawyer turned out to be unreliable. Hence. he or she creates the simplest structure possible in order to minimize effort and cognitive load. Fischler (1977) investigated word encoding using the lexical decision task. . For example. Reaction times to respond to the stimuli (usually on the order of milliseconds) and proportion of correct responses are the most often employed measures of performance in behavioral tasks. and other times they would be nonwords requiring a "no" response. Such experiments often take advantage of priming effects. readers typically recognize their misparse by the time they reach "by the lawyer" and must go back and re-parse the sentence. in the sentence above. one influential theory of sentence processing. A subset of the licit words were related semantically (e. Tanenhaus et al.g. an interactive theory of sentence processing. Under this theory as the reader is reading a sentence. bread-stem). In these types of studies. These modulates have limited interaction with one another.

. For example. writing and typing of language as it is produced can provide evidence of the process which has generated it. Neuroimaging Until the recent advent of non-invasive medical techniques. Thus.[15] A great deal of research in psycholinguistics focuses on how this ability develops and diminishes over time.g. language researchers had an opportunity to pursue their research. It also seems to be the case that the more languages one knows. It refers to the practice of setting up cognitive models in the form of executable computer programs. the easier it is to learn more. and second language acquisition. and further insight into how the brain processes language. In addition. such as whether the human ability to use syntax is based on innate mental structures or emerges from interaction with other humans. Another example of computational modeling is McClelland and Elman's TRACE model of speech perception. functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). event-related potentials (ERPs) in electroencephalography (EEG) and magnetoencephalography (MEG). the DRC model of reading and word recognition proposed by Coltheart and colleagues[12]—is another methodology. Each type of methodology presents a set of advantages and disadvantages for studying a particular problem in psycholinguistics. For example. Newer.[8][14] Recent research using new non-invasive imaging techniques seeks to shed light on just where certain language processes occur in the brain. the cohort model seeks to describe how words are retrieved from the mental lexicon when an individual hears or sees linguistic input. and whether some animals can be taught the syntax of human language.Psycholinguistics 171 Language Production Errors The analysis of systematic errors in speech. Brain imaging techniques vary in their spatial and temporal resolutions (fMRI has a resolution of a few thousand neurons per pixel. and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). severing the corpus callosum (the bundle of nerves that connects the two hemispheres of the brain) was at one time a treatment for some forms of epilepsy.[16] The field of aphasiology deals with language deficits that arise because of brain damage. Studies in aphasiology can both offer advances in therapy for individuals suffering from aphasia. Where an illness made brain surgery necessary. the process by which infants acquire language. Researchers could then study the ways in which the comprehension and production of language were affected by such drastic surgery. There are a number of unanswered questions in psycholinguistics. Computational modeling Computational modeling—e. non-invasive techniques now include brain imaging by positron emission tomography (PET). Such programs are useful because they require theorists to be explicit in their hypotheses and because they can be used to generate accurate predictions for theoretical models that are so complex that they render discursive analysis unreliable. it is much more difficult for adults to acquire second languages than it is for infants to learn their first language (bilingual infants are able to learn both of their native languages easily). sensitive periods may exist during which language can be learned readily. and ERP has millisecond accuracy).[13] Issues and areas of research Psycholinguistics is concerned with the nature of the computations and processes that the brain undergoes to comprehend and produce language. Two other major subfields of psycholinguistics investigate first language acquisition. brain surgery was the preferred way for language researchers to discover how language works in the brain.

4-7." The Morphology of Chinese: A Linguistic and Cognitive Approach. "A Review of B. PMID 353867. Spivey-Knowlton M.L. (2001). (1998).. Psychological Bulletin 85 (3): 618–660. (1994).298. Langdon R. London: Longman. "DRC: "A dual route cascaded of visual word recognition and reading aloud". doi:10. Steven. [9] {Fischler I. New York:Prentice Hall. Skinner's Verbal Behavior". J. [12] Coltheart M. (1977). [14] Altmann. Tanenhaus M.. Cognitive psychology 14 (2): 178–210.1570. The TRACE model of speech perception.618. (2001) Psycholinguistics: Language. Hiroshi Nagata. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Skinner. Memory & Cognition 5 (3): 335-339. Oxford: Oxford University Press.. Natalia. Johnson Mark. [16] Seidner. F. (1997). Hove: Psychology Press.. • Harley. p. Moscow. pdf). B. iupui. and how we (eventually) find them.D. 2000 (in Russian) (http://www.1569. Trevor. pp. doi:10. J. and Power from a Psycholinguistic Perspective.. Cambridge. (1995). Danny D. Bates Elizabeth. JSTOR 411334. edu/ ~babytalk/ pdfs/ harley/) Hove: Psychology Press. "Toward a lexical framework of constraint-based syntactic ambiguity resolution". Stanley S. • Lakoff. Plunkett Kim (1998). The Articulate Mammal: An Introduction to Psycholinguistics. Psycholinguistics. Gerry T.ling.3. 284-309.5598. and David P. Ziegler J. and Power from a Psycholinguistic Perspective. Stanley S. and Pollatsek. pp. Sedivy J. (1994) The Language Instinct. • Aitchison. 2nd ed.L. Further reading A short list of books that deal with psycholinguistics.26. Science 268 (5217): 1632–1634. [11] Tanenhaus M. Foundations of Psycholinguistic Diagnostics (Models of the World).: Harvard University Press. "The interaction of syntax and semantics during sentence processing: Eye movements in the analysis of semantically biased sentences". Trevor. [2] Chomsky.. Chomsky N. fire.. • Scovel. • Piattelli-Palmarini. 18.ed. PMID 7777863. Routledge. [15] Seidner. Thomas. "Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences". D..) (http://www.psypress. [8] Packard. N. Carlson M. Rethinking innateness: A connectionist perspective on development. 1-86. Science 298 (5598): 1569–79.. includes: • Belyanin V. (2002). .W.. George. Jusczyk. 65-83.. (2000) New Horizons in the Study of Language and Mind. Eberhard K.M.textology. (1982). M. Cognitive Psychology. ed. (2006) Introduction to Psycholinguistics 2nd edition..2307/411334. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 26 (5): 1570–1582. ISSN 0097-8507. (1986). A. The MIT Press. Jean. (1978). Fitch W. Parisi Domenico. & Elman. [5] Frazier L. Ethnicity. Karmiloff-Smith Annette. 11.html) • Chomsky. [7] Trueswell J. Longman (http://www. K. [6] Rayner K.(1982). [13] McClelland. pp. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.7777863.. Psychological Review 108: 204–256. K. (1987) Women. • Rayner. Language. Rastle K.html) • Steinberg. (1989) The Psychology of Reading. doi:10. Mass. "Chinese words and the lexicon.M. "Eye movements in reading and information processing". (1998). [4] Elman. Oxford University Press. [3] Hauser M.5. (2000). New York: William Morrow. ed.1126/science. Aline. Rayner. J. "Semantic facilitation without association in a lexical decision task". F. Retrieved 1 March 2012. Perry C.1037/0096-1523. Bruxelles: Centre de recherche sur le pluralinguisme. • Harley.Psycholinguistics 172 References [1] Houston. Journal of verbal learning and verbal behavior 22 (3): 358–374. and dangerous things: what categories reveal about the mind. PMID 12446899. • Pinker. Ethnicity.P. Noam. (ed. Language (Linguistic Society of America) 35 (1): 26–58. E. doi:10. Massimo. • Steinberg." The Ascent of Babel: An Exploration of (2009) Talking the talk: Language. (1983). Jeffrey. Frazier L. & Sciarini.1126/science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. "Words. .1037/ Language.85. "Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension".) (1980) Language and learning: the debate between Jean Piaget and Noam Chomsky. (1959). [10] Rayner K. psychology and science. doi:10. Perspectives on sentence processing: 155–179.. written in language accessible to the non-expert. P. Mind and World.. Jerome L (2000).. (2008) The Psychology of Language: From data to theory (3rd.(1982). and Understanding. Bruxelles: Centre de recherche sur le pluralinguisme. Danny D. Mind. "The ROle of Talker-Specific Information in Word Segmentation by Infants" (http:/ / www.

eventually leading to a systematic alphabet. Antiquity Across cultures. notably that of Sanskrit grammar by Pāṇini (fl. This often led to explorations of sound-meaning mappings. pre-verbs. verbs.g. 800 BCE. clarity was reached in the organization of sound units. such as Noam Chomsky's generative grammar. and that word meanings are derived based on sentential usage. around the 6th century BCE. Map the semantics of verb argument structures into thematic roles 2.. China also developed its own grammatical traditions and Arabic grammar and Hebrew grammar developed during the Middle Ages. The first half of the 20th century was marked by the structuralist school. Pāṇini specifies a comprehensive set of about 4. The etymologist Yāska (c. and that all nouns are etymologically derived from actions. based on the work of Ferdinand de Saussure in Europe and Edward Sapir and Leonard Bloomfield in the United States. 4th century BCE) opposes the Yāska view that sentences are primary. or by the development of logic and rhetoric among Greeks. the Rigveda. and phonetic units. root or stem modification) by which the final phonological form is obtained . Provide morphosyntactic rules for creating verb forms and nominal forms whose seven cases are called karaka (similar to case) that generate the morphology 3. In semantics. reaching the "golden age of philology" in the 19th century. Pratisakhyas).org/Science/Social_Sciences/Linguistics/Psycholinguistics/) at the Open Directory Project History of linguistics Linguistics as a study endeavors to describe and explain the human faculty of language. 5th century BCE) posits that meaning inheres in the sentence. Already in the oldest Indian text. Modern linguistics began to develop in the 18th century. and particles/invariants—and a test for nouns both concrete and abstract: words which can be indicated by the pronoun that. William Labov's sociolinguistics. Finally this led to the processes by which larger structures are formed from units. the early history of linguistics is associated with a need to disambiguate discourse. stems. Michael Halliday's systemic functional linguistics and also modern psycholinguistics. linguistic study was originally motivated by the correct description of classical liturgical language. vāk ("speech") is deified.[1] the oral performance of these texts becomes standardized. especially for ritual texts or in arguments. and the stop consonants were organized in a 5x5 square (c. and proposes a grammar for composing semantics from morphemic roots. Over the next few centuries. Pāṇini (c. He also provides four categories of words—nouns. and the debate over conventional versus naturalistic origins for these symbols.000 aphoristic rules (sutras) that: 1.dmoz. India Linguistics in ancient India derives its impetus from the need to correctly recite and interpret the Vedic texts. Beginning around the 4th century BCE. Take these morphological structures and consider phonological processes (e. In ancient civilization. the early Sanskrit grammarian Śākaṭāyana (before c. and treatises on ritual recitation suggest splitting up the Sanskrit compounds into words. By 1200 BCE. 500 BCE) proposes that verbs represent ontologically prior categories. The 1960s saw the rise of many new fields in linguistics. providing an impetus for morphology and phonetics. Transcending the ritual text to consider living language. Brāhmī.Psycholinguistics 173 External links • Psycholinguistics (http://www. 4th century BCE).

The phonological structure includes defining a notion of sound universals similar to the modern phoneme. Frits Staal[2] discussed the possible European impact of Indian ideas on language. Pāṇini and commentators Nirukta (nirukta): etymology. who also posits that language-universals are the units of thought. a list of sounds (the so-called Shiva-sutras). according to some. may have been influenced by Pāṇini and Bhartrihari. Several debates ranged over centuries. it is the ambition of mapping these from morpheme to semantics that is truly remarkable in modern terms. for example. may itself have been catalyzed by Europe's contact with the work of Sanskrit grammarians. his idea of the unity of signifier-signified in the sign is somewhat similar to the notion of Sphoṭa. The Pali Grammar of Kacchayana. The Nyaya Sutras specified three types of meaning: the individual (this cow). close to the nominalist or even the linguistic determinism position. and vowels based on height and duration. based on which formal rules were also introduced in computational languages. on whether word-meaning mappings were conventional (Vaisheshika-Nyaya) or eternal (Kātyāyana-Patañjali-Mīmāṃsā). a wider body of work influenced Sanskrit scholars such as Ferdinand de Saussure. Leonard Bloomfield. Patañjali (2nd century BCE). Subsequently. first proposed by de Saussure in 1894. who wrote aphorisms on Pāṇini (the Varttika) and advanced mathematics. The Kavirajamarga is a treatise on Kannada grammar that is comparable in age to the Tolkappiyam. may indeed lie in the European exposure to the formal rules of Paninian grammar. the author of the Yoga Sutras. dated to the early centuries CE.History of linguistics In addition. This body of work became known in 19th century Europe. the type universal (cowhood). Staal posits the theory that the idea of formal rules in language. More importantly. Grammarians following Pāṇini include Kātyāyana (c. Gārgeya and commentators Chandas (chandas): prosody or meter. known for his commentary on selected topics in Pāṇini's grammar (the Mahabhasya) and on Kātyāyana's aphorisms. The Tolkāppiyam (dated to 7th century CE) presents a grammar of Tamil. who lectured on Sanskrit for three decades. and Roman Jakobson. four dealt with language: • • • • Shiksha (śikṣā): phonetics and phonology (sandhi). Pingala and commentators Vyakarana (vyākaraṇa): grammar. The extremely succinct specification of these rules and their complex interactions led to considerable commentary and extrapolation over the following centuries. That the sound of a word also forms a class (sound-universal) was observed by Bhartṛhari (c. and Pingala. and finally developed by Chomsky in 1957. and a list of 260 words not derivable by the rules. who mainly looked at Pāṇini. the very idea that formal rules can be applied to areas outside of logic or mathematics. where it influenced modern linguistics initially through Franz Bopp. However. Of the six canonical texts or Vedangas that formed the core syllabus in Brahminic education from the 1st century CE until the 18th century. the Pāṇinian school also provides a list of 2000 verb roots which form the objects on which these rules are applied. Yāska and commentators 174 Bhartrihari around 500 CE introduced a philosophy of meaning with his sphoṭa doctrine. de Saussure. derivatives of which are still used today. . Bhartṛhari also considers the sentence to be ontologically primary (word meanings are learned given their sentential use). In particular. 500 CE). After outlining the various aspects of the contact. with his mathematical approach to prosody. 3rd century BCE). the systematization of consonants based on oral cavity constriction. describes the language of the Buddhist canon. as well as. and the image (draw the cow).

Next. One of the most important offers of the Stoics in language study was the gradual definition of the terminology and theory echoed in modern linguistics. he distinguishes between a subject of predication. Ion etc." "the horse runs. such as simple terms and propositions. a social artifact. without composition or structure. • Or having composition and structure. like their predecessors. respectively. and a subject of inhesion. namely that of which anything is affirmed or denied. as text genres. position. which is . A philosophical discussion about the nature and origins of language can be found as early as the works of Plato. poetry. and his work on this area was fundamentally important for the development of the study of language (logos in Greek means both language and logic reasoning). independent of the language user. A subject of concern was whether language was man-made. Furthermore Aristotle's works on rhetoric and poetics were of the utmost importance for the understating of tragedy. Along with written speech. the form and the structure of those texts (see the Republic and Phaidros. Alexandrians. In phonetics and phonology the articulators were defined. Aristotle defines what is meant by "synonymous. such as "a man fights. it cannot possibly exist without the subject.History of linguistics 175 Greece The first important advancement of the Greeks was the creation of the alphabet based on a system previously used by the Phoenicians." "fights. forming the basis of philology and criticism. and on modal propositions. verb. There was also a discussion about the role of analogy in language. which were categorized according to their weight as either "long" syllables or "short" syllables (also known as "heavy" and "light" syllables.[4] The Stoics studied phonetics grammar and etymology as separate levels of study. In Categories.g. The categories are not abstract platonic entities but are found in speech. As a result of the introduction of writing." or univocal words." "horse. nouns and verbs. e. were very interested in the meter and its relation with poetry. It then divides forms of speech as being: • Either simple. adding vowels and other consonants needed in Greek (see Robins. quality." etc.[3] Aristotle supports the conventional origins of meaning. although by the end he admits a small role for convention. Plato in his Cratylus presents the naturalistic view. 1997). and draws a series of basic conclusions on the routine issues of classifying and defining basic linguistic forms. In de Interpretatione. Aristotle's work on logic interrelates with his special interest in language. the quantity of simple propositions (primitive roots of the quantifiers in modern symbolic logic). poetry such as the Homeric poems became written and several editions were created and commented on. and what is meant by "paronymous. though it is not a part of the subject. what is meant by "homonymous. such as "man. place. public discussions etc. the Greeks commence its study in grammatical and philosophical bases.). relation. quantity." etc. The basic unit in Greek and Latin prosody is a mora. The sophists and Socrates introduced also dialectics as a new text genre. defined parts of speech with notions such as noun. state. to distinguish from long and short vowels). where the meaning of the whole is usually related to the constituents. shape in a thing having a shape. The foot is often compared to a musical measure and the long and short syllables to whole notes and half notes. or supernatural in origin. Stoics made linguistics an important part of their understanding about the cosmos and the human. The metrical "feet" in the Greek was based on the length of time taken to pronounce each syllable. whereas the grammatic in schools Asia Minor consider that language is not based on analogical bases but rather on exceptions. The syllable became an important structure for the understanding of speech organization. He defined the logic of speech and the argument. Aristotle analyzes categoric propositions. action and affection.. that word meanings emerge out of a natural process. A thing is said to be inherent in a subject. His arguments are partly based on examples of compounding. etc. Alexandrian grammarians also studied speech sounds and prosody." or equivocal words. these are substance. In his platonic dialogs there are definitions about the meter of the poems and tragedy. time. in this discussions the grammatici in Alexandria supported that language and especially morphology is based on analogy or paradigm. when. The important role of the Stoics in defining the linguistic sign terms adopted later on by Ferdinand de Saussure like "significant" and "signifie". negation." or denominative words. investigations on the excluded middle (what to Aristotle isn't applicable to future tense propositions — the Problem of future contingents).

of notions such as the word. classifies Chinese characters by radicals. The initial syllable of either foot is called the ictus. a practice that would be followed by most subsequent lexicographers. A smaller version. the first Chinese dictionary. At that period. As in ancient Greece. morphology. modern linguistics struggles to overcome this. the text Tékhnē grammatiké (c. possibly written by Dionysius Thrax. or dialectical or special such as medical words. the first Chinese work concerning dialects. 3rd century BCE). Xiaoxue (小 學 "elementary studies"). and connectives. and more. orthography. 176 Rome In the 4th century. the subject etc. thesauri and lists of special words "λέξεις" that were old. Happily.History of linguistics defined as a single short syllable. a diphthong. as a result. This form uses verses of six feet. Think. dialectology. Lexicography become an important study domain as dictionaries. etymological dictionaries etc. Subsequently. With the Greeks a tradition commenced in the study of language. (zhengming) stating that the moral collapse of the pre-Qin was a result of the failure to rectify behaviour to meet the moral commitment . eventually when books came to be printed in the 15th c. semantics. Xiaoxue came to be divided into three branches: Xungu (訓 詁 "exegesis").[5] Apollonius wrote more than thirty treatises on questions of syntax. 100 BCE. The glossary Erya (c. the basic "beat" of the verse. and this title means "Art of letters"). Ars Minor. lists eight parts of speech. respectively.e. the verb. is regarded as the first linguistic work in China. adverbs. early Chinese thinkers were concerned with the relationship between names and reality. botanic words were made at that period by many grammarians. and three one-book monographs on pronouns. devoted to etymology. Various rules of elision sometimes prevent a grammatical syllable from making a full syllable. The sixth foot is either a spondee or a trochee. The fifth foot is almost always a dactyl. and lays out the broad details of Greek morphology including the case structures. the meter of Homeric poetry. Other grammars by Charisius (mainly a compilation of Thrax. i. A long syllable contains either a long vowel. this was one of the first books to be printed. Confucius (6th century BCE) famously emphasized the moral commitment implicit in a name. the language spoken in the known world (for the Greeks and Romans) of that time and. China Similar to the Indian tradition. or a short vowel followed by two or more consonants. gramma meant letter. The most important Classical meter as defined by the Alexandrian grammarians was the dactylic hexameter. In the early medieval times we find more categories of dictionaries like the dictionary of Suida that is considered the first encyclopedic dictionary. A long syllable is equivalent to two moras. There is usually a caesura after the ictus of the third foot. comparable to the Indian Nighantu. The Romans and the medieval world followed and their laborious work is considered today as a part of our everyday language. Shuowen Jiezi (c. but can be spondees. and also covers punctuation and some aspects of prosody. 2nd century BCE). the syllable. prosody. Two more pioneering works produced during the Han Dynasty are Fangyan. began as an aid to understanding classics in the Han dynasty (c. covered only the eight parts of speech. and certain other lengthening and shortening rules (such as correption) can create long or short syllables in contexts where one would expect the opposite. as well as lost texts by Remmius Palaemon and others) and Diomedes (focusing more on prosody) were popular in Rome as pedagogic material for teaching Greek to native Latin speakers. the Greek language was considered a lingua franca. The first four feet are dactyls. for example. four of these are preserved—we still have a Syntax in four books. Schoolboys subjected to all this education gave us the current meaning of "grammar" (attested in English since 1176). and Shiming. Gk. Wenzi (文 字 "script [analysis]") and Yinyun (音 韻 "[study of] sounds") and reached its golden age in the 17th century CE (Qing Dynasty). This text was intended as a pedagogic guide (as was Panini). One of the most prominent scholars of Alexandria and of the antiquity was Apollonius Dyscolus.. Aelius Donatus compiled the Latin grammar Ars Grammatica that was to be the defining school text through the Middle Ages. Chinese philology. 3rd century BCE).

with Duan Yucai and Wang Niansun as the towering figures.History of linguistics inherent in names: "Good government consists in the ruler being a ruler. and unrestricted (thing). language is not in accordance with the truth of things. The efforts of three generations of grammarians culminated in the book of the Persian linguist Sibāwayhi (c. R. are X and Y identical or is X a subclass of Y. Xun Zi (3d century BCE) revisits the principle of zhengming. But the first Chinese grammar. For this reason. and also related to philosophical speculation on philosophical languages and the origin of .g. Luo Changpei. The Western comparative method was brought into China by Bernard Karlgren.3). the earliest grammatical treatises on Arabic are often written by non-native speakers. In his book he distinguished phonetics from phonology. who also helped lay the foundation of modern Chinese linguistics. after Buddhism had become popular in China. However. The last great philologist of the era was Zhang Binglin. In De vulgari eloquentia ("On the Eloquence of Vernacular"). Other linguistic works of the same period concerning the vernaculars include the First Grammatical Treatise (Icelandic) or the Auraicept na n-Éces (Irish). 177 Middle Ages Middle East Due to the rapid expansion of Islam in the 8th century. His grammar was based on the Latin (prescriptive) model. his emphasis is on rectifying language to correctly reflect reality. 117 AH). The ancient commentators on the classics paid much attention to syntax and the use of particles.13.11. The study of phonology in China began late. Europe The Irish Sanas Cormaic 'Cormac's Glossary' is Europe's first etymological and encyclopedic dictionary in any non-Classical language. the father being a father. Important modern Chinese linguists include Y. The Renaissance and Baroque period saw an intensified interest in linguistics. 479-221 BCE). consider that ming (名 "name") may refer to three kinds of shi (實 "actuality"): type universals (horse). Philological studies flourished during the Qing Dynasty. when Gongsun Longzi (4th century BCE) questions if in copula statements (X is Y). individual (John). Sibawayh made a detailed and professional description of Arabic in 760 in his monumental work. e. If names be not correct. The rime dictionary is a type of dictionary arranged by tone and rime.. This is consistent with a more "conventional" view of word origins (yueding sucheng 約 定 俗 成). notably for the purpose of Bible translations by the Jesuits. Dante expanded the scope of linguistic enquiry from Latin/ Greek to include the languages of the day. This is the famous paradox "a white horse is not a horse". Al-kitab fi al-nahw (‫ ." (Analects 12. in the modern sense of the word. what is the reality implied by a name? The later Mohists or the group known as School of Names (ming jia. but instead of rectifying behaviour to suit the names. many people learned Arabic as a lingua franca. Chao. in which the pronunciations of characters are indicated by fanqie spellings. The earliest grammarian who is known to us is ʿAbd Allāh ibn Abī Isḥāq al-Ḥaḍramī (died 735-736 CE. the first scholar to reconstruct Middle Chinese and Old Chinese with Latin alphabet (not IPA). Rime tables were later produced to aid the understanding of fanqie. 760-793).. was produced by Ma Jianzhong (late 19th century). and the son being a son. They adopt a realist position on the name-reality connection universals arise because "the world itself fixes the patterns of similarity and difference by which things should be divided into kinds". Li Fanggui and Wang Li. and was influenced by the Indian tradition.[6] The philosophical tradition is well known for conundra resembling the sophists. The Modistae or "speculative grammarians" in the 13th century introduced the notion of universal grammar. the minister being a minister.ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺎﺏ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﺤﻮ‬The Book on Grammar).

and cognitive approaches have steadily gained ground. In his The Sanscrit Language (1786). Of this observation he said that it allowed language to make "infinite use of finite means" (Über den Dualis 1827). Descriptive linguistics In Europe there was a parallel development of structural linguistics. and Celtic languages. Chapter 16. Notes [1] Staal. Latin. It was only in the late 19th century that the Neogrammarian approach of Karl Brugmann and others introduced a rigid notion of sound law.. pragmatic. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. anticipating a theme that was to become central in the formal work on syntax and semantics of language in the 20th century. F. In the 1820s. The Blackwell Companion to Hinduism Blackwell Publishing. Sir William Jones proposed that Sanskrit and Persian had resemblances to classical Greek. "Mohist Canons" (http:/ / plato. From this idea sprung the field of comparative linguistics and historical linguistics. Lord Monboddo analyzed numerous languages and deduced logical elements of the evolution of human language. with a concern for finding their common roots and tracing their development. 2003. published posthumously by his students. 599 pages ISBN 0-631-21535-2. J. North-Holland Publishing Company. During the second World War. functional. htm [4] http:/ / plato.History of linguistics language. ISBN 978-0-631-21535-6. stanford. Some of his early concepts have been validated and are considered correct today. edu/ entries/ mohist-canons/ ). Leonard Bloomfield and several of his students and colleagues developed teaching materials for a variety of languages whose knowledge was needed for the war effort. 1986. org/ works. The Fidelity of Oral Tradition and the Origins of Science. Gothic. stanford. Through the 19th century. William Stokoe. . which became a recognized discipline in most American universities only after the war. his approach has been widely adopted in other fields under the broad term "Structuralism". in Gavin D. a linguist from Gallaudet University published an analysis [7] which proved that American Sign Language fits the criteria for a natural language. European linguistics centered on the comparative history of the Indo-European languages. com/ dictionary-linguistic-principles-Gallaudet-publication/ dp/ B0007DK1X6 . and the romantic or animist theses of Johann Gottfried Herder and Johann Christoph Adelung remained influential well into the 19th century. edu/ entries/ stoicism/ #Log [5] http:/ / schmidhauser. 357-358 [3] http:/ / plato-dialogues. 178 Modern linguistics Modern linguistics does not begin until the late 18th century. both in the United States and in Europe. This work led to an increasing prominence of the field of linguistics. In 1965. ed. [7] http:/ / www. Flood. amazon. a Swiss professor of Indo-European and general linguistics whose lectures on general linguistics. p. Other subfields From roughly 1980 onwards. us/ apollonius/ [6] Chris Fraser. 27 [2] The science of language. p. Wilhelm von Humboldt observed that human language was a rule-governed system. His thinking was interleaved with his precursive concepts of biological evolution. Historical linguistics In the 18th century James Burnett. influenced most strongly by Ferdinand de Saussure. set the direction of European linguistic analysis from the 1920s on.

Landmarks in Linguistic Thought III: The Arabic Linguistic Tradition. Most people would agree that in all of these areas it is meaningful to describe some usages as. to teach what is perceived within a particular society to be correct forms of language.[4] The basis of linguistic research is text (corpus) analysis and field studies. It may imply a view that some forms are incorrect or improper or illogical. London: Equinox. • Pieter A. Wiley-blackwell. prescription may produce neologisms. Landmarks in Linguistic Thought II: The Western Tradition in the Twentieth Century. grammar. London: Routledge. (ed. London: Longman. Aims The main aims of linguistic prescription are to specify standard language forms either generally (what is Standard English?) or for specific purposes (what style and register is appropriate in. are often contrasted with the alternative approach of descriptive linguistics. ISBN 0-415-06396-5. prescription might (appear to) be resistant to language change. Lehmann.utexas. pronunciation. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-509834-X Linguistic prescription In linguistics. Invitation to Linguistics. • Bimal Krishna Matilal (1990). • Frederick J. • Randy Allen Harris (1995) The Linguistics Wars. Despite apparent opposition. and Talbot J.[3] Prescriptive approaches to language.[3] since comprehensive descriptive accounts must take into account speaker attitudes. prescription and description can inform each other. Its aims may be to establish a standard language. grammar. . • Kees Versteegh (1997). a legal brief?) and to formulate these in such a way as to make them easily taught or learned. Nigel Love. The Western Classical Tradition in Linguistics. both of which are descriptive activities. One main aim of prescription is to draw workable guidelines for language users seeking advice in such matters. Taylor (2001). The History of Linguistics (http://www. Seuren (1998).[2] Normative practices may prescribe on such aspects of language use as spelling. ISBN 0-582-24994-5.cfm).) (1967). • Roy Harris and Talbot J. for example. The Word and the World: India's Contribution to the Study of Language. • W. Joseph. pronunciation and register. or lacking in communicative but description includes each researcher’s observations of his or her own language usage. ISBN 0-19-562515-3. London. semantics. Taylor (1989). Delhi. ISBN 0-253-34840-4. ISBN 0-415-00290-7. Indiana University Press. • Robert Henry Robins (1997).edu/cola/centers/lrc/books/readT. or of low aesthetic value. if the usage preferences are radical. Oxford University Press.html). M. prescription or prescriptivism is the practice of championing one variety or manner of speaking of a language against another. concerned with how the prescriptivist recommends language should be used. Linguistic Society of America. New York: Routledge. Western linguistics: An historical introduction. London: Routledge. while some understanding of how language is actually used is necessary for prescription to be effective. Doubleday & Company. P.History of linguistics 179 References • Keith Allan (2007). which observes and records how language actually is used. Landmarks in Linguistic Thought: The Western Tradition from Socrates to Saussure. ISBN 0-415-11553-1. • John E. ISBN 0-631-20891-7. and syntax. ISBN 0-385-06584-1. A Short History of Linguistics.lsadc. or to advise on effective communication. Linguistic prescriptivism includes judgments on what usages are socially proper and politically correct. • Mario Pei (1965). ISBN 0-415-14062-5.[5] Prescription can apply to most aspects of language: spelling. Newmeyer (2005). A Reader in Nineteenth Century Historical Indo-European Linguistics (http:// www. If usage preferences are conservative.[1] Sometimes it is informed by linguistic purism. at least. inappropriate in particular contexts.

Shoots & Leaves. This reform has remained so controversial that in a plebiscite in Schleswig Holstein in 1998. Some authorities may be self-appointed campaigners whose rules are propagated in the popular press. has its own Office québécois de la langue française. The Académie française in Paris is an example of a national body The Royal Spanish Academy. Examples of prescriptive bodies include: • The Académie française is the national language-governing academic body whose recommendations. • The Canadian province of Québec. George Orwell in Politics and the English Language (1946) criticized the use of euphemisms and convoluted phrasing as a means of hiding insincerity. powerfully. A complementary aim of linguistic prescription may be the imposition of a political ideology. Writers or communicators who wish to use words clearly. believing that these may make their communications more widely understood and unambiguous. "people-first language" as advocated by disability rights organizations).g. • The German-speaking nations (Germany.Linguistic prescription Standardized languages are useful for interregional communication: speakers of divergent dialects may understand a standard language used in broadcasting more readily than they would understand each other's dialects. which argues for stricter adherence to prescriptive punctuation rules. Orwell's fictional "Newspeak" (1949) is a parody of ideologically motivated linguistic prescriptivism. where French is perceived to be particularly threatened by the incursion of English. or effectively often use prescriptive rules. Austria. Some were met with significant political dissent. such as serial commas. politically motivated linguistic prescription recommended by various advocacy groups had considerable influence on language use in the context of political correctness. normative spelling usages for their respective varieties of the language by statute with the German orthography reform of 1996. though legally unenforceable. imposing special rules for anti-sexist. as in the case of the German orthography reform of 1996. During the second half of the 20th century. their dictionaries are widely used as prescriptive authorities by the community at large. however the . are respected for maintaining standard French. if needed. have phases of fashion and are authoritative to the extent that they attract a significant following. anti-racist or generically anti-discriminatory language (e. In some language communities. Other kinds of authorities exist in specific settings. Madrid whose recommendations are widely respected though not legally enforceable. It can be argued that such a lingua franca. Such an authority may be a prominent writer or educator such as Henry Fowler. 180 Authority Prescription presupposes an authority whose judgment may be followed by other members of a speech community. for example.[6] The Duden grammar (first edition 1880) has a similar status for German. Although dictionary makers often see their work as purely descriptive. the vast majority of voters decided that the reform was not to be executed in the Federal State. recent spelling reforms were devised by teams of linguists commissioned by the government and were then implemented by statute. as in "proper Cantonese pronunciation". In Germany and the Netherlands. Popular books such as Lynne Truss's Eats. such as publishers laying down a house style which. may either prescribe or proscribe particular spellings or grammatical forms. but the desire to formulate and define it is very widespread in most parts of the world. Switzerland) established national. whose Modern English Usage defined the standard for British English for much of the 20th century. will evolve by itself. Liechtenstein. linguistic prescription is regulated formally.

standardized spelling norms were compulsory for Dutch government publications — yet popular and mass communications media language applied an adapted spelling reform. Like-wise. see Wordlist of the Dutch language and the White Booklet. its resolutions and recommendations are acknowledged by the Romanian state and other entities where Romanian is officially recognised (e. Traditional Chinese and Simplified Chinese characters . strict adherence to prescribed spellings and pronunciations was and remains of great spiritual importance.. This is most commonly achieved by providing the conventional orthographic representation of the English translation of a word alongside the IPA transcription of the word's pronunciation when spoken by a native speaker. Islamic naming conventions and greetings are notable examples of linguistic prescription being prerequisite to spiritual righteousness. but they nonetheless rely on some shared orthographic representation in order to preserve semantic identities with data sets. Early historical trends in literacy and alphabetization were closely tied to the influence of various religious institutions: Western Christianity propagated the Latin alphabet. the language is officially called "Moldovan" and it is regulated by the Academy of Sciences of Moldova. • The standard of Spanish is maintained in 21 countries by the Real Academia Española in affiliation with the Association of Spanish Language Academies. The spoken and written language usages of the authorities (state..Linguistic prescription Schleswig-Holstein parliament overruled this decision in 1999. military. the Hebrew alphabet. the style of language used in ritual also differs from quotidian speech. In the Republic of Moldova. the only country besides Romania where Romanian is the official language of the state. Linguists largely disregard native writing systems. Der Spiegel) or not at all. through its Institute of Linguistics. • In the Netherlands. replacing the conventional symbols of the language they are researching with phonetic transcriptions. Axel Springer AG. Islam. standard language usage includes archaisms and honorific colours. 181 Origins Historically.[7] Special ceremonial languages known only to a select few spiritual leaders within a community are found throughout the world. see social class. church) are preserved as the standard language to emulate for social success. was the de facto standard in German spelling.g. Many major German newspapers chose to implement the reform only in part (e. the Devanagari script. linguistic prescriptivism originates in a standard language when a society establishes social stratification and a socio-economic hierarchy.g. and Hinduism. orthographic rules for the consistent transcription of linguistic outputs allows for a large number of speakers to understand written communications with minimal difficulty. although officially only mandatory in government and educational use. the European Union and Vojvodina). To distinguish itself from contemporary colloquial language. Another commonly cited example of prescriptive language usage closely associated with social propriety is the system of Japanese honorifics. • The Albanian standard language (the Tosk variety) is regulated by the Social Sciences and Albanological Section of the Academy of Sciences of Albania. Eastern Orthodoxy. ending a period where unified German spelling (German: Rechtschreibung.[8] In certain traditions. the Greek and Cyrillic alphabets. • The regulating body for standard Romanian is the Romanian Academy. • During the era of the Soviet Union the Union of Soviet Writers policed the Russian language with prescriptive linguistics to establish a standardized Russian language. the Arabic alphabet. verbatim: right [=correct] writing). When a culture develops a writing system. Judaism.

However. i. but only when the forms being thus defended were in any case the norm in the prestige form of English. Such choices are often strategic. RP has now lost much of its status as the Anglophone . as with the prohibition of swear words. in the prohibition of some alternate form such that it is rejected in favor of the desired form.[12] In particular. Modern prescription of the type that is in school textbooks draws heavily on the results of descriptive linguistic analysis. Linguistic prestige is a central research Ptolemaic hieroglyphics from the Temple topic within sociolinguistics. Robert Lowth is frequently cited as one who did this. prescription also involves conscious choices. languages with a significant number of speakers demonstrate some degree of social codification through speaker adherence or non-adherence to prescriptive rules.Linguistic prescription 182 Government bureaucracy tends toward prescriptivism as a means of enforcing functional continuity. prescriptivism is often subject to criticism.. Similar is the condemnation of expletives which offend against religion.[15] Frequently. in fact. Problems While many people would agree that some kinds of prescriptive teaching or advice are desirable. even if this "lower prestige" language is their native one. but. including highly regarded books like Strunk and White's Elements of Style. Sources From the earliest attempts at prescription in classical times. linguists point out that popular books on English usage written by journalists or novelists (e. English prescription was based on the norms of Latin grammar..[13][14] One problem is that prescription has a tendency to favour the language of one particular region or social class over others. distinct languages in multilingual regions. if not all. and this can become politically controversial—see below. Such prescriptivism dates from ancient Egypt. Sometimes they may be based on entirely subjective judgments about what constitutes good taste. as for example Great Britain's Received Pronunciation. Many linguists.g. wherein speakers make a conscious decision not to use a dialect of language with a prestige level perceived to be lower than that of an alternative dialect or language in certain social contexts. where bureaucrats preserved the spelling of the Middle Kingdom of Egypt into the Ptolemaic period through the standard usage of Egyptian hieroglyphics.[11] It is true that analogies with Latin were sometimes used as substantiating arguments. Simon Heffer's Strictly English : the correct way to write . but this is doubtful. he specifically condemned "forcing the English under the rules of a foreign Language". it is very rare for a form to be prescribed which does not already exist in the language. aimed at maximizing clarity and precision in language use.[10] It is sometimes claimed that in centuries past. Prestige level disparity often leads to the phenomenon known as diglossia. or more recently of language which is not considered politically correct.e. As prescription generally manifests itself negatively. are highly skeptical of the quality of advice given in many usage guides. Sometimes there is a conscious decision to promote the language of one class or region within a language community.[9] Most. a standard dialect is associated with the upper class. such as Geoffrey Pullum and other posters to Language Log. and thus militates against linguistic diversity. and why it matters) often make basic errors in linguistic analysis. The desire to avoid language which refers too specifically to matters of sexuality or toilet hygiene may result in a sense that the words themselves are obscene. Prescription can be motivated by an ethical position. grammarians have observed what is in fact usual in a prestige variety of a language and based their norms upon this. privileging some existing forms over others. Notions of linguistic prestige apply to different of Kom Ombo dialects of the same language and also to separate.

that it is in his power to change sublunary nature. While these have a more democratic base. Although prescribing authorities almost invariably have clear ideas about why they make a particular choice. Today the construction has become common in most varieties of English. or African-American Vernacular English may feel the standard is slanted against them. Australian English. With this hope. A second problem with prescription is that prescriptive rules quickly become entrenched and it is difficult to change them when the language changes. Thus there is a tendency for prescription to be excessively conservative. sounds are too volatile and subtile for legal restraints. being replaced by the dual standards of General American and British NRP (non-regional pronunciation). but this can be difficult to do. Machiavel. and with equal justice may the lexicographer be derided. prescription was used consciously as a political tool. While competent authorities tend to make careful statements. however. today. or Caro. Hiberno-English.) A classic example from 18th-century England is Robert Lowth's tentative suggestion that preposition stranding in relative clauses sounds colloquial. The French language has visibly changed under the inspection of the academy. a view which linguists reject. A further problem is the difficulty of specifying legitimate criteria. who being able to produce no example of a nation that has preserved their words and phrases from mutability. but their vigilance and activity have hitherto been vain. popular pronouncements on language are apt to condemn. 183 . prescription can appear to be antithetical to natural language evolution. and a prohibition is no longer supported by observation. The prescriptive rule was based on a descriptive observation. and to lash the wind. from century to century. When in the early 19th century. academies have been instituted. unwilling to measure its desires by its strength. they often appear arbitrary to others who do not understand or are not sympathetic to the goals of the authorities. repeated in the school room this may become a ruling that the non-standard form is automatically wrong. Judgments based on the subjective associations of a word are more problematic. they are still standards which exclude large parts of the English-speaking world: speakers of Scottish English. In this way.Linguistic prescription standard. there is the problem of inappropriate dogmatism. (Linguists may accept that a form is incorrect if it fails to communicate. we laugh at the elixir that promises to prolong life to a thousand years. to enchain syllables. For these reasons. and the choices are therefore seldom entirely arbitrary. commented as follows on the tendency of some prescription to resist language change: When we see men grow old and die at a certain time one after another. the main motivation was that this construction was not in fact a frequent feature of the varieties of English favoured by those prescribing. Thus wise prescriptive advice may identify a form as non-standard and suggest it be used with caution in some contexts. and repulse intruders. from this grew a grammatical dogma that a sentence should never end with a preposition. by Le Courayer to be un peu passé. are equally the undertakings of pride. but not simply because it diverges from a norm. Samuel Johnson. prescriptive use advised against the split infinitive. 1772 the avenues of their languages. prescription usually attempts to avoid this pitfall. and secure it from corruption and decay. Finally. ca. to guard Samuel Johnson.[16][17] Thus prescription has clear political consequences. and clear the world at once from folly. the stile of Amelot's translation of Father Paul is observed. Judgments which seek to resolve ambiguity or increase the ability of the language to make subtle distinctions are easier to defend. to retain fugitives. and no Italian will maintain that the diction of any modern writer is not perceptibly different from that of Boccace. some writers have argued that linguistic prescription is foolish or futile. and affectation. the rule endured long after the justification for it had disappeared. shall imagine that his dictionary can embalm his language. although this is usually not the intention of those formulating the rules. However. In the past. vanity.

Karol (2006) Language misconceived: arguing for applied cognitive sociolinguistics (http:/ / books. Archived from the original (http:/ / bib. South Asia. Retrieved 2011-03-30. "Genius Loci" (http:/ / www. OCLC 729837512. . generally. 984–85 [16] McArthur (1992) pp. It was met with the opposition of Cesare Beccaria and the Verri brothers (Pietro and Alessandro). the introduction to the Merriam–Webster's Dictionary of English Usage (1994) reports that: “Possible is sometimes considered to be an absolute adjective”. [12] Pullum. irb. upon being established as such.[20] Another typical criticism directed toward prescriptivism is verbosity. 2011 [15] McArthur (1992) pp. ac. English grammar: not for debate (http:/ / languagelog. 979. The Alphabet: A Key to the History of Mankind (1947. reprinted 1996). upenn. com/ books?id=wwvOjiqyU-EC& pg=PA259) [2] Janicki. which through their journal Il Caffè programmatically insulted the Accademia and its pedantic. ISBN 0-521-23228-7) for North American examples of ritual speech. they are prescriptively exclusive of other Anglophone languages such as Scottish English. Australian English. edu/ nll/ ?p=2623). 2011 [14] Pullum. google.259 (http:/ / books.. archaic grammar in the name of Galileo and Newton and of a modern and cosmopolitan intellectual thought. 850–53 [17] Fowler’s Modern English Usage. 2011 [13] Pullum. by the early 20th century. ldc. of contemporary linguistics. in the 18th and 19th centuries. . Ed. Second Edition. retrieved July 25. Notes [1] John Edwards (2009) Language and Identity: An introduction p. . 505–06 [18] http:/ / www. Geoffrey (November 15. ISBN 81-215-0748-0 [9] Allen. 1999. Middle Egyptian — An Introduction to the Language and Culture of Hieroglyphs.[4][19] Linguistic description (observation and explanation of how language exists and is used) establishes conceptual categories without establishing formal usage rules (prescriptions). 107. [20] Alberto Arbasino. retrieved July 25. OL{{{1}}}. arts. Retrieved 23 August 2012. 2009). Geoffrey (September 11. the results of which formed the bases. 2010). com/ books?id=lWAz__vpe88C& pg=PA155) p. gutenberg. LCCN 2011520778. upenn. com/ article/ 50-Years-of-Stupid-Grammar/ 25497/ ). condemning Richard Bentley's "corrections" of some of Milton's constructions. retrieved July 25. "50 Years of Stupid Grammar Advice" (http:/ / chronicle.. Rotulus Universitas. Oxford University Press:1965. 58–68. Ernest Gowers. 794 [11] A Short Introduction to English Grammar. html) (in Italian). Jezik_i_nacionalizam. 2010). google. James P.Linguistic prescription — Preface to a Dictionary of the English Language [18] (Project Gutenberg) 184 Prescription and description Linguistic prescription is typically contrasted with the alternative approach linguistic description. Jezik i nacionalizam [Language and Nationalism] (http:/ / www. hr/ datoteka/ 475567. edu/ nll/ ?p=2780). 982–83 [6] McArthur (1992) p. . 1999) ISBN 0-521-65312-6 [10] McArthur (1992) p. pp. In 1572 the fundation of the Accademia della Crusca set the model for future purist and prescriptivist institutions in Europe. 286 entry for "Descriptivism and prescriptivism" quotation: "Contrasting terms in linguistics. and AAVE.155 [3] McArthur (1992) [4] McArthur (1992) p. webcitation. Marianne Mithun. [8] David Diringer. Geoffrey (April 17. Snježana (2010) (in Serbo-Croatian). uk/ italian/ gadda/ Pages/ resources/ archive/ classics/ arbasinogeniuslocii. Strictly incompetent: pompous garbage from Simon Heffer (http:/ / languagelog. ISBN 978-953-188-311-5. ed. About normative rules. (Cambridge University Press. Zagreb: Durieux. . pdf) on 8 July 2012. org/ 690BiBe4T). ldc. The Chronicle of Higher Education. The discipline of modern linguistics originated in the 16th and 17th centuries from the comparative method of lexicography that was principally about classical languages. org/ etext/ 5430 [19] Kordić. Despite the demotic intent of General American and Non-regional Pronunciation Englishes as “standard language”. Hiberno-English. 414 [7] See. descriptive research concentrated upon modern languages." [5] McArthur (1992) pp. pp. . The Languages of Native North America (Cambridge University Press. p.

linguistic infrastructure Aronoff. Power and Linguistic Theory (pdf format) (http://people. (United States). syntax Arisaka Hideyo (Japan. comparative lexicography Abdul Haq. lexicography Ajduković. Serbian language Albright. Ancient Macedonian language. 1933–). Keith (Australia). English language Aikhenvald. Tocharian languages a paper about descriptivism and prescriptivism by Geoffrey Pullum. 1821–1868). • Language Police (http://wiki. William Foxwell (United States. Oxford University Press • Strunk and White's The Elements of Style Further reading • Simon Blackburn. (Germany/United States. 1949–). Arthur S.Linguistic prescription 185 References • McArthur. philosophy of language. ladin language • Austin. Jovan (Serbia. comparative linguistics. Carl. 1870–1961). 1968–). Mervyn Coleridge (Trinidad & Tobago/Jamaica. 1957–). A • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Abel. speech act . "descriptive meaning". Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. pp. 1948–). Gregory D. John Langshaw (UK. Adam Jack (UK. Mark (Canada. Germany. morphology • Ascoli. but these two uses of the word are distinct (and one does not have to be a polyglot in order to be an academic linguist). Graziadio Isaia (Italy. George J. lexicography Anderson. Urdu language Abramson. 1908–1952). Maulvi (India. creole languages Amerias (Greece). 1996 [1994]. phonetics Adams.ucsc. (United States).ling. 1829–1907). typology. or a grammarian (a scholar of grammar). Slavic languages. Tom (Ed. oriental languages. 1921–1998). sociolinguistics.oxus. 1911–1960). semantics Alleyne. German language. Munda languages Aoun. Semitic languages Allan. at Kerim's Wiki • Prescriptive versus descriptive grammar (http://www. Douglas Q. html#prescriptive) List of linguists A linguist in the academic sense is a person who studies natural language (an academic discipline known as linguistics). Russian language Aitken. Japanese language Aristar. 1891–1971). English language.) (1992) The Oxford Companion to the English Language. Russian language. the word is sometimes also used to refer to a polyglot (one who knows several languages).upenn. Alexandra Yurievna (Russia. Amazonian languages. Substrata. Joseph (Lebanon/United States). Papuan languages.S.[1] The following is a list of linguists in the academic sense. Ambiguously. (United States). Anthony (South Africa/United States. Hebrew language. contact linguistics. 101–102 for possible difficulty of separating the descriptive and evaluative Additional resources • Ideology.

machine translation. phonetics Bolinger. Nahuatl language Barnhart. 1959–). discourse analysis Bartlett. languages of Africa Bloch. 1915–1975). Ursula (United States). 1865–1947). phonology. language acquisition Bhartrihari (India. Sino-Tibetan languages. Charles (Switzerland. 1954–). 450–510). phonetics. 1929–). (United States. indigenous languages of the Americas Boersma. language typology. categorial grammar Barker. Lexicography. 1918–1951). Tibetan language Bello. 1947–2004). Yehoshua (Israel. Charles Frambach (United States. 1965–). African languages Benedict. phraseology Bardovi-Harlig. Julian Charles (United States. tense and aspect. Japanese language Bloch. Jules (France. English language. Native American languages. (United States). historical linguistics Bopp. Eliezer (Israel). Spanish language. 1858–1942). English language Bowerman. Kathleen (United States. neurolinguistics Ben-Yehuda. languages of India Bloomfield. 1887–1949). Emmon (United States. Derek (United States. 1933–2007). phonology) • Brugmann. Balthasar (Switzerland. syntax Bright. 1827–1875). 1914–2003). Haisla language Badshah Munir Bukhari (Pakistan. Leonard (United States. semantics. lexicography. historical linguistics Berlitz. Sanskrit. phonetics . Indian languages Barlow. Robert (United States). creole languages. Paul K. syntax Browman. Mary E. 1805–1886). Robert (United States). Melissa psycholinguistics. Allan R. syntax. comparative linguistics • Bucholtz. Polish language Beckman. 1954–) second language acquisition. Baudouin de Courtenay. English language Barnhart. language acquisition Berlitz. South Asian languages Brody. Austronesian languages Boas. Indo-European languages. Tai–Kadai languages. (Philip) Muhammad Abd-al-Rahman (United States. Language acquisition Bresnan. Mark (United States). Bengali language 186 B • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Bach. Urdu language. Catherine (phonetics. Nostratic languages. phonology Beckwith. phonology. generative grammar Bally. 1943–). 1941–). pragmatics Bar-Hillel. (United States). 1930–). Kiranti languages Bickerton. 1926–). sign language. 1945–). 1907–1992). Franz (United States. Paul (Netherlands. Sanskrit Bickel. 1931–2005). French language. Mohawk language. 1880–1953). 1907–1965). Joan (United States. Spanish language Bomhard. 1945–). 1791–1867). Lionel (United States). lexicography. Asian languages. Karl (Germany. Andrés (Venezuela). Mary (United States). English language Barsky. Philology Bellugi.List of linguists • Azad. M. Bernard (United States. Anthony (UK. Wilhelm Heinrich Immanuel (Germany. structural linguistics Blust. (United States. languages of Northern Pakistan and Afghanistan Baker. 1978–) applied linguistics. Christopher (United States. John Russell (United States. Indo-European languages. Franz (Germany. 1852–1921). 1928–2006). comparative linguistics Boyd. Jan Niecisław (Poland. Maximilian Delphinius (United States. 1917–1993). David K. Revival of the Hebrew language Bender. Michael (Hungary. Robert (United States. 1845–1929). sociolinguistics • Burgess. 1849–1919). Robert Hayward (United States. William (United States. origin of language Bleek. Humayun (Bangladesh. Dwight Le Merton (United States.

Andrew (Canada. (United States). (United States). Papuan languages Cardona. Eugen (Romania/Germany. syntax Caro. etymology Collitz. 1860–1948). 1891–1970). language change Culioli. 1951–). historical linguistics Comrie. Germanic languages Cohen. applied linguistics Cuervo. Austronesian languages. 1924–). 1957–). Hermann (Germany/United States. 1844–1911). Linear B Chafe. Chinese language Chakrabarti. 1938–). 1902–1986). Bernard (UK. Paul S. syntax. Elizabeth (Canada). 1947–). David (UK. Michael George (Australia). cognitive linguistics. Jack (Canada. Noam (United States. phonology. Niger–Congo languages. 1941–). George (United States. Lina (Lebanon). 1938–). 1855–1935). John (UK. Jean-François (France. Guy (UK. syntax. 1929–1985). 1956–). Lebanese Arabic Chyet. Santali language. Una (Denmark. 1890–1977). 1969–). syntax. constructed languages Carnie. 1853–1936). Rudolf (Germany. 1843–1909). (Colombia. syntax. 1931–). Kate (Australia). English language. 1921–2002). Australian languages. cognitive linguistics Crystal. Nakh-Daghestanian languages Croft. Bengali language Choijinzhab (PR China. George Oliver. 1790–1832). semantics Chao Yuen Ren (PR China. Wolfgang (Germany. William (United States. Antoine (France. Denis (France). Rufino Jose (Colombia. 1923–1981). (United States. 1920–1998). Spanish language. Miguel A. 1927–). Warren (United States. Suniti Kumar (India. Byomkes (India. Mongolian language Chomsky. languages of India • Burridge. general linguistics Curme. Egyptian hieroglyphs Chambers. sociolinguistics Chatterji. Indo-European studies Cowper.List of linguists • Burling. English language . applied linguistics Coşeriu. Lyle (United States). Romance languages Cowgill. 1928–). universal grammar Choueiri. applied linguistics. 1938–). Peter W. syntax Creissels. William Henry (United States. Michael L. language death. Sr. Icelandic language Chadwick. typology Cook. German language. (United States. Colombian Spanish Carpenter. Arthur (Australia. Bengali language. Wallace (United States. 1926–). syntax. English language 187 C • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Campbell. Germanic languages • Butzkamm. Indo-European studies Carnap. Mesoamerican languages Capell. syntax. Colombian Spanish Culicover. phonology. Spanish language. comparative linguistics Champollion. Robbins (United States. Native American languages Canger. 1892–1982). 1942–). Kurdish language Clyne.

historical linguistics • Elgin. historical linguistics . 1943–). (Austria. Vladimir (Russia. historical linguistics.List of linguists 188 D • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Dal. 1745–1801). Pirahã language • Everson. Terrence (United States). Konrad (Germany. transformational grammar • Ellis. David (United States). 1829–1911). Tibeto-Burman languages. (United States. Czech language. 1951–). 1930–). Tsimshian language E • Edmondson. Dzongkha language Duden. Berthold (Germany. Ahmad Hasan (Pakistan. morphology. Mon–Khmer languages van Dijk. syntax. Peter T. Rod (UK). origin of language. writing systems. Jerold A. Ray C. Murray Barnson (United States. neurolinguistics • Emeneau. languages of Africa. second language acquisition • Elman. 1801–1872). Robert Malcolm Ward (Australia. Tevfik (Turkey 1904–1992). lexicography Doke. Nancy (United States). Daniel Leonard (United States. constructed languages. Lamba language Dolgopolsky. writing systems Deacon. Indo-European languages. Australian languages. syntax Dozier. John Asher (United States). George (Netherlands). pragmatics. German language Dunn. North American languages. language change. 1939–). Persian language Delbrück. Native American languages. text linguistics van Driem. language death. Nostratic languages Dorian. cognitive linguistics Dehkhoda. 1879–1959). Gérard (United States). 1936–). Ali-Akbar (Iran. 1916–1971). phonology. (United States). Ubykh language • Evans. 1893–1980). lexicography • Everett. (United States). Michael (United States/Ireland. Edward P. 1753–1829). Scottish Gaelic Dougherty. symbiosism. discourse analysis. Jr. Christopher (United States). Austronesian languages Diderichsen. 1905–1964) Danish Diffloth. language processing. Otto (Germany. 1963–). Josef (Czech Republic. transformational grammar. 1904–2005). languages of Southeast Asia • Edwards. (United States). (United States. comparative linguistics Dempwolff. Nicholas (Australia. syntax. Jeffrey L. Tai–Kadai languages. 1871–1938). typology • Even-Shoshan. computational linguistics Dowty. Aharon (Russia/Israel. 1920–2009). (United States). Russian language Dani. Wolfgang U. lexicography. semantics. text linguistics Dixon. 1956–) Indigenous Australian languages. South Asian languages Daniels. typology. languages of the Philippines Dressler. Bantu languages. Amazonian languages Dobrovský. Paul (Denmark. 1842–1922). Dravidian languages. lexicography. Mohegan language • Ehret. Papuan languages. lexicography. languages of Brazil. 1939–). Clement Martyn (South Africa. 1906–1984). Hebrew language. Suzette Haden (United States. linguist areas • Esenç. Teun Adrianus (Netherlands. Avraham (Belarus/Israel. Slavic languages. Jonathan.

(Herbert) Paul (UK/United States. Indo-Iranian languages. functionalism Giegerich. computational linguistics Goldstein. (Georgia. Talmy (Israel/United States. Czech language Geeraerts. syntax. Tangut language Gordon. Danish language Fishman. phonology Gong Hwang cherng (Republic of China. (United States). Halkomelem language Gamkrelidze. 1941–). David Heath (United States. syntax. psycholinguistics Goldsmith. 1929–). semantics Gebauer. Japanese language G • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Galloway. semantics. 1890–1960). Chinese language Goddard. cognitive linguistics. typology. phonetics. Germanic languages Goldberg. Louis Herbert (United States. Jan (Czech Republic. Alexandre (France). George Abraham (Ireland. 1950–). (United States. 1951–). R. theoretical linguistics. Hittite language Fromkin. Johannes (Germany. Heinz (Germany/UK). Old Chinese. Indo-European studies. historical linguistics Gode. prosody Fischer-Jørgensen. Gerald (UK. computational linguistics. cognitive linguistics. (USA. language contact Freiman. John Rupert (UK. Adele (United States. 1851–1941). Janet Dean (United States). 1963–). lexical semantics. John Anton (United States. constructed languages. 1906–1970). phonology Greenberg. Sociology of language Fiske. corpus linguistics. Sino-Tibetan languages. Victoria (United States. Dirk (Belgium. cuneiform script Gray. pragmatics. pragmatics Grierson. Eli (Denmark 1911–). 1934–2010). typology. 1929–). 1935–). language acquisition Goatly. 1936–). computational linguistics. Ives. Jeremiah Denis Mathias (United States. historical linguistics. Romain (France). pragmatics Goddard. Austronesian languages Ford. language universals. (Germany/United States. 1873–1958). 1926–). Amerindian languages. semantics. phonology. Thomas V. Willard (United States. origin of language Garnier. Howard. III (United States). 1918–1994). Austronesian languages. Jerry Alan (United States. sociolinguistics Givón. language of thought Foley. psycholinguistics. Charles J. Native American languages Friedrich. languages of India • Gries. lexicography Firth. 1970–). Iranian languages French. syntax. phonetics. syntax. 1908–2001). 1838–1907). phonology. phonology Gleason. Cliff (Australia). Andrew (UK). 1923–2000). languages of Africa Grice. psycholinguistics. 1831–1904). constructed languages Fujitani Nariakira (Japan. phonology François.List of linguists 189 F • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Fillmore. 1915–2001). semantics. Spanish language Fowler. phonology. Brent D. Louis M. Papuan languages. 1944–). English language. 1875–1955). English language. Joseph Harold (United States. syntax Fodor.H. Joshua (United States. Carol A. phonetics. 1893–1972). lexicography Giles. Eric (United States. ancient languages. semantics. Northern European languages. 1738–1779). 1879–1968). William (Australia). Aleksandr Arnoldovich (Poland/Russia. Alexander (Germany/United States. Jean Berko (United States). Icelandic language Fodor. Algonquian languages. Stefan Th. Georgian language Gans. phonetics. construction grammar . (United States). 1955–). Cyrus Herzl (United States. psycholinguistics. 1913–1988). Indo-European linguistics Gazdar.

sociolinguistics. Wilhelm (Germany. Nilotic languages • Hall. 1863–1939). Native American languages. Thai language. John Joseph (United States.. Kenneth Locke (United States. John A. contrastive linguistics • Hasan. semiology. 1906–1994). Richard Michael Ryan (United States. Tungusic languages. Zellig Sabbetai (Ukraine/United States. corpus linguistics. language contact. syntax • Hamp. 1785–1863). Native American languages. discourse analysis. linguistic anthropology • Gutiérrez Eskildsen. language extinction • Hartmann. Jan (Czech Republic). sociolinguistics. distributed morphology. Roy (UK. 1882–1945). Jr. Alexander (Belarus/United States. Robert A. Einar Ingvald (United States. Old Japanese language. typology. Reinhard Rudolf Karl (Austria/UK. phonology 190 H • Haarmann. Native American languages • Haq. Michael Alexander Kirkwood (UK/Australia. Mary Rosamund (United States. Saraiki language • Harder. 1899–1979). endangered languages. applied linguistics • Hammond. computational linguistics. 1931–). 1932–1987). 1855–1908). (United States. historical linguistics • Hayakawa. John Peabody (United States. functional linguistics • Harkavy. Spanish language. phonology. 1923–). 1906–1992). lexicography • Harley. 1925–). evolutionary linguistics. David Glenn (United States. Old Norse • Hawkins. David K. Romance languages. applied linguistics • Hashimoto Mantarō (Japan. phonology. phonology • Hays. Indo-European languages. Carl August (Sweden. 1922–).List of linguists • Grimm. 1940–). Jakob Ludwig Carl (Germany. historical linguistics • Hagberg. historical linguistics. Pidgins and Creoles • Halle. 1909–1992). language change. computational linguistics • Hajičová. phonetics • Harris. Samuel Ichiye (Canada/United States. Eva (Czech Republic). discourse analysis. psycholinguistics. historical linguistics. 1946–). morphology. neurolinguistics • Grube. 1810–1864). corpus linguistics • Hale. 1963–). language contact • Haas. 1931–). Peter (Denmark. (1935–). Gregory (United States). Semitic languages • Harrison. Heidi B. machine translation. cognitive linguistics • Hawkins. Rosario María (Mexico. historical linguistics. Harald (Germany. integrational linguistics • Harris. dependency grammar. (United States. cognitive science • Heath. comparative linguistics. 1928–1995). 1910–1996). morphology • Halliday. (UK). Michael (United States. systemic functional grammar. John Thomas (United States. sociolinguistics. ecolinguistics. 1957–). Bruce (United States). systemic functional grammar. linguistic anthropology . English language. Lezgian language • Haugen. Kira (United States). Morris (Latvia/United States. German language • Grinder. computational linguistics. Bruce Wayne (United States). phonology • Hall. Martin (Germany. structural linguistics. Nivkh language. (United States. syntax. 1920–). Scandinavian languages • Hajič. 1934–2001). (Pakistan. dialectology • Guy. sociocultural linguistics • Hall. 1927–1996). Jurchen language • Gumperz. Yiddish language. historical linguistics. 1915–1995). Indo-European studies. 1884–1961). Jeffrey (United States). syntax • Harrington. (United States. phonology. phonetics. Mehr Abdul. 1966–). Ruqaiya (India/Australia. 1969–). natural language processing. sociolinguistics. semantics • Hayes. Japanese language • Haspelmath. Eric P. 1950–). 1911–1997). 1938–) lexicography. Japanese language • Hashimoto Shinkichi (Japan.

lexical priming. syntax. Jay (USA. Pavle (Serbia. English language Hudson. South Slavic languages. August Wilhelm (Germany/Estonia. Iatmul language Jespersen. Roman Osipovich (Russia/Czech Republic/United States. Gerd (Germany). Basque language 191 Huddleston. phonology. syntax. 1862–1937). discourse analysis. John-Baptist (Germany. 1946–). 1787–1835). phonetics. phonology. 1942–). comparative linguistics. 1899–1965). textual interaction. Avestan language Jackson. Bernd (Germany. English language. phonology. Aleksei Ivanovich (Russia. comparative linguistics. semantics. Vyacheslav Vsevolodovich (Russia. Basque language. semantics Heine. Chinese language. computational linguistics. semantics Hobbs. Hans Henrich (Germany/United States). Indo-European linguistics Jaszczolt. 1952–2007). John Napoleon Brinton (United States. Charles Francis (United States. 1879–1952). 1939–). Tangut language Ivanov. Irene Roswitha (Germany/United States). 1907–2002). comparative linguistics Jendraschek. languages of Africa • Hymes. Vladislav Markovich (Ukraine/Russia. Lithuanian language. Indo-Iranian languages. structuralism. language contact Herbert. Daniel (UK. 1859–1937). 1927–). 1860–1943). Gunnar (Sweden. Turkish language. 1878–1937). James R. Japanese language. Iroquoian languages Hjelmslev. emergent grammar Hornstein.List of linguists • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Heim. 1939–). Old Chinese. Katarzyna (UK). 1904–1976). Richard (UK. Kathlamet language I • • • • Illich-Svitych. grammar. Louis (Denmark. Kazimieras (Lithuania. Abraham Valentine Williams (United States. Mundari language Hoijer. Brythonic languages. 1942–). 1934–1966). comparative linguistics. 1838–1923). Vatroslav (Croatia. Athabaskan languages. James Curtis (United States. Robert (Hungary/United States. languages of Africa. semantics. (UK. Hittite language. constructed languages • Johnson. Sanskrit Michael Hoey (United Kingdom). 1881–1967). Robert Knox (United States. Slavic languages Jakobson. 1947–). (United States. Norbert (United States). sociolinguistics. 1857–1928). phonetics . ancient languages von Humboldt. Paul (UK/United States). Serbocroatian language J • • • • • • • • • • • • Jackendoff. Gaelic languages Jacques. 1848–1908). Rgyalrongic languages. historical linguistics. 1737–1819). languages of Africa. Dell Hathaway (United States. 1945–). philosophy of language Jaunius. phonology. lexical semantics Jackson. syntax. historical linguistics. Turkic languages Jasanoff. sociolinguistics. Croatian language. Indo-European studies Ivić. Jerry R. syntax • Jones. (United States. sociolinguistics Hetzron. syntax Hrozný. computational linguistics. (UK/Australia). (United States. Wilhelm (Germany. pragmatics. Larry M. 1929–). Harry (United States. Estonian language. lexicography Hockett. evolutionary linguistics • Hyman. Otto (Denmark. United States) phonetics. Tangut language Jagić. lexicography Hurford. 1916–2000). Kenneth Hurlstone (UK. Rodney D. Tonkawa language Hopper. 1937–1997). corpus linguistics Hepburn. 1909–1991). morphology Hoffmann. phonology Jarring. Afro-Asiatic languages Hewitt. 1896–1982). 1815–1911). word grammar. 1924–1999). semantics Hock. linguistics in education Hupel. Nostratic languages Ivanov. Bedřich (Czech Republic. Guillaume (France). Ray (United States. David E.

generative grammar Krahe. Jaklin. Germanic languages Korsakov. Chinese language Knorozov. United States). Hungarian language. generative grammar Kaufman. 1945–). Japanese language Kazama Shinjirō (Japan. Martin (UK. 1916–2007). semantics Krauss. Native American languages Kasravi. Snježana (Croatia. comparative linguistics Joshi. 1922–1999). semantics. Dravidian languages • Kroeber. Henry (Czech Republic/United States. Patricia (United States). syntax. Alice (UK/United States. Alfred Louis (United States. 1931–2008). (United States. Bhadriraju (India. (United States). Phags-pa script Jurafsky. Serbian language. Mesoamerican languages Kay. 1928–). Indo-European studies. 1941–). sociolinguistics Kornai András (Hungary/United States. (United States). 1929–). 1746–1794). 1929–). 1890–1946). 1934–). Jan (Netherlands. 1941–). phonetics Keenan. Sir William (UK. James (United States). mathematical linguistics. David R. Eastern Yugur language. Richard (United States). Japanese language Kindaichi Kyōsuke (Japan. Linear B Kordić. theoretical linguistics. sign language Knechtges. Salishan languages Kiparsky. M. morphology. writing systems Kober. English language. 1874–1959). Germanic languages. semantics. 1879–1950). lexicography. English language. John Samuel (United States. Turkic languages. (United States. Illyrian language Krashen. evolutionary linguistics Klima. Japanese language Keating. 1932–2002). morphology. computational linguistics . construction grammar Kayne. Hans (Germany. syntax. syntax.List of linguists • • • • Jones. Ronald M. general semantics Koster. 1787–1864). Indo-European languages. Andrey Konstantinovich (Russia/Ukraine. transformational grammar Kazama Kiyozō (Japan. Yuri Valentinovich (Russia. phonology. second language acquisition Kratzer. East Asian languages. historical linguistics. Sanskrit. Hindi language Kenyon. Paul (United States). lexicography Kari. 1941–). 1933–2004). Ainu language Kinkade. Alfred Habdank Skarbek (Poland/United States. computational linguistics Junast (PR China. Ahmad (Iran. Vuk Stefanović (Serbia. Edward (United States). Angelika (United States/Germany). computational linguistics Kay. Samuel H. Simon (UK) computational linguistics. computational linguistics Karadžić. Aravind Krishana (India/United States. Terrence (United States). phonology Keyser. sociolinguistics Kindaichi Haruhiko (Japan. ancient languages. 1876–1960). Dale (United States. Maya hieroglyphics. 1964-). 1935–). Native American languages • Kucera. syntax Korzybski. Mongolian language. Serbo-Croatian language. Malagasy language Kellogg. Monguor language. morphology Kirby. syntax Kornfilt. 1882–1971). contact linguistics. Stephen (United States. typology. Samuel Jay (United States. 1898–1965). 1906–1950). 1957–). 1965–). (United States). computational linguistics 192 K • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Kaplan. Native American languages • Krishnamurti. phonology. Scott Fabius (United States). Michael E. Daniel (United States). 1925–). phonology. English language Kiesling. Paul (Finland/United States. Iranian languages Katz. morphology. Jerrold J. 1913–2004). Edward (United States.

Tangut language Li Fanggui (PR China/United States. Jerzy (Poland. Mayan languages • Lowman. 1918–2006). Old Chinese. Thomas Oden (United States). phonology Liberman. historical linguistics. 1933–). Tibetan language Li. English language Lakoff. morphology Kychanov. 1945–). speech perception. William (United States. Peter (United States). transformational grammar. Geoffrey (UK) applied linguistics. Howard (United States. Germanic languages Liberman. Rochelle (United States. Fran (Slovenia. Mark (United States). Jr. Winfred P. language evolution Lisker. semantics. Proto-Indo-European language Lepsius. historical linguistics. Dravidian languages • Local. Margaret (United States. Dravidian languages. 1932–). 1925–2006). (United States. Serbo-Croatian. Nubian languages. comparative linguistics. Austronesian languages. Native American languages. dialectology Kuroda Shigeyuki (Japan. Harlan (United States. Formosan languages. (United States. 1915–1995). Qiang. 1922–2010). 1941–). sign language Langacker. 1914–1998). semantics Lasnik. phonetics. August (Germany. computational linguistics Laycock. prosody Lieber. lexical semantics Lieberman. Philip (United States. etymology. 1902–1987). 1947–). 1927–). Mattole language. syntax Lawler. phonetics. sociolinguistics. Joan H. (UK/Netherlands). syntax. Baltic languages. 1895–1978). morphology. Stephen C. syntax • Lakoff. computational linguistics • Lambdin. Robert (United States. 1891–1992). phonology Lehmann. pragmatics Levstik. (Canada. Native American languages LaPolla. Egyptian language. Tangut language 193 L • • • • • Labov. 1981-). text messaging Leech. syntax. lexicography. (United States. phonetics . Robin Tolmach (United States. Chinese. stratificational grammar. English language Lees. syntax Kurath. Floyd Glenn (United States. 1934–2009). Guy Sumner. (United States). generative semantics. phonology Leskien. phonetics. English language. Native American languages. 2005). 1901–1984). lexicography Liberman. Charlton (United States. Slavic languages Levinson. —1988). Semitic languages. Indo-European languages. John (United States). phonetics. Paul Jen-kuei (Taiwan). 1909–1941). Japanese language. 1922–1996). John (UK. Hans (Austria/United States. speech. cognitive linguistics. 1954–). Phonetics. Alvin Meyer (United States. phonology. phonology. 1936-). Karl Richard (Germany. Ilse (United States. George P. 1916–2007). phonetics. Anatoly (Russia/United States). (United States. Egyptian language • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Lane.List of linguists • • • • • Kuno Susumu (Japan/United States. conversation analysis • Lounsbury. historical linguistics. Robert (United States. Ronald W. English language Lado. 1840–1916). applied linguistics. d. 1942–). 1831–1881). lexicography. 1942–). Sydney MacDonald (United States. Evgenij Ivanovich (Russia. Donald (Australia. cognitive linguistics Langdon. 1917–2000). syntax. morpho-syntax. Tai languages. 1810–1884). Peter Nielsen (UK/United States. endangered languages Laird. 1929–). Slovene language Li Fanwen (PR China. 1932–). Leigh (United States. Estonian language. machine translation Lehiste. Randy J. contrastive analysis Ladefoged. languages of Papua New Guinea Lee. sociolinguistics • Lamb. Japanese language Kuryłowicz. Rawang Lasersohn. Deaf culture.

1949–). Czech language Matisoff. antisymmetry. etymology McCarthy. origin of language • Martin. distributed morphology March. optimality theory McCawley. syntax. Yakov (United States. 1763–1828). 1920–2000). 1927–2004). Native American languages Mitxelena Elissalt. languages of Africa Melchert. Vilém (Czech Republic. 1965–). historical linguistics. Austronesian languages. syntax. phonology Lunde. comparative linguistics. semantics. constructed languages Martinet. creole languages. syntax Matthews. Richard Merett (United States. neurolinguistics . (United States. Old English language. syntax. 1908–1988). Ignatius G. historical linguistics. Aleksandr (Russia. (United States. 1937–). syntax. Fred (United States. dialectology Mori Hiromichi (Japan. Basque language Miura Tsutomu (Japan. John Hamilton (United States. Tibeto-Burman languages. Franc (Slovenia/Austria. Yümjiriin (Mongolia). 1825–1911). syntax. 1866–1932). Chinese language McWhorter. John J. second language acquisition. English language. phonology. Saramaccan language Meinhof. André (France. Uto-Aztecan languages Miller. Peter (United States. copula. Australia). comparative linguistics. Roy Andrew (United States. (United States). Alexis (United States/Poland). structuralism. Japanese language Motoori Norinaga (Japan. pragmatics. lexicography. Japanese language • Motoori Haruniwa (Japan. 1945–). 1934–). morphology. 1965–). 1971–). Marc (United States. 1865–1934). 1953–). Brian (United States. 1924–). 1926–2010). (UK/United States. 1813–1891). Semitic languages • Marr. philosophy of language • Moro. Korean language McNamara. semantics Lukoff.List of linguists • • • • Ludlow. Korean language. James D. (United States. etymology. constructed languages Mathesius. poetics. 1932–1994). onomastics. Koldo (Spain. 1924–2009). 1962–). English language • Margolis. 1946–). 1957–). Korean language. Ian (United States). 1857–1944). philology Manaster Ramer. Cantonese language Mattingly. morphology. 1930–1971). Old Japanese. Jeanne (France. phonology. semantics. 1946–). Anatolian languages Michaelis. Barbara (United States). Japanese language • Montague. (United States. 1730–1801). James (Sydney. Keresan languages. speech synthesis. genre • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Martin. Japanese language Mithun. language acquisition. semiotics. syntax. 1911–1989). syntax. 1920–). historical linguistics 194 M • • • • • • MacWhinney. Ken (United States. John (Australia. 1915–1987). etymology Marantz. H. phonetics. Japanese language Miyake. Tangut language Mönkh-Amgalan. Craig (United States). Carl Friedrich Michael (Germany. semantics. East Asian languages Lynch. Max Leopold (Lithuania/United States. semantics. Andrea (Italy. Francis Andrew (United States. speech perception Matveyev. James A. syntax. phonetics Malkiel. 1938–1999). corpus linguistics Maddieson. 1882–1945). Samuel Elmo (United States. English language Miklošič. Slavic languages Miller. Marianne (United States. Japanese language Martinet. Nikolay Yakovlevich (Georgia/Russia. Tibetan language. Mongolian language. Alec (United States). phonology Matthews. historical linguistics. phonology. Laura A. George McAfee (North Korea/United States. 1908–1999). Wick R. phonology McCune. typology. Peter Hugoe (UK. Stephen (UK/PR China). expletive. 1914–1998).

David A. 1837–1915). language evolution Munro. Andrew Nathaniel (United States. phonology. languages of the Caucasus. English language O • • • • • • • • • Odden. dialectology. phonology. 1846–1921). Janet (United States). morphology. language contact 195 N • • • • • • • • • • • • Nábělková. lexicography. phonetics. comparative linguistics Orikuchi Shinobu (Japan. historical linguistics. syntax. 1901–1978). phraseology Pedersen. Papuan languages. Harold (UK. Tokharian. sociolinguistics Nádasdy Ádám (Hungary). origin of language Nichols. phonology. Mario Andrew (Italy/United States. lexical semantics. Ingush language. phonetics. creole languages. descriptive linguistics. semantics Paul. Edward W. David Michael (United States. Holger (Denmark. (United States). phonology Okrand. ca. 520–460 BC). 1942–). Native American languages. Japanese language. Salikoko (United States). Barbara Hall (United States. lexical semantics. Pamela (United States). English dialects Osthoff. Ibrahim (China. Mutsun language Ōno Susumu (Japan. semantics. Janez (Slovenia. Johanna (United States). phonology. 1847–1928). Adolf Gotthard (Sweden. Sanskrit. Klingon language. 1948–). Johannes (Demark. lexicography. Italian language. historical linguistics Ōtsuki Fumihiko (Japan. etymology Muti’I. 1919–2008). syntax. 1847–1909). morphophonology Napoli. phonology. English language. James (UK. 1893–1975). lexicography. 1887–1953). Indo-European languages Pesetsky. 1854–1925). 1867–1953). 1944–). phonetics Noreen. 1964–). 1940–). Carol (United States. Celtic languages. 1935–). Donna Jo (United States). generative linguistics Partee. Hebrew language Pei. Chechen language. 1941). Hermann (Germany. generative grammar Nelson. Japanese language Orton. Japanese language P • • • • • • • • Pāṇini (India. (United States. 1957–). Austronesian languages. 1948–). Tamil language Orešnik. Japanese language Murray. language policy • Pierrehumbert. historical linguistics. Indo-European linguistics . 1908–1995). Ad (Netherlands/UK. Germanic languages Nunberg. Marc (United States. 1928–). Tangut language Nolan. John (United States). Nikolai Aleksandrovich (Russia. Mira (Slovakia). transformational grammar • Phillipson. Robert (UK/Denmark. phonology • Pinault. (United States). Georges-Jean (France). Andrew Kenneth (Australia/New Zealand. 1898–1975). Hermann Otto Theodor (Germany. Frederick J. Francis (UK). Tangut language Newmeyer. Nostratic languages Pedersen. Uyghur language Myers-Scotton. Japanese language. 1920–2010). 1883–1977). 1934–). dialectology. African linguistics. Seri language Mufwene. lexicography Nevsky. Japanese language Neeleman. African American Vernacular English. Geoffrey (United States).List of linguists • • • • • • • Moser. German language Pawley. Indo-European studies. typology Nishida Tatsuo (Japan. phonetics. lexicography Murayama Shichirō (Japan. syntax. Bantu languages Ohala. 1892–1937).

syntax. English language Pustejovsky. 1945–). 1906–2002). Herbert (Germany. psycholinguistics Pollard. (UK/United States. Germanic languages Prince. Malcolm David (Australia. Steven (Canada/United States. 1947–). phonology • Ruhlen. Mongolic languages Postal. Celtic languages. 1954–). Nicholas (Russia. John Russell (United States). James D. Martha (United States). 1915–2005). lexicography Rosenblat. syntax. historical linguistics. 1920–). (United States). 1884–1962). 1948–). Alan Sanford (United States. Carl Jesse (United States. articulatory synthesis. Ángel (Poland/Venezuela. phonology. constructed languages. language acquisition. (UK. Italic languages Pullum. Ian G. Indo-European language Ratliff.List of linguists • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Pike. Joseph Francis Charles (Austria/United States/PR China. Paul (United States). 1942–). Venezuelan Spanish. 1949–). natural language processing. Philip E. 1842–1912). etymology. syntax Rock. Merritt (United States). Philology Ross. Polish language • Rubin. 1936–). Jerzy (Poland/United States. phonetics Pinker. Juan Bautista (United States. historical linguistics . (United States. language acquisition Roberts. semantics Primer. language contact • Rubach. phonology Pulgram. Naxi language. Ernst (Austria/United States. 1931–2008). Austronesian languages. English language R • • • • • • • • • • • • Rael. English language. semantics 196 Q • Quirk. morphology. optimality theory. phonetics Pimsleur. English language. comparative linguistics. phonetics. Sylvester (United States. Kenneth Lee (United States. lexicography. French language. typology. 1787–1832). Geoffrey K. Tanya (Israel. 1952–). semantics. language acquisition. Luigi (Italy. syntax. Jean-Yves (France). Allen Walker (United States. African American Vernacular English Rizzi. syntax Poppe. syntax. semantics Pollock. Claude (Switzerland. John Robert (United States. syntax. 1946–). 1912–2000). Rasmus Christian (Denmark. Paul M. tagmemics Pilch. phonology. 1943–2007). Lexicography. syntax Rickford. (United States. Papuan languages. semantics Piron. English language Reinhart. syntax Ross. 1938–). Charles Randolph (UK/Germany. lexicography. Old English. 1900–1993). Hmong–Mien languages. sociolinguistics. Romance languages. 1902–1984). New Mexican Spanish Rask. 1927–). 1897–1991). dialectology. Esperanto. computational linguistics. 1957–). historical linguistics Read.

Esperanto Salo. pragmatics Sen. 1944–). 1857–1913). Sergei Anatolyevich (Russia. lexicography. conversation analysis Schleicher. semantics Saunders. syntax. historical linguistics Sievers. Native American languages. Judy (United States). language typology Sihler. 1954–). Andrew Littleton (United States. David (United States. Walter W. 1876–1967). Tibetan language. semantics. Geoffrey (UK. Wilhelm (Germany/Austria/Switzerland. Irene (United States/PR China). Uralic languages Sgall. 1949–). 1939–). etymology. Paul (Australia). Edward (Germany/United States. Yiddish language Sag. 1953–2005). Akkadian language Schegloff. Germanic languages. Mon–Khmer languages Schwarzschild. Japanese language Sibawayh (Iran. comparative linguistics. Greenlandic language. corpus linguistics. Elvish languages Sampson. ca. Arabic language Sidwell. syntax Shackle. semantics. 1976–). José María (Spain. morphology. 1767–1843). 1868–1954). Petr (Czech republic. 1893–1963). structural linguistics Sayce. language modeling Smith. Ferdinand (Switzerland/France. 1884–1939). optimality theory. 1926–). constructed languages. Chinese language de Saussure. second-language acquisition Schmidt. Emanuel (United States). 760–796). philosophy of language. Nostratics. syntax. language acquisition Smolensky. Slavic languages. Tocharian languages. 1846–1933). discourse analysis Skeat. Ivan (United States. 1864–1935). B. 1935–1975). phonology. Johannes (Germany. Laurent (France). Vitaly Victorovich (Russia/United States). 1952–). Archibald Henry (UK. Verbal behavior Skousen. Eemil Nestor (Finland. construction grammar Sagart. Nostratics Shinmura Izuru (Japan. Richard (United States). philology Skinner. Nostratics. Jerrold (United States). applied linguistics. language development. 1850–1932). 1942–). philosophy of language Sánchez Carrión. historical linguistics. August (Germany. 1955–2011). pragmatics. Harvey (United States. Basque language. historical linguistics Siewierska. Indo-European studies. comparative linguistics. 1955–). comparative linguistics. Sukumar (India. Nicaraguan Sign Language Shevoroshkin. pragmatics Searle. Royal (United States. Hindi language Sapir. conversation analysis Sadock. Bengali language Sequoyah (United States. syntax. Eduard (Germany. historical linguistics. Chinese linguistics and Austronesian languages Sakaguchi. 1969–). historical linguistics Schmidt. Cherokee language Setälä. Middle English. syntax Stachowski.List of linguists 197 S • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Sacks. Old English. Paul (United States. computational linguistics. 1945–). 1843–1901). Proto-World • Starostin. Indo-European studies. Luc (Belgium). historical linguistics. 1941). 1932–). 1933–2007). John McHardy (UK. Rahul (India. Indo-European studies Schmidt. interlinguistics. Saraiki language Shepard-Kegl. Turkic languages Starostin.F. historical linguistics Sankrityayan. (United States. Georgiy Sergeevich (Russia. Neilson Voyne (UK. 1905–1992). Christopher (UK. 1900–1992). constructed languages. Marek (Poland) historical linguistics. Roger (United States). (UK. John Rogers (United States. Alicja (Poland/Germany. Anna (Poland/Netherlands/UK. 1835–1912). Urdu language. sociolinguistics. Mon–Khmer languages. Finnish language. Indo-European languages Sinclair. evolutionary linguistics . 1821–1868). Proto-World • Steels.

Eve (United States). historical linguistics. Jože (Slovenia. Zdzisław (Poland. Native American languages. typology. 1920–). syntax. Nikolai Sergeyevich (Russia/Austria. semantics. Caucasian languages. 1906–1992). language contact. English language. Native American languages Tannen. lexicostatistics • Sweet. Vasmer. Zeno (United States. comparative linguistics van Valin. semantics Trask. discourse analysis. cognitive linguistics Valli. Japanese language Tolkien. 1845–1912). John Ronal Reuel (UK. 1954–). —2003). sociolinguistics. Morris (United States. cognitive linguistics. philosophy of language. Indigenous Australian languages Thomas. phonology. discourse analysis Tarpent. Calvin (United States.List of linguists • • • • • • Stetson. dialectology Tuite. 1886–1962). historical linguistics. German language Thomason. Karl van Duyn (United States. event structure • Ventris. Clayton (United States. phonology Stokoe. Sindarin. 1903–1980). Slovene language Trager. Maya languages. constructed languages. Quenya Toporišič. 1890–1938). Clive (UK). phonetics Stieber. paralanguage. semantics. (United States). Valentin Nikolaevich (Russia. Nicholas (Australia). Robert Lawrence (United States. Suzuki Takao (Japan. —1950). sociolinguistics. Russian language Vaux. semantics . Edward (UK. Japanese language. 1895–1936). 1926–). cognitive linguistics. Basque language. phonetics • Sweetser. 1945–). Semitic languages • Unger. Archaic Greek • Verner. phonemics. Sarah Grey (United States). typology. phonology Trudgill. George Leonard (United States. Celtic languages 198 T • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Talmy. morphology. historical linguistics. 1900–1967). Max (Russia/Germany. 1909–1967). Yiddish language. 1947–). syntax. historical linguistics • Voloshinov. sociolinguistics. sociolinguistics Swadesh. comparative linguistics. Deborah Frances (United States. Algic languages. Bert (United States. morphology. historical linguistics. origin of language Trubetzkoy. 1854–1919). 1943–). Robert D. William (United States. 1968–). Tsimshianic languages Teeter. historical linguistics. Mandarin language Tokieda Motoki (Japan. Raymond Herbert (United States. 1922–1956). Mark (United States). structural linguistics. Karl (Denmark. American Sign Language. John Eric Sidney (UK. Old English language. 1892–1973). Na-Dené languages. writing systems • Upton. Henry (UK. Marie-Lucie (Canada). Georgian language Turner. Stollznow. Karen (United States) lexical semantics. Linear B. Sandra A. historical linguistics. cognitive linguistics U • Ullendorff. 1944–2004). Germanic languages. 1921–2004). 1926–). sociolinguistics Vendler. dialectology V • • • • • • • Vajda. cherology. James Marshall (United States. Japanese language. cognitive linguistics. semantics. 1952–). Armenian language Veltman. Germanic languages. Edward (United States). Montana Salish Thompson. Slavic languages. Kevin (United States. Maya hieroglyphics Thompson. Michael George Francis (UK. (United States. Ket language. 1898–1975). 1919–2000). 1929–2007). endangered languages Thieberger. English language. American Sign Language. Leonard (United States). phonology. historical linguistics. 1846–1896). Peter (UK. Calvin (United States/Canada/France). etymology.

Korean language. Robert W. French language. Siberian languages. Esperanto. Alexander (Russia/United States). creole languages. morphology • Zhou Youguang (PR China. Indo-European languages Weeks. typology Westphal. Benjamin Lee (United States. lexicography. Papuan languages Y • • • • Yamada Yoshio (Japan. Robert Dick (United States. 1875–1956). 1942–). Ghil'ad (Israel. Arok (Canada). Linguistic relativity Wichmann. Mixe–Zoque languages. 1863–1954). Ofelia (United States. morphology. comparative linguistics. Ludwik Łazarz (Poland. lexicography Wurm. 1971–). Henri (France/Canada. Cree language. Benjamin Ide (United States. Samuel Wells (United States/China. Ernst Oswald Johannes (South Africa/UK. (United States). 1912–2007). Søren (Denmark. Syriac language Wittmann. Basque dialectology. Italy. syntax. dialectology Yngve. Maya script. phonology. Nicholas Jonathan Anselm (UK/Ireland. Australia. Yiddish language Wells. Esperanto • Zepeda. 1938–). Chinese language. French language Weinreich.List of linguists • Vovin. (UK). endangered languages Wheeler. sociolinguistics. computational linguistics. contact linguistics. Chinese language Watanabe Shōichi (Japan. Native American languages. Lydia (United Kingdom/Canada). semantics. revival linguistics . Indo-European studies. dialectology. 1812–1884). Bantu languages. 1873–1958). Yiddish language Weinreich. 1893–1969). 1900–1986). Androula (Cyprus). 1853–1938). Japanese language Watkins. Anna (Poland/Australia. 1954–1927). (United States. lexicography Wilson. Central Asian languages 199 W • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Wackernagel. Romanization of Chinese • Zuazo. 1956–). William Dwight (United States. Westermann. Diedrich Hermann (Germany. semantics. Japanese language Yiakoumetti. languages of Africa. Irish language. comparative linguistics. UK. Raymond (United States. phonology. Williams. Hebrew language. 1937–). Calvert (United States). 1920–). Henry G. phonetics. Sanskrit. Max (Latvia/United States. Mesoamerican languages. comparative linguistics Wolvengrey. 1952–). pragmatics Williams. phonetics. Koldo (Spain. Greek language White. Australian Aboriginal languages. Stephen Adolphe (Hungary/Australia. Khoisan languages Whalen. English language Whorf. 1964–). lexicography Z • Zamenhof. Greek language. Victor (United States. comparative linguistics. Cornish language. Maya script Widdowson. 1897–1941). sociolinguistics • Zuckermann. 1859–1917). Uriel (Poland/United States. natural language processing Young. Manx language. Mayan languages. lexicology. John Christopher (UK. Japanese language. 1919–1990). 1926–1967). Ainu language. formal syntax. English language. Native American languages. 1930–). 1856–1930). 1827–1894). 1939–). discourse analysis Wierzbicka. Sanskrit Wang Li (PR China. 1903–). orthography. 1922–2001). O'odham language • Zhang. Navajo language. second language acquisition Whitney. historical linguistics. Niina Ning (PR China). Douglas H. Jacob (Switzerland.

• Is the human ability to use syntax based on innate mental structures or is syntactic speech the function of intelligence and interaction with other humans? The question is closely related to those of language emergence .List of linguists • Zwicky. Occitan and Catalan)? • How does grammaticalization function? • How do creole languages emerge? Languages • Origin of language and origin of speech are major unsolved problems. html).e. linguistlist. Arnold (United States.e. List of unsolved problems in linguistics This article discusses currently unsolved problems in linguistics. it is generally agreed that no solution is known. while there is no common agreement about the answer.000 languages spoken in the world. although this word is vanishingly rare and has no currency in the field (http:/ / www. Concepts • Is there a universal definition of word? • Is there a universal definition of sentence? • Are there any universal grammatical categories? • Can the elements contained in words (morphemes) and the elements contained in sentences (syntactic constituents) be shown to follow the same principles? • Is it possible to formally circumscribe languages from each other? That is to say. syntax..e. with no demonstrable relationship to other languages.[5] An additional 45 languages are classified as language isolates. i.000-7. i. despite centuries of interest in these topics. in order to avoid this ambiguity. is it possible to use linguistic (rather than social) criteria to draw a clear boundary between two closely related languages with a dialect continuum between their respective standard forms (e.g. language is acquired due to brain's interaction with environment. Some of the issues below are commonly recognized as unsolved problems. How are infants able to learn language? One line of debate is between two points of view: that of psychological nativism. i. morphology 200 Notes [1] The word linguistician has been coined to refer to one who studies linguistics. the language ability is somehow "hardwired" in the human brain.. Another formulation of this controversy is "nature versus nurture".. org/ issues/ 5/ 5-1147.. there are established schools of thought that believe they have a correct answer. i. 1940–). and that of the "tabula rasa" or blank slate.[5] • Undeciphered writing systems Psycholinguistics • Language emergence: • Emergence of grammar[6] • Language acquisition: • Controversy: infant language acquisition / first language acquisition.[1][2][3][4] • Unclassified languages (languages whose genetic affiliation has not been established.e. mostly due to lack of reliable data) make up about 38 of the 6. Others may be described as controversies.

de/ FDP/ 3898257770. 5. Chinese. . Because of its focus on historical development (diachronic analysis). The Cradle of Language.) and non-European (Sanskrit. syntax)? 201 Translation • What should the translator adhere to: fidelity or transparency? • Is there an objective gauge for the quality of translation?[7] References [1] [2] [3] [4] Givon. etc. originating in Pergamum and Alexandria[2] around the 4th century BC. syntax) can animals be taught to use? How much of animal communication can be said to have the same properties as human language (e. The Evolution of Language Out of Pre-language. the establishment of their authenticity and their original form. pdf) Philology Philology is the study of language in written historical sources. Persian. "A Functional Approach to Translation Studies. thesis. Norton. New systemic linguistic challenges in empirically informed didactics".[1] It is also more commonly defined as the study of literary texts and written records. ed. • The language acquisition device: How localized is language in the brain? Is there a particular area in the brain responsible for the development of language abilities or is it only partially localized? • What fundamental reasons explain why ultimate attainment in second language acquisition is typically some way short of the native speaker's ability. Malle (2002). Dallas: SIL International. W.g. and the determination of their meaning. Classical philology is historically primary. Oxford: Oxford University Press. This is due to a 20th-century development triggered by Ferdinand de Saussure's insistence on the importance of synchronic analysis. no. Slavistics. and linguistics. ethnologue. Any classical language can be studied philologically. philology came to be used as a term contrasting with linguistics. Deacon. . ac. ISBN 3-89825-777-0.g. html) [7] Robert Spence. history. dissertation.). com/ ) (16 ed. MacNeilage. continued by Greeks and Romans throughout the Roman and Byzantine Empires. [5] Lewis. and the later emergence of structuralism and Chomskyan linguistics with its emphasis on syntax. ISBN 1-58811-237-3. soc. 2004. John Benjamins. Botha. (2009). Paul. Knight (eds) 2009.W. Arabic. M. and C. with learners varying widely in performance? • Animals and language: How much language (e. and eventually taken up by European scholars of the Renaissance. The Symbolic Species: The Co-evolution of Language and the Brain. surrey. it is a combination of literary studies.). 2008. and indeed describing a language as "classical" is to imply the existence of a philological tradition associated with it. [6] "Simulated Evolution of Language: a Review of the Field". Peter. uk/ 5/ 2/ 4. R. Celtic. Indo-European studies involves the comparative philology of all Indo-European languages. Bertram F. A pdf file (http:/ / www. Classical philology is the philology of Greek and Classical Latin. etc. ISBN 0-571-17396-9. Talmy. ISBN 1-55671-216-2. Terrence (1997). The Origin of Speech. Ethnologue: Languages of the World (http:/ / www. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation vol. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2 (http:/ / jasss. where it was soon joined by philologies of other languages both European (Germanic.List of unsolved problems in linguistics and acquisition.

R. De nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii). reason". there is no clear-cut boundary between philology and hermeneutics. trying to reconstruct an author's original text based on variant copies of manuscripts. Philologia appears in 5th-century post-classical literature (Martianus Capella. from the Middle French philologie. i. Similarities between Sanskrit and European languages were first noted in the early 16th century[9] and led to speculation of a common ancestor language from which all these descended. Tolkien opposed the nationalist reaction against philological practices. the term philology to describe work on languages and literatures. meaning "love. enabling scholars to gain insight into the entire manuscript tradition and argue about the variants. position titles. dear.[10] A related study method known as higher criticism studies the authorship. and later entered the English language in the 16th century. the original principles of textual criticism have been improved and applied to other widely-distributed texts such as the Bible. Scholars have tried to reconstruct the original readings of the Bible from the manuscript variants. As an allegory of literary erudition.[5][6] In British English usage. footnotes that listed the various manuscript variants available. Textual philology editing Philology also includes the study of texts and their history.[3] from the terms φίλος (philos). Most continental European countries still maintain the term to designate departments. describing a love of learning. J. while in US English.Philology 202 Etymology The term philology is derived from the Greek φιλολογία (philologia). The method produced so-called "critical editions". The term changed little with the Latin philologia. R. who desired to establish a standard text of popular authors for the purposes of both sound interpretation and secure transmission. or "from Friedrich Schlegel to Nietzsche". of literature as well as of argument and reasoning. Due to the rapid progress made in understanding sound laws and language change. in the sense of "love of literature". affection. and in British academia. meaning "word. and US academia. which had become synonymous with the practices of German scholars. articulation. for the light they could cast on problems in understanding and deciphering the origins of older texts. claiming that "the philological instinct" was "universal as is the use of language".[10] When text has a significant political or religious . The adjective φιλόλογος (philologos) meant "fond of discussion or argument. and provenance of text to place such text in historical context. history and literary tradition" remains more widespread. φιλόσοφος (philosophos).[10] As these philological issues are often inseparable from issues of interpretation. colleges.[4] In the Anglo-Saxon world. It includes elements of textual criticism.e. This method was applied to Classical Studies and to medieval texts as a way to reconstruct the author's original work. beloved. was abandoned as a consequence of anti-German feeling following World War I. Lydgate). which provided a reconstructed text accompanied by a "critical apparatus". loved. in Hellenistic Greek also implying an excessive ("sophistic") preference of argument over the love of true wisdom. an idea revived in Late Medieval literature (Chaucer.[7][8] Branches of philology Comparative philology The comparative linguistics branch of philology studies the relationship between languages. reflecting the range of activities included under the notion of λόγος.. Philology's interest in ancient languages led to the study of what were. date. It is now named Proto-Indo-European. This branch of research arose among Ancient scholars in the 4th century BC Greek-speaking world. "exotic" languages. friend" and λόγος (logos). the wider meaning of "study of a language's grammar. "philology" remains largely synonymous with "historical linguistics". the "golden age of philology" lasted throughout the 19th century. Since that time. and journals. in the 18th century. talkative". The meaning of "love of learning and literature" was narrowed to "the study of the historical development of languages" (historical linguistics) in 19th-century usage of the term.

despite many attempts. com/ books?id=2joVAAAAYAAJ& dq=philology& printsec=frontcover& source=bl& ots=REA2bM6Pf_& sig=Ws1UMX0ld3eeYXO2IxcBXD4WhNs& hl=en& ei=VJowSqeaCYTAMtiD_ccH& sa=X& oi=book_result& ct=result& resnum=9#PPA5. [2] Hall. Linguistics (1998) 4 I. Christoph König (Göttingen: Wallstein. . philology includes the prior decipherment of the language under study. Funktion. "A Greek-English Lexicon". [8] M. pp. a number of individuals attempted to decipher the writing systems of the Ancient Near East and Aegean. princeton. 203 Cognitive philology Another branch of philology. "Englische Philologie vs. at Perseus" (http:/ / www. [9] This is noted in Juan Mascaro's introduction to his translation of the Bhagavad Gita. Notes [1] Philology (http:/ / books. and Akkadian. . Morpurgo Davies. Studies in Semitic Philology. Since the late 20th century. Beginning with the famous decipherment and translation of the Rosetta Stone by Jean-François Champollion in 1822. scholars have difficulty reaching objective conclusions. cognitive philology. 2009). A Companion to Classical Texts. decipherment yielded older records of languages already known from slightly more recent traditions (Middle Persian and Alphabetic Greek). W. . This science compares the results of textual science with the results of experimental research of both psychology and artificial intelligence production systems. The code is described as a logosyllabic style of writing. Ugaritic and Luwian languages. perseus. which records the same text in Old Persian. and taught Sanskrit to the German critic Friedrich von Schlegel. (1968). Perseus. Liddell and Scott. Work on the ancient languages of the Near East progressed rapidly. Hittite was deciphered in 1915 by Bedřich Hrozný. edu/ cgi-bin/ ptext?doc=Perseus:text:1999. [3] "''φιλολογία''. which could be used to fully express any spoken (1977) p. Mascaro says this is the beginning of modern study of the roots of the Indo-European languages. and the Mayan languages are among the most documented and studied in Mesoamerica. Princeton University Department of German (http:/ / scholar. Oxford. The movement known as New Philology has rejected textual criticism because it injects editorial interpretations into the text and destroys the integrity of the individual manuscript. ed. Sumerian. Work continues on scripts such as the Maya. Retrieved 2011-07-16. M. [7] A. English Studies: A Foundational Conflict". Retrieved 2011-07-16. Hist. where it is important to study the actual recorded materials.M1). England: Clarendon Press. now known as Mycenaean Greek. edu/ nwegmann/ ) [5] "Philology: General Works".google. with great progress since the initial breakthroughs of the phonetic approach championed by Yuri Knorozov and others in the 1950s. Linear A. This has notably been the case with the Egyptian. In the mid-19th century. [6] Richard Utz. without emendations. The Year's Work of English Studies 4 (1923). 36–37. a script used in the ancient Aegean.[10] especially in historical linguistics. tufts. 2008-02-09. was deciphered in 1952 by Michael Ventris. 0057:entry=#111282).tufts. Books. who demonstrated that it recorded an early form of Greek. Bravmann. the writing system that records the still-unknown language of the Minoans. 04. Linear B. pp. 22–52. Leistung. hence damaging the reliability of the data. F. in Das Potential europäischer Philologien: Geschichte. Hittite. studies written and oral texts. the Maya code has been almost completely deciphered. Supporters of New Philology insist on a strict "diplomatic" approach: a faithful rendering of the text exactly as found in the manuscript.Philology influence (such as the reconstruction of Biblical texts). google. 22. using a variation of cuneiform for each language. Elamite. Some scholars avoid all critical methods of textual philology. 34–44. in which he dates the first Gita translation to 1785 (by Charles Williams). 457. Mascaro claims Alexander Hamilton stopped in Paris in 1802 after returning from India. Henry Rawlinson and others deciphered the Behistun Inscription. The elucidation of cuneiform led to the decipherment of Sumerian. In the case of Old Persian and Mycenaean Greek. considering them as results of human mental processes. resists deciphering. [4] so Nikolaus Wegmann. Decipherment In the case of Bronze Age literature.

edu/ipsa/ [10] Textual Philology and Text Editing (http:/ / books. that an individual has chosen to specialise in. There are many sociology-related scientific journals.ufl. University of Zaragoza. google.html) • Asociación de Jóvenes Investigadores Filólogos de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid (AJIF-UCM) (http:// Outline of linguistics The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to linguistics: Linguistics is the scientific study of natural language. Spain) (http://www.html) • CogLit: Literature and Cognitive Linguistics (http://cogweb.ucla.html) • Institute for Psychological Study of the Arts (http://www.a disciple (student). com/ books?id=Cu4G-D1bNPcC& pg=PA9& lpg=PA9& dq=Branches+ of+ philology+ Textual+ philology+ and+ text+ editing& source=bl& ots=647MRHwJLT& sig=XFlQ93KiBqfd10ZzXGz8ZtyknS8& hl=en& ei=upUwSrj0GZLCM_7U6M8H& sa=X& oi=book_result& ct=result& resnum=10).uniroma1.html)—(A special web search through the philological sites of Runet) • Wikiversity: Topic:German philology • (Italian) Rivista di Filologia Cognitiva (http://w3. where peer reviewed research is published. • Field of science – widely-recognized category of specialized expertise within science. Nature of linguistics Linguistics can be described as all of the following: • Academic discipline – body of knowledge given to . University of Florida • A Bibliography of Literary Theory. José Ángel García Landa. Branches of linguistics Subfields of linguistics • Theoretical linguistics • • • • • Cognitive linguistics Generative linguistics Functional theories of grammar Quantitative linguistics Phonology • Graphemics • Morphology • Syntax • Lexis . and Philology ( Such a field will usually be represented by one or more scientific journals. or field of study. . Linguistics can be theoretical or applied. Retrieved 2011-07-16. 204 External links • Philology in Runet (http://ruthenia. • Social science – field of academic scholarship that explores aspects of human society. and typically embodies its own terminology and nomenclature. Someone who engages in this study is called a linguist.unizar.or received by . a branch or sphere of knowledge.

Outline of linguistics • Semantics • Pragmatics • Descriptive linguistics • • • • Anthropological linguistics Comparative linguistics Historical linguistics Phonetics 205 • Graphetics • Etymology • Sociolinguistics • Applied linguistics • • • • • • • • • • • • Computational linguistics Evolutionary linguistics Forensic linguistics Internet linguistics Language acquisition Language assessment Language development Language education Linguistic anthropology Neurolinguistics Psycholinguistics Second-language acquisition Subfields. by linguistic structures studied Sub-fields of structure-focused linguistics include: • Phonetics – study of the physical properties of speech (or signed) production and perception • Phonology – study of sounds (or signs) as discrete. abstract elements in the speaker's mind that distinguish meaning • Morphology – study of internal structures of words and how they can be modified • Syntax – study of how words combine to form grammatical sentences • Semantics – study of the meaning of words (lexical semantics) and fixed word combinations (phraseology). written. and how these combine to form the meanings of sentences • Pragmatics – study of how utterances are used in communicative acts – and the role played by context and nonlinguistic knowledge in the transmission of meaning • Discourse analysis – analysis of language use in texts (spoken. or signed) .

(Constructed language fits under Applied linguistics. be assumed to be innate to human language capacity. by nonlinguistic factors studied • Applied linguistics – study of language-related issues applied in everyday life. • Clinical linguistics – application of linguistic theory to the field of Speech-Language Pathology. • Stylistics – study of linguistic factors that place a discourse in context. so that the linguistic theories devised can be shown to exhibit certain desirable computational properties implementations. • Psycholinguistics – study of the cognitive processes and representations underlying language use. • Sociolinguistics – study of variation in language and its relationship with social factors. • Neurolinguistics – study of the structures in the human brain that underlie grammar and communication. Also called diachronic linguistics. • Historical linguistics – study of language change over time.Outline of linguistics Subfields. planning. • Linguistic typology – study of the common properties of diverse unrelated languages. taking careful note of computational consideration of algorithmic specification and computational complexity. particularly the acquisition of language in childhood. i.) • Biolinguistics – study of natural as well as human-taught communication systems in animals. • Evolutionary linguistics – study of the origin and subsequent development of language by the human species. given sufficient attestation. and education. • Developmental linguistics – study of the development of linguistic ability in individuals. properties that may. compared to human language.e.. notably language policies. • Computational linguistics – study of linguistic issues in a way that is 'computationally responsible'. • Language geography – study of the geographical distribution of languages and linguistic features. 206 Other subfields of linguistics • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Contrastive linguistics Corpus linguistics Dialectology Discourse analysis Grammar Interlinguistics Language didactics Language learning Language teaching Language for specific purposes Lexicology Linguistic statistics Orthography Rhetoric Text linguistics .

History of linguistics Main article: History of linguistics • Unsolved problems in linguistics Timeline of discovery of basic linguistics concepts When were the basic concepts first described and by whom? • • • • • • • • • • • Ancient Sanskrit grammarians Ancient Greek study of language Roman elaborations of Greek study Medieval philosophical work in Latin Beginnings of modern linguistics in the 19th century Behaviorism and mental tabula rasa hypothesis Chomsky and functionalism Generative grammar leads to generative phonology and semantics Alternate syntactic systems develop in 80s Computational linguistics becomes feasible the late 80s Neurolinguistics and the biological basis of cognition .Outline of linguistics 207 Schools. language can be seen as a sign or symbol. and approaches of linguistics • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Cognitive linguistics Danish School Functionalism Generative linguistics Geneva School Neo-Grammarians Prague School Prescription and description Soviet linguistics Stratificational linguistics Structuralism Systemic linguistics SIL International Tagmemics Related fields • Semiotics – investigates the relationship between signs and what they signify more broadly. with the world as its representation. From the perspective of semiotics. movements.

A. lexicon. terminology • Semantics • meaning. syllable. clause. What is language? How did it/does it evolve? How does language serve as a medium of communication? How does language serve as a medium of thinking? What is common to all languages? How do languages differ? Basic concepts What basic concepts / terms do I have to know to talk about linguistics? • Morphology • morpheme. 4. 2. sense. aspect. segment. compositionality • Pragmatics • presupposition.Outline of linguistics 208 Questions in linguistics 1. entailment. 6. declension. 3. grammatical voice • Lexicology • word. deixis Languages of the world Linguistics scholars People who had a significant influence on the development of the field • • • • • • • • • • • • John Langshaw Austin Leonard Bloomfield Franz Bopp Noam Chomsky David Crystal Daniel Everett M. grammatical number. mood and modality. paradigm. derivation. 5. Pike • Rasmus Rask • Edward Sapir • Ferdinand de Saussure . grammatical gender. compound • Phonology • phoneme. case • Syntax • phrase. lemma. Halliday Louis Hjelmslev Roman Jakobson Sir William Jones Pāṇini Kenneth L. vocabulary.K. stress. tone • Grammar • tense. truth condition. foot. inflection. implicature. lexeme. grammatical function. allophone. mora.

org/ info/ ling-fields. J. A. Searle Claude Lévi-Strauss Nikolai Trubetzkoy Noah Webster Benjamin Lee Whorf 209 Linguistics lists • Languages • Language families and languages • ISO 639 • Official languages • Definitions by language • Alphabets & Orthography Arabic Aramaic Armenian Korean Katakana Braille Hebrew Coptic IPA Cyrillic English IPA Georgian Gothic Kannada Hiragana Runic Morse code ICAO spelling Phoenician Thai SAMPA Chart English SAMPA Shavian • Common misspellings • English words without rhymes • Acronym • Wiktionary:Definitions of acronyms and abbreviations External links Glottopedia. under construction [1] Subfields according to the Linguistic Society of America [2] Glossary of linguistic terms [3] and French<->English glossary [4] at SIL International "Linguistics" section [5] of A Bibliography of Literary Theory. citizendium. html http:/ / www. sil. scholarpedia. org/ linguistics/ glossary_fe/ http:/ / www. org/ linguistics/ GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/ index. sil. unizar. org http:/ / www. MediaWiki-based encyclopedia of linguistics. glottopedia. org/ article/ Language http:/ / en. es/ departamentos/ filologia_inglesa/ garciala/ bibliography. lsadc. Criticism and Philology. cfm http:/ / www.Outline of linguistics • • • • • • August Schleicher John R. ed. García Landa (University of Zaragoza. Spain) • Linguistics and language-related wiki articles on Scholarpedia [6] and Citizendium [7] • • • • References [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] http:/ / www. org/ wiki/ Linguistics . htm http:/ / www.

Expletive attributive .Derivation .Aorist .Adverb .Index of linguistics articles 210 Index of linguistics articles Linguistics is the scientific study of human language.Eurolinguistics .Clefting .Cardinal vowel .Dialect .Acute accent .Diaeresis .Antonym .Absolutive case .Coherence Colloquialism .Allomorph .Defective verb .Determiner .Applied linguistics .Case in tiers .Closed-class word .Adverbial .Ablaut .Cuneiform D Dangling modifier .Areal feature .Conjugation .Ergative case Error .Accent (phonetics) .Bilabial consonant .Asterisk .Essive case .Double acute accent .Conjunction .Article .Creaky voice .Comparative method .Approximant .Alveolar consonant .Adposition .Consonant .Cryptanalysis .Abessive case .Capitonym .Cedilla .Accusative case .Cranberry morpheme .Accent (sociolinguistics) .Copula . the List of linguists.Agglutinative language .Creole language . Someone who engages in this study is called a linguist.Ethnologue .Entailment .Breve C Calque .Context .Etymologist . See also the Outline of linguistics.Corpus linguistics .Discourse .Evolutionary linguistics Example-based machine translation .Dative case .Declension .Dislocation .Conjunct .Elative case .Backronym .Adpositional phrase .Endangered language .Cognate .Articulatory phonetics .Adjective .Adverbial phrase .Breathy voice .Chiasmus . the List of phonetics topics.Descriptive linguistics .Computer-assisted language learning .Diacritic .Articulatory gestures .Anaphora .Dual grammatical number E Eggcorn .Decipherment .Allative case .Adjunct .Ecolinguistics .Diphthong .Constructed language .Etymology .Affricate consonant .Analytic language .Compound verb .Click consonant . and the List of cognitive science topics.Augment .Comparative linguistics .Auxiliary verb B Back-formation .Adessive case .Compound noun and adjective .Dictionary .Contrastive linguistics .Communication skill Comparative .Contrastive analysis .Acronym .Computational linguistics .English pronunciation . Articles related to linguistics include: A Abbreviation .Affix .Comitative case .Dental consonant .Disjunct .Cognitive science .Abugida .Allophone .Agglutination .Capitalization .Attrition .Animacy Anthropological linguistics .Alphabet .Circumfix Circumflex .Aspect .Case .

Lexicography .Historical linguistics .Infix .Gerund .Meaning .Implication (pragmatics) .General semantics .Language acquisition .Natural language understanding .Laryngeal theory .Neurolinguistics .Grimm's law .Linguistic relativity .Linguistics .Open class word .Formal language .Onomatopoeia .Inessive case .Glottal consonant .Optimality theory .Heaps' law .Inflection Initialism .Linguistic ecology .Lexeme .Lemma .Morpheme .Language attrition .Lateral consonant .Loanword .Null morpheme O Onomasiology .Guttural consonant H Hacek .Noun phrase .Natural language .Future tense G Gender .Homonym .Hypernym .Manner of articulation .Illative case .Grave accent .Hyponym I I-mutation .Orthography Object–subject–verb .Morphology N Naming .Macron .Fusional language .Mora .IPA chart for English Irregular verb L Labiodental consonant .Future perfect .Interjection .Modality .Mood .Lexical semantics .Great consonant shift .Origin of language .Linguistics basic topics Liquid consonant .Impersonal pronoun .Lexicology .Function word .Metathesis .Grammatical mood .International Phonetic Alphabet .Genitive case .Index of linguistics articles 211 F False cognate .Government .Infinitive .Nasal stop .Idiom .History of linguistics .Fricative consonant .Germanic umlaut .Noun .Impersonal verb .Object–verb–subject .Nasal consonant .Linguistic anthropology .Initial-stress-derived noun .Instructive case .Language families and languages .Locative case M Machine translation .Indo-European languages .Grammatical gender .Great Vowel Shift .Lexicon .Grammatical number Grammatical voice .Minimal pair Mispronunciation .High rising terminal .Linguist .Ideogram .Natural language processing .Linguistic layers .Language .Glottal stop Glottochronology .Nominative case .Grammar .Language game .Language isolate .Language education .Neologism .List of linguists .Idiolect .The Language Instinct .Historical-comparative linguistics .Meronymy .Oxytone .Inflected language .False friend .Hiatus (linguistics) .

Portmanteau .Phonetic complement .Sociolinguistics .Syntax .Translative case .Philosophy of language .Preposition .Proparoxytone .Postposition .Telicity .Regimen .Presupposition .Past tense .Retroflex consonant .Slang Sociolect .Semantic class .Speech act .Perfect (grammar) .Speech processing .Transformational-generative grammar .Prefix .Spiritus asper .Prosody (linguistics) .Retronym .Text types .SVO .Rounded vowel S SAMPA .Postalveolar consonant .Rhotics .Syntactic categories .Tone (linguistics) Tongue-twister .Specialised lexicography Speech communication .Semantics .Transcription .T-V distinction .Pluperfect .Paradigm .Tense .Stylistics .Stratificational linguistics Structuralism .Split infinitive .Synthetic language T Tagmemics .Text linguistics .Second language .Time–manner–place .Speech synthesis Speech therapy .Index of linguistics articles 212 P Palatal consonant .Sentence function .Supine .Thou .Subject .Semantic property .Slack voice .Pronoun .Participle .Pharyngeal consonant .Prepositional phrase .Pseudo-acronym Pseudo-Anglicism .Persuasion .Truth condition .Phrase structure rules .Schwa .Shall .Pragmatics .Phoneme .Prolative case .Speaker recognition .Possessive case .Semivowel .Paroxytone .Pleonasm .Phonation .Present tense .Synonym Syntactic ambiguity .Preterite Profanity .Thematic role Theoretical linguistics .Translation .Tonal language .Partitive case .Superlative .Phone Phonetics .Pronunciation .SOV .Polysemy Polysynthetic language .Phonology .Sign .Sound pattern of English .Part of speech .Suppletion .Unsolved problems in linguistics .Place–manner–time .Psycholinguistics .Stop consonant .Prescription and description .Punctuation Q Quendecincy .Sentence .Sound change .Particle .Syntactic expletive .Syllable .Romanization .Terminology .Semiotics .Semantic feature .Philology .Standard language .Phonetic transcription .Pidgin .Place of articulation .Tense–aspect–mood .Phonemics .Sign language .Universal grammar .Quirky subject R Radical .Phrase .Syllabary .Speech recognition .Typology U Uninflected word .Thesaurus .Uvular consonant .Speech disorder .

Index of linguistics articles


V2 word order - Variety - Velar consonant - Verb - Verb–object–subject - Verb phrase - Verb–subject–object Verbal noun - Verner's law - Vocative case - Vowel - Vowel harmony - Vowel stems -

Weak suppletion - Will (verb) - Word - Word sense disambiguation - Writing - Writing systems - Wug test

X-bar theory

Zipf's law

Index of cognitive science articles
Cognitive science is usually defined as the scientific study either of mind or of intelligence (e.g. Luger 1994). Practically every formal introduction to cognitive science stresses that it is a highly interdisciplinary research area in which psychology, neuroscience, linguistics, philosophy, computer science, anthropology, and biology are its principal specialized or applied branches. Therefore we may distinguish cognitive studies of either human or animal brains, mind and brain

Alan Turing - anthropological linguistics - artificial intelligence - artificial life - attention - autism

Brain–computer interface

cognition - cognitive therapy - cognitive behaviour therapy - cognitive neuroscience - cognitive psychology cognitive ergonomics - cognitive science - cognitive science of mathematics - Cognitive Science Society - collective intelligence - comparative linguistics - comparative method - computational linguistics - computational semiotics conceptual metaphor - connotation - constructed language - corpus linguistics - Creole language - cryptanalysis cybernetics

Index of cognitive science articles


decipherment - descriptive linguistics

embodied philosophy - enaction - ethnologue - etymology - evolutionary linguistics

figure of speech - formal language

George Lakoff - general semantics

H. Christopher Longuet-Higgins - Herbert A. Simon - historical-comparative linguistics - historical linguistics history of linguistics - human–computer interaction

Intelligence - International Phonetic Alphabet

Jerry Fodor

language - language acquisition - language families and languages - lexicography - lexicology - linguistic layers linguistics - linguistics basic topics - Linguistic relativity - List of famous linguists - List of linguistic topics - literal and figurative language - logical language

machine learning - Marvin Minsky - metaphor - metonymy - Moral Politics - motor control - morpheme

naming - natural language understanding - neural network - neurolinguistics - neurophilosophy - neuroscience Noam Chomsky


perception - philology - philosophy of language - philosophy of mind - phonetics - phonology - pidgin - pragmatics prescription and description - profanity - psycholinguistics - psychology of reasoning

Index of cognitive science articles




Oliver Sacks- SAMPA - semantics - semiotics - sociolinguistics - speaker recognition - speech communication speech processing - speech recognition - speech synthesis - speech therapy - stratificational linguistics - structuralism - syntax

theoretical linguistics - theory of computation - tongue-twister - transformational-generative grammar - Turing test

unconscious mind

Where Mathematics Comes From - writing systems

Speech-language pathology
Speech-language pathology professionals (speech-language pathologists (SLPs), or informally speech therapists) specialize in communication disorders as well as swallowing disorders. The main components of speech production include: phonation, the process of sound production; resonance; intonation, the variation of pitch; and voice, including aeromechanical components of respiration. The main components of language include: phonology, the manipulation of sound according to the rules of the language; morphology, the understanding and use of the minimal units of meaning; syntax, the grammar rules for constructing sentences in language; semantics, the interpretation of meaning from the signs or symbols of communication; and pragmatics, the social aspects of communication.[1]

National approaches to speech and language pathology
Speech-language pathology is known by a variety of names in various countries around the world: • Speech-language pathology (SLP) in the United States [2], Canada [3], Malta [4], Italy [5], and in the Philippines • Speech and language therapy (SLTs) in the United Kingdom, Ireland [6], and South Africa [7]. Within the United Kingdom a Speech and Language Therapy team is sometimes referred to as the "SALT" team, to avoid confusion with Senior Leadership Team. S&LT is preferable however, and closer to the official abbreviation SLT used by RCSLT (Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists) [8]. • Speech pathology in Australia [9], and the Philippines • Speech-language therapy in New Zealand • Speech therapy in India [10], Hong Kong [11] and other Asian countries.

Speech-language pathology • Speech and language pathologist in the Netherlands, the title for graduates from University who can participate in research. • Speech and language therapist (logopedist) are educated to give therapy in the Netherlands. Prior to 2006, the practice of Speech-Language Pathology in the United States was regulated by the individual states. Since January 2006, the 2005 "Standards and Implementation Procedures for the Certificate of Clinical Competence in Speech-Language Pathology" guidelines as set out by The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) have determined the qualification requirements to obtain "Speech-Language Pathology Clinical Fellowship". First, the individual must obtain an undergraduate degree, which may be in a field related to speech-language-hearing sciences. Second, the individual must graduate from an accredited master's program in speech language pathology. Many graduate programs will allow coursework not done in undergraduate years to be completed during graduate study. Various states have different regulations regarding licensure. The Certificate of Clinical Competence (CCC) is granted after the clinical fellowship year (CFY) when the individual provides services under the supervision of an experienced and licensed SLP. After a Certificate of Clinical Competence in Speech-Language Pathology is awarded. Continuing education is required for maintenance of the Certificate of Clinical Competence, every three years.[12] Post master's graduate study for a Speech-Language Pathologist may consist of academic, research, and clinical practice . A doctoral degree (Ph.D or Speech-Language Pathology Doctorate) is currently optional for clinicians wishing to serve the public.


The Speech-Language Pathology vocation
Speech-Language Pathologists provide a wide range of services, mainly on an individual basis, but also as support for individuals, families, support groups, and providing information for the general public. Speech services begin with initial screening for communication and swallowing disorders and continue with assessment and diagnosis, consultation for the provision of advice regarding management, intervention and treatment, and provision counseling and other follow up services for these disorders. • cognitive aspects of communication (e.g., attention, memory, problem solving, executive functions). • speech (i.e., phonation, articulation, fluency, resonance, and voice including aeromechanical components of respiration); • language (i.e., phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, and pragmatic/social aspects of communication) including comprehension and expression in oral, written, graphic, and manual modalities; language processing; preliteracy and language-based literacy skills, phonological awareness. • swallowing or other upper aerodigestive functions such as infant feeding and aeromechanical events (evaluation of esophageal function is for the purpose of referral to medical professionals); • voice (i.e. hoarseness (dysphonia), poor vocal volume (hypophonia), abnormal (e.g. rough, breathy, strained) vocal quality). Research has been proven to demonstrate voice therapy to be especially helpful with certain patient populations, such as individuals with Parkinson's Disease, who often develop voice issues as a result of their disease. • sensory awareness related to communication, swallowing, or other upper aerodigestive functions.

[16] . families. Training Education: • Master's degree in Speech-Language Pathology (M.) or a clinical doctorate in Speech Language Pathology (SLP-D).A. and mentor future Speech-Language Pathologists. following successful completion of clinical fellowship year (CFY). and training programs to promote and facilitate access to full participation in communication. including the elimination of societal barriers.[15] Participate in continuing education. occupational therapist. to indicate the practitioner's graduate degree and successful completion of the fellowship year/board exams to obtain the certificate of clinical competence (CCC). • American Speech and Hearing Association (ASHA) certificate of clinical competence (CCCs) and full state licensure to practice.A.. language. CCC-SLP or Ph. Educating and counseling individuals. providing information to health care professionals (including doctors.D. • Passing score on the National Speech-Language Pathology board exam (PRAXIS).Speech-language pathology 217 Multi-discipline collaboration Speech-Language Pathologists collaborate with other health care professionals often working as part of a multidisciplinary team. supervise. Continuing Education and Training Obligations: • • • • • Educate. • Recognizing the need to provide and appropriately accommodate diagnostic and treatment services to individuals from diverse cultural backgrounds and adjust treatment and assessment services accordingly. CCC-SLP. swallowing disorders. or swallowing. and dietitians). and parents as dictated by the individual client's needs. co-workers.A/M. educators. and decisions about communication and swallowing. or other upper aerodigestive functions. and manage Speech-Language Pathology Assistants and other support personnel. Educate and provide in-service training to families. The speech therapy outcome is even better as the surgical treatment is performed earlier. education. The treatment for patients with cleft lip and palate has an obvious interdisciplinary character. In relation to Auditory Processing Disorders[13] collaborating in the assessment and providing intervention where there is evidence of speech. • Advocating for individuals through community awareness. • Successful completion of a clinical fellowship year (CFY). caregivers. or for the treatment of other upper aerodigestive disorders. • Credentials of a clinical fellow typically read as M. and other persons in the community regarding acceptance.S. • Credentials of a licensed SLP are commonly written as M. providing referrals to audiologists and others. educators.S. or M. and other professionals. Research • Conduct research related to communication sciences and disorders. nurses. and/or other cognitive-communication disorders. adaptation. hearing. supervise. Train. CFY-SLP.[14] Healthcare • Promote healthy lifestyle practices for the preservation of communication.

or telepractice. hospice. called articulation disorders. private therapy is readily available through personal lessons with a qualified Speech-Language . co-ordination.g. cognition. Infants and children • Infants with injuries due to complications at birth. Informal assessments rely on a clinician's knowledge and experience to evaluate an individual's abilities across areas of concern. VII. range of movement. working in both public and private schools. language and/or cognitive development including cleft palate. including assessment and lessons through the public school system.g. Clients and patients requiring speech and language pathology services Speech-Language Pathologists work with clients and patients who can present a wide range of issues. language sample analyses. including dysphagia • Children with mild. difficulty with word-finding. symmetry and speed of cranial nerves V. and swallowing can consist of informal (non-standard or criterion based) assessments. (including vocalic /r/ and lisps) • Pediatric traumatic brain injury • Childhood apraxia of speech Some children are eligible to receive speech therapy services. Oral motor assessments review the strength. Instrumental measures (e. providing services at prisons and young offenders' institutions or providing expert testimony in applicable court cases. feeding and swallowing difficulties. or for Augmentative Alternative Communication needs. and oral motor mechanism exam. disorganization etc. and universities.[19] Subsequent to ASHA's 2005 approval of the delivery of Speech-Language Pathology services via video conference.[20] SLPs have begun delivering services via this service delivery method. language and/or cognitive development • Language delay • Specific language impairment • Specific difficulties in producing sounds. long-term acute care (LTAC) facilities. nasometer)utilizes equipment to measure physiological or anatomical impairments (e. errors in speech sound production. Formal standardized testing is used to measure an individuals' abilities against peers.. colleges. DiGeorge syndrome • Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder[21][22] • Autism.Speech-language pathology 218 Working environments Speech-Language Pathologists work in a variety of clinical and educational settings. Methods of assessment Assessment of speech. language.[17] and home healthcare. formal standardized tests. skilled nursing facilities (SNFs). following by a Traumatic Brain Injury). Referrals to Speech and Language Pathologists should be made if there are any concerns regarding slow or limited communication development in children. If not. instrumental measures. cognition (limited attention. SLPs work in public and private hospitals. Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES) or Modified Barium Swallow Study (MBS)).[18] Some speech-language pathologists also work in community health. IX.[23] including Asperger syndrome[24] • Developmental delay • Cranial nerve damage • Hearing loss • Craniofacial anomalies that adversely affect speech. moderate or severe: • Genetic disorders that adversely affect speech. SLPs may also work as part of the support structure in the education system. X and XII. The Australian National Guidelines for Stroke Management state that the presence or absence of a gag reflex in an oro-motor examination is not sufficient evidence to determine if someone has a swallowing disorder.. Down syndrome.

org/ certification/ slp_standards. Ad Hoc Committee on Service Delivery in the Schools. org [3] http:/ / www. za/ [8] http:/ / www. org/ cgi/ content/ abstract/ 17/ 1/ 4). fli. and Sara Hodge Zeno (1993). • Parkinson's disease. doi:10. RP1993-00208. Gina E. . Amie Amiot. • Motor Neuron Diseases. org [5] http:/ / www. ca [4] http:/ / www. moderate. speechtherapy. Am J Speech Lang Pathol 17 (1): 4–18.1044/policy. doi:10. Nimmo. Von Almen. saslha. etc.Speech-language pathology Pathologist or the growing field of telepractice. html). retrieved 2010-08-07 [2] http:/ / www. hk/ [12] "2005 SLP Standards" (http:/ / www. • Huntington's disease. rcslt. moderate. it [6] http:/ / www. au [10] http:/ / www. . org/ docs/ html/ RP1993-00208. iaslt. in [11] http:/ / www. Cheryl Deconde Johnson. "Definitions of Communication Disorders and Variations" (http:/ / www.) • cancer of the head.[25] More at-home or combination treatments have become readily available to address specific types of articulation disorders. Deborah W. neck and throat (including laryngectomy) • mental health issues • transgender voice therapy (usually for male-to-female individuals) References [1] Block. "Auditory processing disorders: an update for speech-language pathologists" (http:/ / ajslp. PMID 18230810. . ie/ [7] http:/ / www. speechpathologyaustralia. Stuttering (dysfluency) Stroke • • • • Naming difficulties (anomia) Dysgraphia. org. • dementia. org/ [9] http:/ / www. agraphia Cognitive communication disorders Pragmatics • • • Voice Disorders (dysphonia) Language disorders • • Laryngectomies Tracheostomies Oncology (Ear. org. or severe eating. The use of mobile applications in speech therapy is also growing as an avenue to bring treatment into the home. feeding and swallowing difficulties. Moncrieff D (February 2008). asha. 2005 Standards and Implementation Procedures for the Certificate of Clinical Competence in Speech-Language Pathology. asha. htm). [13] DeBonis DA. White. asha. org. ASHA. nose or throat cancer) Motor speech disorders (dysarthria or dyspraxia) • Adults • Adults with mild. including dysphagia • Adults with mild.. • Multiple Sclerosis. ishaindia. 219 Children and adults • • • • Cerebral Palsy Head Injury (Traumatic brain injury) Hearing Loss and Impairments Learning Difficulties including [26][27] • Dyslexia • Specific Language Impairment (SLI) [28] • Auditory Processing Disorder • • • • Physical Disabilities Speech Disorders Stammering. . or severe language difficulties as a result of: • Stroke • Progressive neurological conditions • Alzheimer's disease). asha. Peggy G. Frances K.1044/1058-0360(2008/002). co. caslpa. aslpmalta.

"FOXP2 as a molecular window into speech and language" (http://www. revistaomf. . (2009-06). html). [27] "The Role of the Speech-Language Pathologist | DyslexiaHelp at the University of Michigan" (http:/ / dyslexiahelp. "Speech therapy — criteria for determining the time of the surgical operation in surgery of labio-palato-velars cleft" (http:/ / www. ro/ (33)) (in (Romanian)). Trends Genet. "Language disturbances in ADHD.002. chir. 2010. PMID 22201208. Panoscha R (February 2006). Emil Urtilă. org/ telepractice/ ). cplol. [28] Richard GJ (July 2011). PMID 19304338. Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci 20 (4): 311-5. eu/ eng/ profil_professionnel. html). 2 (2): 21–23. nhscareers. asha. nidcd. aspx [24] http:/ / www. [20] "ASHA Telepractice Position Statement" (http:/ / asha.1542/peds. doi:10. P. edu/ parents/ living-with-dyslexia/ school/ classroom/ role-speech-language-pathologist)..php?option=com_content&view=article&id=14&Itemid=123) • http://www. [18] "Speech and language therapist . doi:10. A. who. nhs. [22] "International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems 10th Revision (ICD-10) Version for 2010" (http:/ / apps. 33. J Palliat Med 7 (5): 694–702. Retrieved 2012-06-06. Maria Ștefănescu (Oct 2011). gov/ disorders/ asperger/ Recovery From Stuttering. speech-language-therapy. Perlini. "Role of the speech-language pathologist in palliative hospice care". aspx?id=288). "Screening for speech and language delay in preschool children: systematic evidence review for the US Preventive Services Task Force" (http://pediatrics. [19] "What is speech and language therapy?" (http:/ / www. . int/ classifications/ icd10/ browse/ 2010/ en#/ F90).". PMID 21757563. 220 Further reading • Fisher SE. • Nelson HD. PMID 16452337. 26th October 2012. 2011.asha. nih. . aappublications. New York: Psychology Press/Taylor & Francis Group. oro-maxilo-fac. implantol. Michaela J. .Speech-language pathology [14] Mihaela Frățilă. doi:10.aspx • http://www. "The role of the speech-language pathologist in identifying and treating children with auditory processing disorder". • Howell. nih. htm [25] http:/ / asha. Moretti. org/ content/ 10/ 2/ 38. Brambilla. . . rcslt.1044/0161-1461(2011/09-0090).gov/health/voice/Pages/Default. 25 (4): 166–77. External links • Glossary of Speech-Language Pathology / Speech and Language Therapy Terminology (http://www. ISSN 2069-3850.(webpage has a translation button) [15] "Professional Profile of the Speech and Language Therapist" (http:/ / www. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch 42 (3): 241–5. umich. PMID 15588361. Perspectives on School-Based Issues 10 (2): 38– 2009&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_acct=C000050221& _version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=a40988a1d7dcbe434bf39246fae802af).2005-1467. doi:10. . Scharff C (April 2009).. "The Speech-Language Pathologist and Reading: Opportunities to Extend Services for the Children We Serve" (http:/ / div16perspectives.tig. Walker M.1016/ .1044/sbi10. org/ telepractice/ [26] Ritter. gov/ health/ voice/ pages/ autism.03. .org/cgi/content/full/117/2/e298#R8). sciencedirect.nih. Nygren P.nidcd. asha. Asha. full). org/ speech_and_language_therapy/ what_is_an_slt). Web. uk/ details/ default. Retrieved 2012-04-15. World Health Organisation.NHS Careers" (http:/ / www.38. Peter. [23] https:/ / www. . M. org/ docs/ html/ PI2010-00317. Rev.2. [16] "Roles and Responsibilities of Speech-Language Pathologists in Schools" (http:/ / www. Pediatrics 117 (2): e298–319. [17] Pollens R (October 2004). C. ninds. (Dec 2011). [21] Bellani. Retrieved 2010-04-15..

194. Trondtr. Jodie2003. Stevertigo. BiT. MIT Trekkie. Wells. Bogey97. Kajervi. Vegaswikian. Chronotox. ClosedEyesSeeing. MattPres. Gilliam. Picus viridis. Grahas02. Hans Adler. N-true. NTox. Powered. Andycjp. clown will eat me. Nscheffey. Mav. Looxix. Man vyi. Kripkenstein. XJamRastafire. Gaius Cornelius. Zack wadghiri. The Wiki ghost. Kronecker. Palmen. Rulevoider. Angr. Monty845. Beland. Jodi. Moxfyre.shura. Galoubet. FrancisTyers. Deeptrivia. Seglea. Lucidish. Dbachmann. Rcgy. Template namespace initialisation script. Furrykef. Pinethicket. LittleDan. Phil webster. CharlesGillingham. Indeterminate. Spellbinder. Jalwikip. Freedomlinux. Airborne84. Tbackstr. Jhopkins. Ophion. Wotnow. BD2412. KrakatoaKatie. Linas. Rkmaknowles. Marnanel. Artegis. Brian the Editor. Altg20April2nd. Akanemoto. Eugene-elgato. Hannes Hirzel. Wavelength. Ellmist. Signalhead. Sumgirl. Mack2.Article Sources and Contributors 221 Article Sources and Contributors Linguistics  Source: http://en. FrancisTyers. Conversion script. Aalahazrat. Joe Jarvis. Flamingspinach. Obradovic Goran. Ahoerstemeier. Florian Huber. CWenger. CambridgeBayWeather. Merfster. Poetaris. VinTing. Lexor. Kwamikagami. 62 anonymous edits Cognitive linguistics  Source: http://en. Pepper. EagleFan.Fred. Marek69. Newnoise. Cadr. Eshleyy. Garik. Jeff Thincat. Tayste. J. Dbachmann. Fayenatic london. Netan'el. GregLee. Conversion script. JKJasmineWongLaiKwan. Acb4341. FatsoGSD. Milesbarger. Taivo. Buridan. Bobo192. FreplySpang. Mindstore. Cnilep. Fuzzypeg. Skifunkster2011. Paul D. Galoubet. Tobby72. J. Haukurth. Achowat. R'n'B. Knightingail.wikipedia. Charles Matthews. LeadSongDog. Wapcaplet. 195. Joanjoc. Andjor. Keith D. Freespirit. Hannes Hirzel. Mike Dillon. DanielCD. Caiomarinho. Avitohol. Pinethicket. Velho. DennisDaniels. Andycjp. Happysailor. Charles Matthews. Wavelength. Cybercobra. SolaCrespuci. Velella. Lpjurca. Nbarth. MaximvsDecimvs. Donald Albury.68. Cromwellt. WereSpielChequers. Jonathan. AMMeier. Wik. Grendelkhan.wikipedia. Dennis Brown. Cc116. Jbeans. Rik G. Fplay. Ran. Alfio. Connormah. 130.schneider. Poor Yorick. David Kernow. Yidisheryid. LittleWink. Cadr. Dewritech. Trwier. Mr. Mindstore.too. Silvonen. Benc. Allan McInnes. Gibbja. WikHead. 209. Ghiraddje. Almit39. Hippietrail. Chris the speller. Hulten. PhilKnight. Guaka. Rjwilmsi. Template namespace initialisation script. Noticket. Can't sleep. Sirmylesnagopaleentheda. Mark Dingemanse. Zerida. Benjamin9832. El C. Hazchem. Pirtskhalava. Jasy jatere. Docu. Nigholith. Jlittlet. Sietse Snel. Mani1. Aaron north. Barbara Shack. Ziggurat. Richardtgriscom. LittleOldMe. Alinovic.160. Kyoakoa. Dvdsn.wikipedia. Radicalsubversiv. Giftlite. Topbanana. Jwestbrook. Devotchka. Alex S. Dittaeva. JoanneB. Brion VIBBER. Damian Yerrick.php?oldid=535618284  Contributors: Addshore. Svenonius. Daykart. Axeman89. 96. Jasy jatere. Bongwarrior. Jcarroll. JonnybrotherJr. PeepP. Jelly Roal. Kalomfa.wikipedia. Undead Herle King. Rspeer. Dbachmann. Pauldelacy. Dezidor. 681 anonymous edits Theoretical linguistics  Source: http://en. Jsteph. Onopearls. Ferhengvan. Norm mit. Paul500. The Wiki ghost. Carlog3. Hm423. Rich Farmbrough. Beige Tangerine. TheAMmollusc. Mike2000. CJLL Wright. CapnPrep. Jossi. The Transhumanist. Scwlong. Fuzheado. Linguizic. Diego UFCG. Jwestbrook. Francis Tyers. Dungodung. Phantomtiger. Schnitzi. PhnomPencil. Augustus Leonhardus Cartesius. Rje. The Anome. Firstwingman. Rich Farmbrough. Hu12. AK IM OP. Infovoria. Guy1890. Gregbard. Cnilep.117.222. Yjhjerry. Ivanobradovic. Looxix. JALockhart. Eilthireach. Chun-hian. Jagged 85. Angr. Woohookitty. Duoduoduo. Zeke (usurped). Ninly. Jo3sampl. Poccil. Corpx. FromFoamsToWaves. Adw2000.wikipedia. Hirzel. Kku. Sobreira. Conversion script. Byelf2007. Beland. Deleet. Matve. Zhozefiine. Ish ishwar. Davidjobson. Thewayforward. Hexham. HamYoyo. 204 anonymous edits Morphophonology  Source: http://en. Newbyguesses. Imran. Jose77. JNF Tveit. Leuko. Jonsafari. Rick richards. InfoCan.php?oldid=507163051  Contributors: Adam78. Tjdw. Kinema. Venu62. Mangojuice. Husseinjacob75. Altg20April2nd. Ergative rlt. RA0808. D6.51. Uncle4263. Netoholic. Tcamps42.wikipedia. Altenmann. Robbiemuffin. Miskwito. Mindspillage. Zoe. Cquan. TimBentley. Velho. JMStewart. SolKarma. Ryguasu. Alt-o. Dwspig2. FilipeS. IstvanWolf. Gregbard. Ahoerstemeier. Musical Linguist. Mairi. Byelf2007. Freethinker77. Atlant. Woohookitty. Nathan. Gem131. Wleman. ΚΕΚΡΩΨ. KBYU. Colonies Chris. Karmosin. Angr. Cromwellt. Imz. Tobby72. LittleDan. Alton. Osmòtic. Mr. Zalmoxe. Firstwingman. Dmerrill. Tijfo098. LMBM2012. Cnilep. Christopher Kraus. Denihilonihil.87. Semmelweiss. Zhen Lin. KakistocraticLaw. Cansem. The Nerd from Earth. Livajo. Depthgr8. Joelemaltais. Stradivarius on tour.lee.delanoy. Onco p53. Charles Matthews. Maarten van Vliet. Maurice Carbonaro. Suruena. Ashot Gabrielyan. Pakaran. Avjoska. HunterAmor. Icek. Shermanmonroe. SebastianHelm. Grick. Giftlite. NawlinWiki. Quintessent. Kwamikagami. Boleslav Bobcik. Piandcompany. Giftlite. WmGB. Nema Fakei. CapnPrep. LilHelpa. Fram. Haggen Kennedy. Victor Yus. Just plain Bill. Neelix. Edward.225. Ritchy. Nevill Fernando. Eob. Geoffrey S. JdeJ. MarsRover. The Transhumanist (AWB). Junglecat. Comhreir. Caeruleancentaur. Bogger. Obankston. Bryant. Imiraven. Weaponbb7. Godfrey Daniel. Welsh. Hirzel. Ish ishwar. Ben-Zin. CharlesGillingham. WLU. Albeiror24. Hadal. Eleassar. Gum375. Mxn. Squids and Chips. Anthony Appleyard. Michaelrayw2. IvanLanin. Andre Engels. Func. Gansam12. Sietse Snel. Rich Farmbrough.farah. Wikispan. Purple Sheep. Ninly. Jeff G. AdiJapan. Nstringer. RexNL. Ryguasu. MacTire02. WmGB. Cadr. KBYU.a. Cathfolant. Caledones. Hirzel. 14 anonymous edits Quantitative linguistics  Source: http://en. Notyourbroom. Fæ. Mitrius. Epbr123. DerHexer. Bobo192. Graphitus. Anomalocaris. John. Zoe. Joost. Triggerzeal13. Objectivesea. Mayumashu. Mayumashu. Garik. Sahehco. Allformweek. Pb30. Kajervi. Conversion script. Victor Yus. Hégésippe Cormier. JohnOwens. Almkglor. Iph. Dbachmann. Doric Loon. Furrykef. Kylu. Ncapriola. Binksternet. Headbomb. Just plain Bill. Saterry. Mrwojo. Raymond Feilner. C. KBYU. Shweta. Kalogeropoulos. Ninabeck. AK IM OP. Jsteph. Dduck. JossBuckle Swami. 94 anonymous edits Generative linguistics  Source: http://en. Jones Malcolm. Ergative rlt. Cervello84. Universal Life. BiggerAristotle. Rjwilmsi.php?oldid=534732110  Contributors: [email protected] Joshuagross. Nine Tail Fox. Cooper-42. Gilliam. Freelance Intellectual. Kappa. CyrilThePig4. Kwamikagami. Rotem Dan. Kowey. J. Anarkisto. FaerieInGrey. Bogdangiusca. Noctibus. Hannes Hirzel. DionysosProteus. Emil DARTH SIDIOUS 2. Nono64.php?oldid=530246275  Contributors: Angr. Ufotrain. LokiClock. John Riemann Soong. Valmi. Quiddity. JoergenB. Oskar. Mxn. True. Szyslak. AxelBoldt. Jobber. LittleDan. Jobber. Freakofnurture. The Wiki ghost. CyborgTosser. 'mach' wust. Conversion script. Mahaabaala. Ike9898. Vaiyach. Taw. Jauhienij. Twinxor. Dougluce. Skizzik. BigBangTheoryLad. Sabraw1. Vaganyik. Nickshanks. Zerida. AkselGerner. Djinn112. Ap. Hvn0413. Bomac. Ks 7508. Majorly. Uriyan. Susan118. Nanshu. Bobby D. Sebesta. Brandon. Bobelvis. Mark Dingemanse. J Crow. Jorge Stolfi. Synchronism. Derek farn. Graham87. Kwertii. Trilobitealive. Aaron Schulz. Ramendra. Szquirrel. TroubledTraveler. 2bluey. Qatter. Luna Santin. Template namespace initialisation script. Aitias. Kwertii. Gun Powder Ma. Gregbard. CR7. Action potential. DanKeshet. Quadell. Aeusoes1. Scipius. Puceron. Dlohcierekim. Ashmoo. Altg20April2nd. Babbage. Anomalocaris. WinedAndDined. Esanchez7587. . Jrdioko.Mestel. CCLS. 64. Discospinster. 62. Torgo. Samw. Erutuon. BRG. Inkstersco. Nurg. Hermitstudy. Jobin RV. Buzgun. Jdavidb. Lacrimosus. Jecar. Nasz. Scholar1982. Coren. 㓟. Atkinson 291. FlyHigh. Css. Darigan. Jaichetr. Mustafaa. The Wiki ghost. MER-C. E2lise. Rjanag. Tim Q. ThinkBlue. Glenn. DMacks. Benwing. Erutuon. Glane23.macuser. Lightmouse.230. Zaheen. Yury Tarasievich. Vaganyik. Mingwangx. SpuriousQ. Jonik.php?oldid=535505080  Contributors: 13alexander. MisfitToys. Kallerdis. Dolmagray. Paul A. Davidjobson.186. Nikai.202. Googl. Tassedethe. Suruena. Rogerb67. Ling. Brad7777. Natalie Erin. Andycjp. Gurch. FilipeS. Krash. Paxse. Ram-Man. IRP. Selfinformation.101. Jerry. Akerbeltz. Brighterorange. Stevertigo. GTony7912. MrsCaptcha. Astuishin. Ed g2s. Proofreader77. Sintonak. Shlomital. GlasGhost. Krawi. Spencer. Indeterminate. El C. Jsteph. Rosiestep. Tim Starling. Nawafpower. Jasonbook99. LA2. SolKarma. J. ChrisGualtieri. QuartierLatin1968. MIRACLE ONOCHIE.php?oldid=533745507  Contributors: Aleksd. VegKilla. Vanberg. Cadr. Gandalf1491. Faring.wikipedia.X. Alvinpoe. Epbr123.wikipedia. Brad7777. Spitfire19. ChrisGualtieri. Haham hanuka.. AdamRaizen. Bluemask. RodC. Mitsuki152. Glen. Bastique. Rjanag. Vanberg. Headfacemouth. Oda Mari. J Crow. Coffeeassured. Karmosin. Jmonk95. Steven Zhang. Rumiton. Swooningdisaster. Maunus. Grblomerth. Graft. Akhil999in. MZMcBride. Antonio Lopez. Macedonian. Kokoriko. Pprabhakarrao. Jkominek. Wiseskier. Reynoldst. Guillaume2303. Edward. Crusadeonilliteracy. QzDaddy. Kornfan71. Facopad. Lizmarie. Kagredon. Andre Engels. Jrw7. Lee Daniel Crocker. Hectorthebat. AlanBarnet. Reinhard Hartmann. Gigacannon. Jobber. Liftarn. Mdd. Touch Of Light. E104421. Bpetroglyph. Snoyes. Andrea moro. Mathematicmajic. Sara Parks Ricker. Cassowary. Tartarus21. Amirke5585. Island. Hectorthebat. Gum375. Cadr. Wknight94. Gbouzon. Ish ishwar. 10 anonymous edits Phonology  Source: http://en. Hannes Hirzel. Jan. Nposs. SunDragon34. Trusilver. Dinglydell. Vuo. David. Kikos. Comhreir. Rmashhadi. Icairns. Pengkeu. KnowledgeOfSelf. Wooddoo-eng. Netrapt. Doprendek. GregLee. KisstheGEEK. Tony1. Ish ishwar.120. Angr. Donald Albury. Jon Awbrey. Mike Dillon. Tappel. Closedmouth. Elatb. Deflective. Jonsafari. Felix Folio Secundus. FayssalF.26.php?oldid=536712546  Contributors: 12. Gregbard. Sinuhe. Greg-si. Capricorn42. Wikiwow. KEJ. R'n'B. Random account 47. Divespluto. Taragui. Fwc. Conversion script. 2bornot2b. Kbh3rd. Wikipeditor40. Fellowscientist. Lacrimosus. Tide rolls. Alansohn. Goudron. Hippietrail. Richwales. Nohat. Trickstar. CRGreathouse. Trusilver. Ehrbar. JeremyA. Glenn. Eklir. Kjkolb. B9 hummingbird hovering. 8 anonymous edits Functional theories of grammar  Source: http://en. Squideshi. Michael Hardy. Andrewpmk. Macbookair3140. Andres. DJ Clayworth. Technopat. Ecksemmess. Ante Aikio.Keromnes. Caltas. RoseParks. Hvn0413. Jasy jatere. Altenmann. Wikipelli. Aranea Mortem. Scarlet Lioness. Lockesdonkey. Jalali. Aintsemic. MagneticFlux. Tassedethe. Gogo Dodo. Ryguasu.88.kt. Schlossberg. Rainwarrior. Jlittlet. Knutux. Passw0rd. Makrai. J Crow. DVD R W. Sobreira. Tom Hope. John254. Sanya3.s. Filll. Dirk Geeraerts. Angryafghan. Drphilharmonic. Dwo. Flatterworld. Karpenkook. Lecorbeau5. IvanLanin. Kyoakoa. Msanford. Jacquerie27. Mandyvigilante. Altenmann. Pedrodius. Borislav. Ghirlandajo. Kyoakoa. Imiraven. Cntras. Cuaxdon. ResidentAnthropologist. Yuriybrisk. Niyogi. Thnidu. CityOfSilver. Hires an editor. Kaobear. Karl E. Marego. Python eggs. Puellanivis. Maunus. Graham87. Innoak. Jonnabuz. Kevin Steinhardt. Mrg3105. Himatsu Bushi. Burschik. Hoo man. Lee Daniel Crocker. Aphaia. Bissinger. Mxn. Ej. Fon. Efe. Lam Kin Keung. AuburnPilot. Ewan dunbar. Nihil novi. Pfold. D6. Spellbinder. Linguaua. EugeneZelenko. Feedmymind. Zadignose. Setok. Khoikhoi. Calumm. Ciceronl. Bentong Isles. Two halves. Bellenion. ElbowingYouOut. Honeybop. Quebec99. Mundart. Nikai. Mattisgoo. UkPaolo. Stevertigo. Djfrost711. Shadowjams. Grstain. Alipir. Desiphral. Dude1818. Macrakis. Kaobear. J Crow. Stinguist. Liontooth. MER-C.freebird. Cbdorsett. Xemoi. R'n'B. Kwamikagami. Ematch1. Sj. Xact. Richard Brooks MK. Joseph Solis in Australia. Jadoogiri. Suraduttashandilya. Hadal. Anderson.php?oldid=527185298  Contributors: Aeusoes1. Muspilli. Gogo Dodo. OrenBochman. Alinguist. Epbr123. Ioscius. Jerry. ElBenevolente. Auntof6. Friviere. Oghmoir. Hephaestos. TelecomNut. OlEnglish. Hyacinth. Apmab1. Spencer. Polocrunch.Hurd. Angr. Lova Falk. Asenine.240. Languageleon. Fattyjwoods. GordonUS. Angr.wikipedia. Jagged 85. GoodSirJava. Stevenmitchell. Wikivangelist. Rjanag. DDD DDD. Michael Hardy. MastCell. Poitypoity. Lam Kin Keung. Jmundo. Tbhotch. Ericedward.148. Mogism. Burzmali. Keta.. Pete. Gioto. Tech408. Jlittlet. Mindmatrix. Alipir. Slrubenstein. Richaraj. J. Altenmann. Glossologist. Khoikhoi. FilipeS. Ronhjones. Mattisse. BestKH. SimonP. Ish ishwar. Template namespace initialisation script.b. Supadawg. SuperlativeHors. Emufreak2. Deineka. Szyslak. Brevam.98. Prof. Spencer. James Crippen. Askari Mark. Syllabology. Branddobbe. Hoss. Aurista25. Theoretick. Tabitha2000. 26 anonymous edits Syntax  Source: http://en. Andycjp.php?oldid=530359565  Contributors: Ajd. Andycjp. Oliver Pereira. Magioladitis. Squidley. Edward321. KEJ. Cnilep. Johan1298. K. Denisarona. Iloveandrea. Supriyya. Nine Tail Fox. Crazycrazycrazycrazy. Livajo. Gjm. Jimbo2222. Thebeginning. Sergei Grinev-Griniewicz. Robofish. Rich Farmbrough. El C. Mzajac. Lilfireball05. Hyad. Byelf2007. Kompar. Karl-Henner. Trondtr. MrOllie. Truman Burbank. Hippasus. Cherry blossom tree. Bookuser. Mogism. Squarrels. Gailtb. Jane Santos. Alex Vynogradoff. Menchi. Rosanne. Zanimum. Joycloete. V.186.

Arribasplata. Chris the speller. Poccil. Edhubbard. Verbum Veritas. Kevin12xd. Ntennis. DandyDan2007. Heron. Fopnor. Yonghokim. Woohookitty. Dleonard. Andres. Spellbinder. Taw. Lova Falk. Damian Yerrick. Nabeth. Kalogeropoulos. Cnilep. Greedyhalibut. Gabrieldov. PhnomPencil. Germandemat. Mr. Erutuon. Robzy213. CALR. Florian Blaschke. Laurens-af. Br1z. Jefffi. Bjenks. Hakeem. PhJ. Granitethighs. 0XQ. Graham87. Александър. Shawn wiki. Adamstamp. Matturn. Luna Santin. Linkoman. Brighterorange.php?oldid=536423867  Contributors: [email protected] AKA MBG. Nohat.wikipedia. Stevertigo. Informatwr. OverlordQ. Template namespace initialisation script. Angr. Kwamikagami. Katy121. Cenarium. Mandarax. JLD. Cailil. Zegarad. Redwalker. Yug. Xp54321. Materialscientist. Comiscuous. Rp. Spellbinder. Charles Matthews. Mona Williams. Mike Rosoft. TheSoundAndTheFury. Möchtegern. Landroving Linguist. Marc Venot. Easterboxx. Erud. Lechatjaune. Kowey. BlumeTheory. Kablammo. SidP. Moink. Brion VIBBER. Reneeholle. Fenbaud. Pleckaitis. Mlinar. A. Lockesdonkey. Baronka. Ahernandez33. Redyka94. Stevenzenith. Dan Pelleg. Pigman. Chris the speller. Yuyudevil. Sinatra. Kyoakoa. Wales. AustralianMelodrama. Sabrebattletank. Bguest. Burschik. Hephaestos. DEddy. Newbyguesses. Rjwilmsi. Camw. Scope creep. HHirzel. MacedonianBoy. Benc. Lucidish. Milais. 383 anonymous edits Lexis (linguistics)  Source: http://en. Aniketdalal. Youssefsan. N-k. Robin klein. JourneyWomanSLP. RJFJR. Ayatniazi. Sir Vicious.php?oldid=534719542  Contributors: 13alexander. Ortolan88. Miskwito.wikipedia. William Avery. Nk. Stemonitis. 46 anonymous edits Semantics  Source: http://en. Raoul NK. Maashatra11. Vanisheduser12345. TuukkaH. Chalst. Rex Germanus. WereSpielChequers. Gwalla. Calwiki. MiNombreDeGuerra. Darigon Jr. Kelisi. Rjanag. Kukini. Malhonen. JoJan. Mr. Angry candy. Victor Yus. Wutsje. Nguyen Thanh Quang. Asderff. Gandalf1491. Battamer. Rama. David91. Richigi. Stevenmitchell. Lotje. Fuper. Ionius Mundus. Philip Trueman. Supertouch. Mooncow. Irc-reading. Pigman. Sysy. Khoikhoi. Bigjimr. Retodon8. Versus22. Molewood6. Warhorus. Ddball. Stifynsemons.kudinkin. Pliny. J. 9258fahsflkh917fas. Doremo. Linas. Tinctorius. Zerida. Jon Awbrey. ScAvenger lv. El C. Solitude.Article Sources and Contributors Macetw. EvenT. Sethmahoney. Ashfan83. Smithonian. Qwyrxian. TimVickers. Andycjp. B. Wresu. AkselGerner. Prabhakar P Rao. Isnow. Marek69. Genesiswinter. NatusRoma. Hairy Dude. Antonielly. Gioto. The wub. Nlight. Epbr123.. Rhys. Jon Roland. Aszev. Isnow. JWB. Stradivarius. Macedonian. Nbarth. Eric Shalov. Netesq. Elipongo. Nubiatech. Template namespace initialisation script. Hu12. Mahitgar. Rijkbenik. Michael Hardy. Szyslak. C. Genhuan. Quercus solaris. Mais oui!. Erick. NeoAmsterdam. Shadowlynk. Mchcopl. Tsk351. RandomP. Gveret Tered. Robson correa de camargo. Vaganyik. Edward. Gavia immer. Kricxjo. EnisSoz. TheDJ. Stevietheman. Superabo. Darkfrog24. Gabnh. Roven7. Cnilep. Sverdrup. SimonGreenhill. Ante Aikio. BiT. Rjanag. Jojit fb. Conversion script. Pinethicket. Salam32. Gregbard. Omnipaedista. Msasscts. Sangchaud. Martarius. Mjhoy. B. Msasscts. Michael Hardy. Gregorvalmehan. LogertGilby. Kkmcbride. Michael Hardy. SimonP. The Anome. Stevenmitchell. Joviir. Intgr. Philip Trueman. Macedonian. VMS Mosaic. Floddinn. Alexkon. Stevertigo. Unschool. Eagletm. Courcelles. Dolfrog. Ojigiri. Falcon9x5. Heron. Project2501a. RockMFR. Blankego. Squarrels. Dúnadan. Chameleon. Catgut. Ashley Pomeroy. Mayumashu. Quibik. Aboctok. Vaganyik. Sinatra. SDC. Art LaPella. Rich Farmbrough. Pit. Thom2002. Yaxu. Oldekop. Majorly. Parkjunwung. Ben Babcock. Gregbard. Oneiros. Royote. Droll. Danny lost. Wavelength. Squarrels. Jusdafax. Ianml. ITstudents. Dbiel. Sverdrup. Dcooper. Landon1980. DopefishJustin. Tim Q. BD2412. Whimemsz. Guy Peters. JForget.wikipedia. Revery. Typritc. Strife911. Nickleus. Jorunn. Æk. Wikid77. Astronautics. Nafpaktiakos. Shrumster.. Mike hayes. Galaxiaad. AnakngAraw. Mjb. Moanzhu. Cleduc. DaCentaur. BrainMagMo. D'n. MacedonianBoy. So-called Genius. SirGrotius. Tony1. Cybercobra. OlEnglish. Mindmatrix. Dsp13. Michael Hardy. Joanjoc. Tide rolls. Jahsonic. Davidsclarke. Bender235. Jimbo2222. Hermitstudy. Umofomia. Kyoakoa. Nora lives. Nick Number. Kaleissin. Joost. Micmachete.php?oldid=536340026  Contributors: 1ForTheMoney. Pasta Salad. Jojit fb. DocWatson42. Deepak (old). Pjoef. Slrubenstein. Velho. Youandme. DabMachine. Cpaw1. Livajo. Delldot. Musiphil. Rdsmith4. Wavelength. Mr. J Di. Siafu. Iridescent. Iranway. Jlittlet. Manytexts. 34 anonymous edits 222 . Wikiwlod. Haukurth. Govindmaheswaran. Derek Ross. Mukerjee. Rollred15. Starfire777. Stifynsemons.:Ajvol:. Will Hen. Antonielly. JDspeeder1. Tautologist. Fat Burner. Vaganyik. Frecklefoot. Cwkmail. Lunakeet. Camembert. Dave5702. Micmachete. Tijfo098. Octahedron80. MBisanz. Lrunge. Ghirlandajo. Woland37. Wikilibrarian. Rdsmith4. Supriyya. Maunus. Godfrey Daniel. Ave Caesar.S. Raymond Meredith. ElKevbo. AVand. JonHarder. Ioscius. Samsara. Mundart. NickelShoe. Kyoakoa. Pdblues. Ready. Jerzy. Jonkerz. Rjwilmsi. JustinCope82. Deathtripp. Dorvaq. Hannes Hirzel. Krupo. McSly. Willking1979. LilHelpa. Tooki. NawlinWiki. Meursault2004. Benc. Keeno. Christian List. GirasoleDE. MER-C. Rik G. Cnilep. Eequor. Kjoonlee. Borgx. Michael Hardy. Ap. Tbhotch. Anaphalis. MarkkuP. Genspire. Burschik. JimD. CharlesGillingham. Suttkus. 394 anonymous edits Linguistic description  Source: http://en. Karl-Henner. Ahoerstemeier. Viriditas. Rursus. Lubos. Amhawks. Pne. Enric Naval. Wolfdog. SteinbDJ. Nk. Dduck. Poeticbent. Macedonian. Garik. Mazeface. Nick Number. JAHendler. Zarel. Mike BenSmak. ChrisGualtieri. Lakoff. Allens. Elwikipedista. The Transhumanist. Physicist. Grant Fletcher. Tang Kai Mun. Ritzemar. Dmccreary. Jaberwocky6669. Andre Engels. Cquan. Thomasmeeks. Tijfo098. Hyacinth. FilipeS. UnconsciousInferno. Rezwalker. Stradivarius on tour. Evereyes. Jason L. Donald Albury. Fayte. DPCBOSS. BD2412. Notinasnaid. PBS. Incrediblub. TwigsCogito. Sylent. HairyFotr. Springindd. Shamalyguy. Mjklin. Wayland. Zaslav. Suraduttashandilya. GTBacchus. Mbell. Sonic Mew.wikipedia. Marc Girod. Suraduttashandilya. DASonnenfeld. Nguyễn Thanh Quang. Crònica. Rossami. Gimmetrow. Hong12kong. Eniarrol. Shizhao. Michael Hardy. TimVickers. Evice. Jakash. DoktorMax. Sky1er. Rjanag. Wolfdog. DionysosProteus. The Tetrast. Jackol. Vergad. Ryguasu. Maunus. Youssefsan.ﮐﺎﺷﻒ ﻋﻘﯿﻞ‬anonymous edits Pragmatics  Source: http://en. Erutuon. The Alchimist. Jerryobject. Nurg. Kokoriko. Art LaPella. Knotwork. Vmenkov. Gurch. Jimwilce. Wyatt915. Fuzzform. LokiClock. Nyoro n.forsythe. TheRingess. Jdlh. Igiffin. Augur.php?oldid=516459445  Contributors: . Jooyoonchung. Emptymountains. Wclark. X201. Ani. U-Mos. Sophie. Varuag doos. Allen3. SJP. Keraunos. Omnipaedista. Ikiroid. Byelf2007. Rdanneskjold. ST47. Polyvios. NorwegianBlue. Wayiran. Ancheta Wis. OlEnglish. Byelf2007. Rivertorch. Oxymoron83. Sethmahoney. Nicodemus13. Kku. IvanLanin. MacedonianBoy. ZimZalaBim. Melchoir. JECompton. Mayooranathan. SummerWithMorons. Wiredrabbit. Conversion script. Koavf. Seriv. Sardanaphalus. Pigsonthewing. Omnipaedista.Antezana. Jtauber. Mayumashu. Iridescent. Sundar. Omnipaedista. Jon Awbrey. Oxymoron83. Mentifisto. Dr Oldekop. Javier Carro. Vivio Testarossa. Russell. Rtcpenguin. Dbachmann. Julian Mendez. Mushroom. Anomalocaris. Asoer. Livajo. Jon Roland. Ben-Zin. Everyking. Riyadi. Kennetha. Tijfo098. Kronecker. Wikipelli.wikipedia. Hui1234. Redvers. Sun Creator. K1US. Dolfrog. RedWolf. Llamas4drama'10. Andrey Kartashov. Javier Carro. HazielAhn. Pi zero. Altenmann. Hu12. Lygophile. Neilc. Wavelength. Sailoralexny. Ish ishwar. Trulytruly. Binadot. Cdc. Template namespace initialisation script. Scwlong. Dylan Lake. Stifynsemons. Torgo. RHHallam. Iblardi. Quangbao. Dissident. Unfree. Pjacobi. El C. Jpatokal. Aldenjadi. Dani0rad. Neutral-en. Lanov. Simlorie. Cansem. Kntg. Bodragon. Smokizzy. Varoon Arya. Reinhard Hartmann. Woohookitty. RoseParks. Purpose Observatory. EcoRover. Göktürker. WpZurp. Nscheffey. Zerida. Jorge Stolfi.. Bjankuloski06en. Ulflarsen. Mgreenbe. JMK. Syndicate. Pitan. DCDuring. Lawandeconomics1. Jakohn. LKNUTZ. KarlHallowell. Hpvpp. Hamsterlopithecus. Anthony Appleyard. Qwyrxian. Hans Adler. JAF1970. Terrasidius. Mundart. Ventusa. Glenn. ‫ 953 . Tharenthel. Hermitstudy. Suchisuvrasen. MK8. Kku. Bonadea. Brantgoose. Luna Santin. Hephaestos. Eaefremov. 183 anonymous edits Orthography  Source: http://en. Jmchambers90. Bornslippy.250. Urhixidur. Joanjoc. Rsrikanth05. Jonsafari. Philip Trueman. Docu. Palica. Mycomp. Skal. Defyn. Galoubet. Pgk. Zsinj. Mike Klaassen. Light current. Mizukane203. Kaihsu. 29 anonymous edits Anthropological linguistics  Source: http://en. LilHelpa. D6. IvanLanin. Galoubet. Dekimasu. Lemccbr. Cie'th. Moretz. Kiwibird. Poor Yorick. Rjanag. Delirium. Rich Farmbrough. Mu.Z-man. LeadSongDog.delanoy. Andre Engels. Bill3000. Shermanmonroe. Aleksd. Khoikhoi. Belovedeagle. Canley. GringoInChile. Jules. Flyte35. Diego UFCG. Mustafaa. Zeno Gantner. 2bluey. Pfold. Passing mouse. NSR. Jpta. Laocoön11. Aviados. Benc. Nuno Tavares. Iketsi. Sankalpdravid. MarkSweep. Hu12. Jusjih. Tijfo098. DASonnenfeld. The bellman. Semmelweiss. Cacycle. AdiJapan. Aenioc. Ricky81682. Sockatume. Stevertigo. Headbomb. Goberiko. Luke4545. Peelpel. Paris1127. Darrenhusted. James Seneca. Steven Weston. Rjanag. Minna Sora no Shita. Piercetheorganist. Paulfp. Lucidish. Mani1. Kku. MER-C. Tmusgrove. Wknight94. Marnanel. Mikeo. Mr. Skeuomorph. Pred. Runch. Doc honcho. Kgoarany. Tom Pippens. Eall Ân Ûle. David Gerard. Friginator. El C. Space Dracula. Ahernandez33. Yuriz. Mindmatrix. Mukerjee. Auccl799. CJ Withers. Coffee. Looxix. Mikeroodeus. Ihcoyc. Michkalas. Heron. Uanfala. Pit. Antiorario. Mandarax. NawlinWiki. Drmaik. Tempshill. Crywalt. Eilthireach. Poccil. Gregbard. Dr sign. Lynch9000s. Martarius. Chris the speller. Funandtrvl. Yenlinch. Mike889. Malhonen. Lingrace us. Dpv. Miquonranger03. Brelson. Xosé. TheRingess. Fmuratozdemir. AGToth. Frap. Rwflammang. Universityuser. Merijn2. Jivecat. Ziusudra. Zhen Lin. MaNeMeBasat. Dear ODear ODear. Lam Kin Keung. R'n'B. Fowler&fowler. Novangelis. Mrcool1122. Josh Grosse. Lindsay658. Hectorthebat.php?oldid=523687590  Contributors: 0XQ. Xyzzyva. Eequor. Stesmo. Ngio. Jens Meiert. Nyttend. Conal Grealis. Smartse. Logan. Alexey. Rursus. Hu12. Djmutex. Grape1. Jdenen. MGTom. Giraffedata. Xxsissyxx. Benwalker446. Gregbard. Mechanismic. Oileyboyley. Smokesomedillweed. Dasternberg. VinTing. Sparafucil. Kokoriko. Tikiwont. Morganiq. Anomalocaris. Slipperyweasel.Örvarr. CumbiaDude. 35 anonymous edits Comparative linguistics  Source: http://en. Mr. Nortexoid. Zerida. Krixou. Kaihsu. Jojalozzo. FilipeS. Aristolaos. Dorftrottel. Tkynerd. Favonian. Spellbinder. Stevertigo. Andres. Eric Biggs. Ilselieve. JuJube. Rigadoun. Dalahäst. Wmahan. Wimberley. The Wiki ghost. Hurmata. Adrian Sampson. Active Banana. Garik. Wooddoo-eng. Andycjp. Helix84. Yerpo. The Tetrast. Sopher99. Semantia. Cquan. Maw. FilipeS. Macrakis. Juniuswikia. Dpv. Edhubbard. Jm34harvey. Stradivarius. PaulColby. Kelleyhg. Dorftrottel. Stephenb. Reinhard Hartmann. Bluszczokrzew. Ekotkie. Awi007. S. Wetman. Reidwikki. Dmacw6. MasterofUnvrs314. RekishiEJ. Pirtskhalava. Rich Farmbrough. Hirzel. Jacksonflint. Jærv. Seaphoto. Guoguo12. Bookinvestor. Sligocki. G. Epbr123. Facopad. Arthur Rubin. Sonjaaa. Immunize. Isotope23. Davidjobson. Sebesta. Triplejo2. SBennett1. BookgirlST. Shanelemaster88. Purplepancho. JohnOwens. Fobizan. Canto2009. The Famous Movie Director. Martin Hinks. Lindsay658. Daveh1. AndriesVanRenssen. Jitse Niesen. R'n'B. Tryxx. Pedant17. Amos Han. Mainstreet27. Bennydigital. Jon Pprabhakarrao. Ontoraul. Rjanag.gadi. Rmallott1. Thomasda. Gailtb. Kzzl. Levalley. Zerida. Beno1000. JustShin. Sacundim.wikipedia. Gdarin. LoggedRoot. Lambda. Gleaman. Gecko. FlavrSavr. Harold Philby. Vonkje. Stevey7788. Kwamikagami. Curdeius. Zack wadghiri. Maunus. BearMachine. Reedy. Chris the speller. Markus Krötzsch.wikipedia. BillGates12345. Khalid hassani. Sarah9987. Tjo3ya. Amerique. Benjamin Dominic. Victoria15. Pupster21. Cupy 52040. Stradivarius. Altg20April2nd. Greudin. A. Itoula. Quite. Aleksd. Ish ishwar. Kemet. Jwdietrich2. Simetrical. Mandarax. MarkBrooks. Lindosland. Titoxd. Beyond My Ken. Jobber. Hajenso. Nposs. Dbachmann. Rod57. Nagelfar. Mav. Tide rolls. Mark Dingemanse.php?oldid=536431716  Contributors: [email protected] Adam78. Miguelmrm. Ctsewall. Kku. Imersion. 达 伟. Analogisub. 8ung3st. Leoselivan. Bdesham. R'n'B. Rlevse. Sj. Nilmerg. Vandermude. Physicist. Doradus. Teamprag. Ott. Somedude202. Dzzl. Tycho. Bgiwan. Cobaltnova. WAS 4. Reaper Eternal. Vishnava. Yerpo. Edunoramus. Cnilep. A. Aaeamdar. Rdsmith4. Verbum Veritas. Rwessel. KYPark. Rich Farmbrough. FadulJA. RasputinJSvengali. Kzollman. Hyggelig. MadGuy7023. Burschik. Qetuth. Ergative rlt. Andreasstokke. Eyadhamid. Thomas Blomberg. Rursus. Aponar Kestrel. Wells. Kwertii. Ko'oy. Radagast83. 119 anonymous edits Semiotics  Source: http://en. Cyborg Ninja. Gohlke. Antonielly. MissFrappell. RekishiEJ. David H Braun (1964). Zaheen. PaulTanenbaum. Slipstream. Rmosler2100. Jordyman97. Aleksd. Kensall. KC 12321. Montag451. VikSol. Doric Loon. Giraffedata. Lambyuk. Theyetiman12345. Ott. Niro5. Peachlette. Lotje. Youssefsan. Espresso Addict. The Anome. Stemonitis. SummerWithMorons. Fvw. Jim1138. Eklir. Antonielly. 2bluey. SofieElisBexter. David Delony. HillarySco. Viverechristus. CanadianLinuxUser.wikipedia. Neilbeach. Conversion script. Apple0142E.php?oldid=535078850  Contributors: Adam78. Alanthehat. Velho. Канеюку. Mav. Boblibr. JC Chu. Phil Sandifer. The singapore ministry of education sucks. Inwind. Rjanag. Eklir. Schaefer. Sannse. Samsara. Vincent Ramos. FocalPoint. Roberta F. Lucidish. Denisarona. Shakescene. Polylerus. Numbo3. Quibik. Wayne Slam. Woohookitty. RedHouse18.. Nihil novi. Bamkin. Burschik. Mindmatrix. Chrishota. Rashomon digger. Azymuthca. Sethton..b. Mark Dingemanse. Mekanik78. Pirtskhalava. Jal.php?oldid=532035453  Contributors: Adresia. Ynaztiw. George100.

Antandrus. Dinesh smita. Vifsm. Overlord512. Pikolas. DennisDaniels. Eichblatt. CreoleFungus. Johnbibby. Darth Panda. 㓟. Garik 11. Hadal. Royote. JSimin. Avidmosh. Lament. Anthere. Roger Davies. Afil. Crònica. Olegwiki. Argylemoose. Pinethicket. Eburaconos. NERIUM. Jkominek. Burschik. Erudecorp. Devovo. Ace Frahm. Shizhao. Daqu. Mahmudss. Gz33. Sickxapples. Venu62. Wavelength. Ap. Fnielsen. Maxcap. Zzuuzz. GeoffreyGleadall. Mitchoyoshitaka. Skeppy. JaGa. Gennaro Prota. Lam Kin Keung. Hu12. Svick. Pindaris. Romanm. Bricolab. ABF. Danjj. Gerteger. 554 anonymous edits Graphetics  Source: http://en. Piotr Gasiorowski.wikipedia. Unmerklich. 21655. Screamingmidgets. Notinasnaid. 127 anonymous edits Forensic linguistics  Source: http://en. Prmdunge. Access Denied. Frank. Iohannes Animosus. Zhangshuo517. Davebachman. The Famous Movie Director. Perezkelly. Filll. Jasperdoomen. Cyde. Discospinster. Cassowary. TomPhil. Sparky147. Dalstadt. HistoryBA. Dmitri83. The JPS. TenPoundHammer.April. Martin451. Jagged 85. Ghirlandajo. Altenmann. Donama. Fredrik. Hari. Czechios. Drewdevin67. Vaganyik. Albeiror24. Magioladitis. DePiep. Wells. Jmabel. Benne. Rjanag. BrainMarble. Shanes. WatermelonPotion. Saforrest. Conversion script. J. The Moose. Mr. Miskwito. Trickstar. Abc518. Mr. Graham87. Linkspamremover. Bbatsell. ConceptExp. Eshleyy. Nethency. Kwertii. Jugger90.sedghi. Mokkers. Bemoeial. CTanguy. Bubuka. Nikola Smolenski. Kzhr. Lambda. The Wiki ghost. Tanár. PaulHanson. Menchi. Tsinfandel. Rygelski. McGeddon. Neilc. Branddobbe. Trigaranus. Dannywalk. RafaAzevedo. J.php?oldid=530561280  Contributors: . Cmannall. DeltaQuad. School genius. Opus33. Stephenb. Hippietrail. J-Wiki. RucasHost. Paxsimius. PiMaster3. Some jerk on the Internet. LittleDan. Ugur Basak. Una Smith. KnowledgeOfSelf. Srnec.Koslowski. Charles Hodgson. Italianoinspiritu.X. Mkruijff. Garik. Dnaeil. Sun Creator.Han-Im. J. M-le-mot-dit. Smcg8374. Fedor. Tbackstr. Limegreen. Rjwilmsi. Ganymead. Man vyi. MacTire02. Jfpierce. Adresia. Haukurth. Rolyatleahcim. Jammie2. Bogdangiusca. Doric JeanEva Rose. Ardief. Babbage. Mononomic. Simetrical. Romanm. Yatsko. CALR. Bodnotbod. Sexyball. Gaius Cornelius. Eanc. Jfurr1981. Charles Matthews. Ante Aikio. Naddy. Z10x. Zohab. LunaticFringe. Daf. MSabev. Hannes Hirzel. Mandarax. Ygwnkm.albrecht. Cult-p. Vi6dla. Materialscientist. Ante Aikio. Reinhard Hartmann. Montrealais. 'mach' wust. QuartierLatin1968. Libcub. FrancisTyers. Kessler. Otichy. Parkwells. Avb. J.php?oldid=534943898  Contributors: [email protected] Louelle. Jsteph.ﺳﻌﯽ‬anonymous edits Computational linguistics  Source: http://en. Romansanders. DVD R W. Chengchamroeun. Lotje. Sebesta. Lalala171717. LittleWink. Secondwatch. EMLM. Optiguy54. 2D. Pmatsuda. Jburr1985. Angr. Simeondahl. Stevenbird. Drydic guy. Schwallex. Kalgari. Andres. Alexwiki. Erutuon. Slackermonkey. Connor4355. Galoubet. Le Anh-Huy. IvanLanin. He who Geezes. Friviere. Chaojoker. Nicke L. Rich Farmbrough. Simon J Kissane. Muhammad Shuaib Nadwi. Iohannes Animosus. Francis Tyers. Zoicon5. Flyhighplato. The Phoenix. Dfrysinger. The Sage of Stamford. Iridescent. Porcher. Taw. TwistOfCain. Fakirbakir. Alsandro. Jmundo. Stevertigo. Renaissancee. PantherNC. Grahamgraeme. Matlee. Phil wink. Lee Carre. Hoss. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea. Neutrality. Richard001. Darkfight. Gailtb. Tomsega. Donarreiskoffer. Gabr. Shadow demon. Gum375. Magicalsaumy. Miskwito. Jay. Stradivarius. Markeilz. John of Reading. Jef-Infojef. Sundar. Suruena. Epbr123. Michal Jurosz. Chris the speller. DigitalSorceress. Bobo192. Dicaeopolis. Download. Niro5. NKT45. Ft1. Vssun. Hydrogen Iodide. Poor Yorick. Umofomia. Oda Mari. Sfan00 IMG.222. Kablammo. 3point14159. Dpv. Ardonik. EncycloPetey. SebastianHelm. Ral77. Zaheen. CapitalR. Ulf Hermjakob. SchreiberBike. Khoikhoi. Apokrif. BrainyBabe.:Ajvol:. Furrykef. Willdunford1. PierreAbbat. Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival. TheJrLinguist. Lilfireball05. Lingboy. Kh7. Andrij Kursetsky. Ravenous. Andrey Kartashov. Qaz. Flyingbird. Nohat. Triddle. Mdoff. The Anome. Andycjp. Livajo. Kjoonlee. Inimino. Jimothytrotter. Bellemonde. Satanael. Jim62sch. Angr. Dsoussan. Headbomb. 小 為. Pinnerup. Kimelinor. Timwi. Semantia. Studyyear. Master2841. Nestanaios. Aleksd. Mxn. Charbee. Reinthal. Dbachmann.254. Edcolins. NeaNita. Linguaua. Woohookitty. Maurreen. RoseParks.Reding. General Reader. Gil mo. VattuVattu. Text Rx. Elfelix. Memefactory. BrainyBabe. Yongjik. Gzabers. Saethwr. CChaski. Akerbeltz. Retodon8. Gilliam. Wiki Wikardo. Hairy Dude. Jbodden6977. Sinatra. Ikiroid. Finn-Zoltan. Shadowjams. Crusadeonilliteracy. Roylee. Noula69. Shepard. Zantedeschia. Ddranf. Van helsing. Future Perfect at Sunrise. Anypodetos. Free Bear. Sacundim. Awien. Mike Rosoft. PierreAbbat. Canhaspancake. Fvasconcellos. Tony1. Wikiwow. TheAMmollusc. Mitch Ames. ChrisO. Klow.php?oldid=529273884  Contributors: [email protected] Remi0o. Mnewmanqc. MrOllie. Uncle uncle uncle. Vivvek. Lam Kin Keung. Diana LeCrois. Yuriybrisk. Nposs. Plm209. Keilana. JH-man. Whimemsz. Majmun. Tiggyp11. Beetstra. Zerida. Louelle. Sadads. Welsh. Petitphoque. Olivier. 223 . Looxix. Eighty. Dominic. Billfalls. Rjwilmsi. Peter Ladage. Hayden120. JLC2. Angr. Mallerd. Sarichkaa. Pfold. Avjoska. Fgrosshans. Treborbassett. Markmark12. Oliver202. Karl Palmen.ﺳﻤﺮﻗﻨﺪﯼ‬anonymous edits Applied linguistics  Source: http://en. Uncle Milty. Masatran. Byalinguist. Graham87. Myanw. Marknadsdomstolen. LukeD. YLSS. Olivier. Timdownie. Modulatum. Billposer. Kongr43gpen. Centrx. Pgdudda. Roger Davies. Cynwolfe. Schapirama. Femto. AndrewHowse. XJamRastafire. Saforrest. Acroterion. Kevlar67. Stradivarius. Frangky silitonga. SpookyMulder. Mindmatrix. Pion. Alan McBeth. Bearcat. TreasuryTag. Pcarter7. AnOrdinaryGuy. Quangbao. Stephenb. Adrian 1001. Meursault2004. Crazycomputers. Nitrogen56. Kwamikagami. SomeFreakOnTheInternet. Wasbeer. Shizhao. Stevertigo. Nasnema. Ishenko. Pjacobi.wikipedia. EDG161. Vahagn Petrosyan. Tabletop. Homerjay. MarkSweep. Restre419. DeGabor. DeadlyAssassin. Misarxist. Patrick. Lucidish. Elockid. Mrg3105. J Di. Flyingidiot. Carey Evans. NewEnglandYankee. Fraserx10. Fgdfgdssfghrr6rg7g756. Micmachete. Fratrep. Thisisanaccountname. Sslyruc. TurinHurinson. Fayenatic london. Awesomearun. Thüringer. Chameleon. Shumdw. Dhirsbrunner. Meclee. CyclePat. Whimemsz. Paperflowergirl. Blenda. Julian Mendez. Droppedyod. Gurch. Scatterkeir. Szyslak. Hannes Hirzel. Avicennasis. Tom. Juggleandhope. Metonym. Pacific50. Dumasb. Astronautics. Rjanag. Quangbao. Demeter. Graham87. Womtelo. Seth Ilys. Raymond Meredith. Mr. Menchi. Jblasco2. Mas. Emperorbma. Fastilysock. Marnanel. Dungodung. Jeroen Claes. Macedonian. Wavelength. Glavkos. Jon Harald Søby. Bjenks. Dysepsion. Stradivarius. BRG. DASonnenfeld. Stephen Compall. Babbage. Pintaio. clown will eat me. Nirjhara. Ciacchi. Jph. Jagged 85. Technopat. Keeno. Pmanderson.frye. J. Davidjobson. Timothy Usher. Tarquin. Jprw. SorenLinden. Joehall45. Twsx. Betamod. Hopiakuta. Juozas Rimas. Massimo Macconi. NeoJustin. Thovt. VeryVerily. Domadams. Hyju. Borgx. Filemon. Cjholula. Chloefb.wikipedia. Nohat. LOL. MK8. Soapyyy. PseudoSudo. Alex earlier account. Angr. Jorge Stolfi. Zeno Gantner. Wereon. IronGargoyle. Pgdudda. Kwamikagami. Hiimbrady. Jyusin. Nurg.delanoy. Daveyboysimmo. JJL. Reinhard Hartmann. MitraE. LWG. Ideogram. Luna Santin. Tothebarricades. Maha Odeh. Sgsilver. Calvin 1998. Mr. Zro. Michielodb. Kurykh. Keeno. DerHexer. Charles Matthews. ManningBartlett. SISPCM. Denial land. Александър. Ffbond. Valentinejoesmith. Sonjaaa. Kyoakoa. 209. Gpkh. Niteowlneils. CapitalR. Chasingsol. Joy. Versus22. Tabletop. Jrtayloriv. Wikiklrsc.delanoy. Kenny sh. SchfiftyThree. Closedmouth. Cmdrjameson.php?oldid=535782296  Contributors: -. CanadianLinuxUser. Andrewcmcardle. Letowskie. Woohookitty. Michael Hardy. Tachyon01.s. Entheta. Popwriter. Rossami. Jreans.wikipedia. Mack2. Mcld. Twooars. Rich Farmbrough. 'mach' wust. Aeusoes1. Rjanag. Slomo. BiT. Joelmills. LaggedOnUser. Doric Loon. Man vyi. Dissident. Aref Saki. Greg-si. Band geek13. Oupblog.Article Sources and Contributors Historical linguistics  Source: http://en. Mani1. David ekstrand. Ruakh. Jonathan. Garant^^. SJK. Djg6058. Kyoakoa. JonnoFLI. Mustafaa. Ioscius. Wesley Holt. Peter Deer. Akhilleus. Jauhienij. Ish ishwar. EamonnPKeane. Christian List. Marchije. Sintonak. Iris lorain. NHRHS2010. Wareh. Mayooranathan. Dmolla.102. Cprompt. Itai. Jimp. Suraduttashandilya. Johnbrownsbody. Brianga. Kwamikagami. TrogL. Nagualdesign. Theirrulez. Hearnoseenospeakno. Samsara. Tsunaminoai. Guy Peters. Aaron north. Iceman787. Brendan. BD2412. Psychonaut. Reconsider the static. MrOllie. Closedmouth. El C. Joehall45. Chzz. Oxymoron83. Mfelkess. Eliptis. Firstwingman. Sacundim. Connor4355. Matusz. Michael Hardy. Leovizza. Pintu1ful. Flywheel. Gbrading. IPfish. Ufotrain. Fryed-peach. Logan. Chinasaur. Damian Yerrick. David spector. Umofomia. Rainiedays. SofieElisBexter. AxSkov. EJPyatt. Fwappler. FilipeS. Cnilep. Spbm. Quiensabe. Dicklyon. Yworo. Stephen C. KevinMcGowan. Alx3762. TheMandarin. Andrusiak. Kallerdis. Neongrey. Teoweilong. Tangerines. Bjankuloski06en. ‫ 772 . Furrykef. Andy500. CapnPrep. Junesun. Lucienyahinna. Pluemaster. Szyslak. Cybercobra. Hotcrocodile. Karmosin. Musical Linguist. Noahpoah. Wavelength. Piggyinthemiddle. 67 anonymous edits Etymology  Source: http://en.wikipedia. Jclemens. Nposs. Youshouldask. Hraefen. Antonielly. Antandrus. AKeen. M0phet. Kappa. WikHead. Ergative rlt.. Insanity Incarnate. Aubadaurada. Fredbauder. Nilfanion. Andre Engels. Bloodofox. Dusty relic. Ish ishwar. Rex Germanus. Assistant N. Kintetsubuffalo. Omnipaedista. Suffusion of Yellow. Peter Isotalo. Meeples. Montrealais.php?oldid=533910849  Contributors: -Ril-.. Rajnishkmr083. Mdoff. Gioto. Ryguasu. Lucidish. BrightStarSky. Jonkerz. Pete unseth. Snoyes. Template namespace initialisation script. Sterlingjones. Windharp. TedSwarovski. Mrhankeythechristmaspoo. Nick Number. Luitgard.wikipedia. Oregontom. Eurobas. Ahoerstemeier. Fleela. Diego. Koyaanis Qatsi. Will Hen. Sebesta.wikipedia. Dylansmrjones. UnitedStatesian. Palica. OnBeyondZebrax. Curdeius. CanisRufus. ThePointblank. Mani1. O.kt. Pgk. NawlinWiki. Poccil. Александър. Tavilis. Emw. 65. Anomalocaris. Kevin Russell. Ornil. Lilasnoir. Dpv. Template namespace initialisation script. Bgwhite. Igor. OprgaG. Hookoo. The. Carlson. Sluzzelin. Inksha. Ortonmc. Ejrrjs. Nohat. Universityuser. Ffbond. Reaverdrop. Paddy O'Scallion. Vanberg. Magioladitis. Rjwilmsi. Allens. Corvus coronoides. Karada. TopAce. Entropy. Stirling Newberry. Stunttriple.wikipedia. Gurt Posh.87. Manma. Charles Matthews. Velella. TimGrant. Carlj7. Michkalas. Looxix. Vdannyv. Ko'oy.. Katelin 21. SiobhanHansa. Moose91894. Hmains. RISHARTHA. Robertsteadman. The Thing That Should Not Be. Paul Drye. KeyStroke. Hmains. Александър. Slomo. Musicalantonio. MacedonianBoy. Xinelo. Inertiatic076. Marxolang. Erik9.php?oldid=490980941  Contributors: Mikelo Gulhi. Gaidheal1. Spellbinder. Bcorr. Jamesmcmahon0. Hannes Hirzel. John K. Heron. Geekdiva. Pigman. Tibetologist. Terasawat. Makswel. Ragib. Hveziris. Visviva. Dajwilkinson. Staszek Lem. EugeneZelenko. Eaefremov. Park jae-hoon. Nono64. Timschmi. Rjanag. 3rdAlcove. Karl-Henner. Diegusjaimes. Miskwito. Ary29. Kaffeeringe. Ceoil. Ckatz. Darigon Jr. BBuchbinder. Malecasta. Galoubet. Kikos. Peachris. Suraduttashandilya. SpeedyGonsales. ‫ 491 . Ethicoaestheticist. Garik. N-true. Abc12345678910. MuffledThud. Yahya Abdal-Aziz. Agradman. Wituckatron. HaeB. Hede2000. Sk8withspanky. Kaobear. Ulric1313. Taral. Jonsafari. KRSplat. Sbluen. Ajd. Angr. ΚΕΚΡΩΨ. Khym Chanur. Mark Dingemanse. Hm423. Template namespace initialisation script. PhilKnight. Jonik. Sebesta. Stormmaster8923. DennisDaniels. Kesla. Ed Cormany. Tang Kai Mun. Yidisheryid. Capricorn42. Adjusting. Michael Hardy. Minor Contributer. Maximus Rex. Leneyi. Reinhard Hartmann. Verbum Veritas. Netan'el. IvanLanin.68. DionysiusThrax. Erskingardner. Marek4. Andycjp. -Ril-. Shafei. Gabnh. ForensicLinguist. Yerpo. Mogism. NikoSilver. Ortolan88. CuteHappyBrute.delanoy. Dynablaster. Diogenes zosimus. Agent X. COMPATT. Arp92493. Alexkon. Olivier. Zzuuzz. Wetman. Haham hanuka. Grebaldar. Kokoriko. Lukasstud. Sarah. Lupin. Djnjwd. Tobby72. Sundar. Sonermanc. Christian List. Imiraven. Andre Engels. Gomm. Haham hanuka. 33451. Conor. DolphinL. Dairyqueen8. MC10. Geimeris. Bryan Derksen. Vrenator. Wahkeenah. Blainster. Jeff G. Dlohcierekim. Mirrorblade. Arno Verweij. Lanov. Benwing. Sunborn. Sandstein. Matusz. QrczakMK. Jeevenson. Dhochron.240. Tim Q. IvanLanin. Dduck. Kzzl. Inogad. Biglovinb. Ojigiri. Computational linguist professional. RexNL. Zantastik. Wikism. Olivia Curtis. TutterMouse. La goutte de pluie. Devanatha. 13alexander. Jotamar. BC Lafferty. Mrzeppolainen22. Fgdfgdssfghrr6rg7g756. Pbice. Ashanda. Frankenpuppy. Dysprosia. Conversion script. Pmbcomm. Guaka. Mrt3366. Gianfranco. Psyche825. Picabear. Utkutanrivere. Canto2009. Den fjättrade ankan. Freyr35. Andre Engels.php?oldid=536306260  Contributors: AFLA-Asso. Eronneill. Komap. Stradivarius Phonetics  Source: http://en. Clarissa Caldwell. Future Perfect at Kelly Martin. RexNL. Heron. Discospinster. Kwamikagami. Dominic. Rwalker. Sivaraj. Thejk. Bn. Ojigiri. Nashrian. Eleassar. Edward. Grape1. Vrenator. Queenmomcat. Hijasegunda. Drphilharmonic. Docboc44. THEN WHO WAS PHONE?. PierreAbbat. Sarahenni102. The Wiki ghost. MLKLewis. JohnCD. Erinfish. Dbachmann. Kinhull. J04n. Dogah. Kompar. Natzi Boy. Conversion script. Hirzel. Larry_Sanger. Mac. 150. Dyanne Nova. JorisvS. Hyarmendacil. Cisgjm. Deor. ThievingBeagles. Logixoul. Rex Germanus. Theserialcomma.php?oldid=522665235  Contributors: Andycjp. Postmodern Beatnik. Jimbo2222. 72 anonymous edits Sociolinguistics  Source: http://en. Phrixussun. Conversion script. SpeedyGonsales. Wolfkeeper. Pion. Wikipelli. AuburnPilot. RandomP. Lucidish. Gdm. KTyson. GRAHAMUK. Gogo Dodo. Nasnema. Mizike. MER-C. Wayne Slam. Colin Keigher. Portalian. Inbetweener. Monstire. Lanov. TheOtherBob. Can't sleep. D. Emilio Juanatey. MarkSweep. Larry laptop. Belovedfreak. R'n'B. Halaqah. Joakim Ziegler.wolfe. Masatran. Nysin. Cometstyles. Chelmian. Niteowlneils.

Pmbcomm. Curdeius. Salthizar. Milkbreath. TakuyaMurata. Gilliam. Davidsonfilms. Sardanaphalus. Secleinteer. Pilotguy. DennisDaniels. 21655. Scwlong. Marentette. Kwamikagami. Yahya Abdal-Aziz. Allen3. ChrisCork. AkselGerner. Belovedfreak. Paul500. Ohso. Clicketyclack. Gronky.64. J. SimonP. Andyjsmith. Maunus. Orbis 3. Anthrophilos. Thedeepblue4. Miss Madeline. Lauplank1216. Iridescent. PhnomPencil. Wouterstomp. Lee Daniel Crocker. Simon Kilpin. DancingPhilosopher. Angela. 20 anonymous edits Language development  Source: http://en. Pgdudda. AlexanderKaras. Pearle. AmiDaniel. Ryulong. Dpr. J04n. WereSpielChequers.php?oldid=534754721  Contributors: Admrboltz. Ozean-schloss. Sapphic. Bryan Derksen. Larissad. Freewind77. Tuanglen. Tabletop. DGG. 20 anonymous edits Language assessment  Source: http://en. Ciotog. Mbxp. Mk270. Rich Farmbrough. Dizeob3. Iridescent. Pragmaticgf. Billinghurst. Billlund. Pete142. Eransgran. Jossi. Snowolf. Numbersinstitute. RogerDonald.63. ElTyrant. Pietaster. SU26Ilham. Xyzzyavatar. Ckatz. PL290. Kennercat. Startstop123. DennisDaniels. Jsg24. KJ Sam. Tang. Burschik. Alansohn. Action potential. Docu. Evil Monkey. Smyth. PeterBlau. Spizzer2.kluk. Ecalteaux. Dbachmann. Zuberjuice. Graham87. Viking59. JimStyle61093475. Hoziron. Sblive. Garzo. Lam Kin Keung. Jesusserrano. Phil Boswell. J. Wikipelli. Jeremy Visser. Never give in. Espoo. Gabbe. Bility. ClubOranje. Colonies Chris. Davidruben. Cyberdork33. Wester. Sdelat. Skinnyweed. Jroberts548. Asfarer. Graham87. LilHelpa. Hyacinth. Furrykef. Wik. Icairns. Koroner. Van helsing. Josh Parris. Kora09. Syomunuka. LianneAnna. VikSol. Mr. Neil. Blaxthos. Fuhvah. Garik. ArkinAardvark. Intgr. Volapuk49. Icairns. Angr. Magioladitis. Beetstra. Jalali. Ebyabe. Iamlilyy. TrbleClef. Mr. Abusharjeel.nauci. Typetrust. Bcbloutreach. Khoikhoi. Dekimasu. DenisePro. Macaddct1984.wikipedia. Shoessss. Misterx2000. Fieldday-sunday. Uttanu. Urdina. Malecasta. Pifactorial. BrainyBabe.php?oldid=516342481  Contributors: Akunnan. Erxnmedia. Adrian Glamorgan. Esurnir. Wikiklrsc. Zoe.tyson. Brad Marhsall. CliffC. Pmbcomm. Gurch. SolKarma. OGoncho. Ckatz. Technopat. Trickstar. Ark. Docleaf. Mcr hxc. Rlaitinen. Cgingold. Dduck. Petropoxy (Lithoderm Proxy). Quibbles. The Transhumanist. Woohookitty. Lihi14. Watervast. Pier440. Rothorpe. Datepalm17. PhiRho. DioniWan.132. ComplingAS. Barfooz. Canto2009. Snigbrook. Valentine Smith. Nono64. Slrubenstein. Eirik (usurped). Visviva. Yug. Parsbyte. Ted. Certes. JoshuaD1991. Championchi. Gatetower. Anbo6. Nposs. Ekotkie.php?oldid=533998539  Contributors: Ajd. Vanished user. Plaqua.farah. Donarreiskoffer. Squidley. Hmains. Kora09. Alexkane. David Eppstein. Saintswithin. Thedude22. Podzemnik. Stradivarius. Rdsmith4. Giftlite. Phanerozoic. Widr. Tarquin. Jph89. Benanhalt. Kingturtle. Johnleemk. Tim bates. Sindhutvavadin. Arvindcares. Paul foord.Z-man.37. Turgan. Hank52. Sardanaphalus. Matlee. Taharley. Deor. ElBenevolente. Zzuuzz. 114 anonymous edits History of linguistics  Source: http://en. Bobo192. Nevill Fernando. Osx85.let. Michelle. Selket. Zvar. DreamGuy. TeaDrinker. Notyourbroom. Salthizar. Bklpari. Strikesvl. Koavf. Multikev. Spencer. Hpvpp. Lam Kin Keung. Suruena. Robbiemuffin. Ihcoyc. Waynemcarr.php?oldid=534535201  Contributors: 0XQ. Bkinsey. Sebesta. Venu62. Quiddity. B0wner. Mikolasz. Prof Wrong. Puellanivis. GoingBatty. Als022. Muijz.php?oldid=535376638  Contributors: [email protected] Gregbard. Picapica. JMW64. Samwaltz. Eshleyy. Iridia. Rich Farmbrough. Conversion script. Eroen.DBA. Ckatz. Annabelle Lukin. Epingchris. Mickkyyy. Discoursetheory. Nposs. Piano non troppo. Newsceptic. Gr1st. Piano non troppo. Veinor. Allens. Arthena. Schekn. Famousdog. Lars Jimduck. Osx85. Owenant. Wlievens. Philaweb. David Woodward. Nevill Fernando. Nsmith 84. Alison. RoseParks. USPatent. 358 anonymous edits Linguistic anthropology  Source: http://en. Ashmoo. Chris. Daviboz. Susan White. Lam Kin Keung. Altenmann. Stemonitis. Tanaats. RHaworth. Mr. Andre Engels. Cnilep. Andre Engels. Ikiroid. Darry2385. A. Spkoh1.152. Furrykef. Rrburke. Phoebe. Trickstar. Technopat. BBuchbinder. Estevoaei. Daniel Mietchen. Paul Erik. Lowbien. StevieNic. Gerteger. Jagged 85. Drork. Babelfisch. Javier Carro. Sjö. Larry_Sanger. RyanCross. Hoss. Henry Flower. CardinalDan. Smartse. Zoicon5. Eu. Grafen. Fcummins. Reinhard Hartmann. Nono64. TimHowles. Deeptrivia. Chamaeleon. Cullio. FitoPaezMagica. Barticus88. Semmelweiss. Lazcorp. Hoary. EauroraUA. Varti. Languagewatch. TheCoffee. Robert Foley. Eaefremov. Salthizar. Psykhosis.php?oldid=535024224  Contributors: 134. Iank125. Walej. KF. Gansam12. Scottalter. Mgavr. DMacks. Soshial.. Jcautilli2003. Rmhermen. PeepP. Chris the speller. SimonP. Ndimiduk. Ryanaxp. Joymukherjee10. Inthecityof. Rossmar22. Prabhakar P Rao. Nate Silva.k. Clicketyclack. Distributional-analyser. Taptonv. Woohookitty. 212. ComUSSR. V35lmt.. CanisRufus. Arcandam. Crzer07. Stradivarius. Aubin. William. Koffieyahoo. Mais oui!. Philippe277. Mareoftenebrae. Rich Farmbrough. Burn. WhatamIdoing. East718. Ericgoldstein. For An Angel. The Rambling Man. Moncrief. Wasell. Vanessasha. Ausir. Dzou. Dantiston. Fnielsen. MER-C. SimonGreenhill. Saraalison12. Wesselbindt. Ohnoitsjamie. Colonies Chris. Curdeius. Jbmurray. Mukkakukaku. Gareth Jones. Altg20April2nd. Winelight. Chris the speller. Jbg. Jahsonic. Jimwilce. Husond. Penarc. AnaJur. Glennh70. Awesomestmole. Michael Hardy. Tijfo098. Comtebenoit. RedWolf. Ohnoitsjamie. Sebesta. RJHall. MZMcBride. Andrea moro. LilHelpa. SimonP. LindsayH. Ginkgo100. Wikky Horse. Charles Moss.php?oldid=527737714  Contributors: 1ForTheMoney. Heroeswithmetaphors. Rjanag. Theoretick. David Branson. Kintetsubuffalo. Cal Evans. Lino08. Sinatra. 193. Angr.stefan. Pigman. Chalst. Josh Parris. Dduck. Allens. Bharatveer. CumbiaDude. Tassedethe. Ninly. MuffledThud. Zuky79. Anticipator. AMMeier. Stultus22. Jeffmatt. Mrtialis. Updatehelper. Forefinger2. FT2. Gwern. Mokkers. Msasscts. Rocastelo.snyder. Rjanag. Thakorn. BAxelrod. PierreAbbat. Tama1988. Yunshui. I'm the Cavalry. Traderob. Rjwilmsi. II MusLiM HyBRiD II. Clare1fielder. Jmath666. Gottago. Lam Kin Keung. Ikwilhetweten. Indiana State. Harjer11. Lam Kin Keung. Ngio. Mdoff. Skysmith. Ogdred. Rjanag. ‫ 143 . Suruena. Zzuuzz. Jayen466. Woohookitty. 2004-12-29T22:45Z. Acerview54. Royote. N-k. Rjanag. Suhailanjum. E2e3v6. Jobber. Celestianpower. Punefirst. Titodutta.wikipedia. Pivi11. Anomalocaris. Reinhard Hartmann. JorisvS. Fayenatic london. Dinesh Chander Kapoor. Belovedfreak. Cnilep. Mr. Jockocampbell. Dvulture. Frondswithverve. LittleHow. Scotttt1. Aaron Kauppi. Neilc. Jim. FrenchIsAwesome. Tonync.wikipedia. Thelmadatter. Kpmiyapuram. Ceyockey. No Guru. Kimkenkat. Ieium. Slrubenstein. Grenavitar.php?oldid=525355213  Contributors: *drew. Gam3. Ruhrjung. DavidCary. Nasz. Torgo. Antandrus. Future Perfect at Sunrise. Trident13.178. Chase me ladies. BD2412. Anthro monkey. Greenmind. Chowbok. Wilycoyote. A193280. MartinPoulter. Rogerhc. Alexius08. Wildt. Rjwilmsi. Espoo. Lunalona. DreamGuy. Dcabrilo. Lingofan. Karimarie. David Shay. Ray Dassen. Sgilanguages. Vincent2236. Deniss007. Pooya72. RichardF. Cromwellt. Ohnoitsjamie. Nn-WCO. Ragesoss. Ahxnccj. Jabberjawjapan. ResidueOfDesign. Tobias Hoevekamp. Pne. Andrew Lancaster. J04n. Angela. Bazonka. Mindstore. Thüringer. Timwi. Esprit15d. Misterx2000. Peatswift. Wikiklrsc. Mark Dingemanse. Academic Challenger. Ttennebkram. Rsweitzman. Eheiberg. Ravenous. Kajmal. TEB728. Maximus Rex. Paul Magnussen. Anticipator. Kyoakoa. Unlocked. Cuchullain. Cjkotler.ﺃﺣﻤﺪ ﻣﺼﻄﻔﻰ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﺪ‬anonymous edits Psycholinguistics  Source: http://en. Moyogo. A.wikipedia. TastyPoutine. Gailtb. Ioverka. Stradivarius. Kcarnold. Mandarax. Stevietheman. Angr. Benlisquare. J Crow. Kyoakoa.wikipedia. Henry Flower. BrokenSegue. WLU. Satellizer. Batistontain. John Vandenberg. LMBM2012. MacGyverMagic. Languagelabdotcom. Ragni. Glenyshanson. LiDaobing. XVA. NickelShoe. That Guy. Chronotox. 54 anonymous edits Neurolinguistics  Source: http://en. Rjwilmsi. Deltabeignet. Angr. Misterwaffles. Stephan Leeds. Pokipsy76. Sahmeditor. Szquirrel. Heenan73. Everyking. Keilana. Szyslak. Rjanag. Eliyak. Mr. Garik. Dbachmann. JWSchmidt. Cnilep. Jonas. Misaacso. Kwamikagami. Voceditenore. Kensor. Jaihanuman. Denisarona. Lawikitejana. Josh. Lova Falk.wikipedia. Upholder. Dlrohrer2003. Nora lives. Ricklaman. Misterx2000.nolfi. Huenslank. Borivoje. Dmitri Lytov. Jeffmatt. Joseph Solis in Australia. Kwamikagami. [email protected] Banazir. Frietjes. Tom. Mr. Mondloch. Michael Devore. Prari. GraemeMcRae.php?oldid=529243116  Contributors: 2over0. Garik. Jimmy Fleischer. Karol Langner. Fheyligh. Mathematicmajic. Dunning. Harnad. Namenotek. Misterx2000. K. Sgilanguages. Antonielly.251. Conversion script. Gronky. Xuchong. Tabletop. Astronautics. Koavf. GlennLThompson. Jneely0421. Postmanw. Camster. Jsteph. 69 anonymous edits 224 . Mushroom. JorisvS. Dispenser. Graham87. Dialectric. Mnbvc. Pompeufabra. Rror. MarkkuP. Srikipedia. Trickstar. [email protected] Giraffedata. Wavelength. Ish ishwar. Sobreira. SimonP. Bit. Koavf. Mcbradaigh. Plasticup. Tlnqxgn. Fabliha. TheGrimReaper NS. Maunus. Andycjp. Andycjp. Bhny.wikipedia. Dunyaedu. Altenmann. JNShutt. Action potential. Neparis. J. Excession. The Noodle Incident. BWCNY. Hottentot. Mild Bill Hiccup. Dougofborg. Zoe. Falcon8765. Kate. Pearle. Ancheta Wis. Languageteacher1945. Johnkarp. Micmachete. King of Hearts. Unyoyega. Gabnh. Charles Matthews. Waveguy. Alejandralop. ParisPynchon. Mattisse. Ffbond. Texture. Brumski. Pinkville. Daniel. Secondlifelanguageeducator. Tkynerd. Mukerjee. Piotrus. Devotchka. IvanLanin. EagleFan. Alanmoroney. RyanCross. Arjayay. RHaworth. Jsteph. Castagna. Rjwilmsi. Flocksy. Daven200520. Cwmhiraeth. John Vandenberg. Michael Hardy. Pnm. Roehl Sybing. Canis Lupus. PS. Lova Falk. Remember me (up to 7 days). Longhair. 119 anonymous edits Language acquisition  Source: http://en. Shanghainese. Kirill Lokshin. Lai eric. Distributional-analyser. Lrose73. Marek69. Heyitspeter. Allahades. B. WMCEREBELLUM. Technopat. GurraJG. Reinhard Hartmann. Kbh3rd. KathrynLybarger. Aoxiang. Mboverload. DarwinPeacock. Caffrey. Tonyk08.Article Sources and Contributors Vitalityverse. Duncan. Rjanag. Rmallott1. Stradivarius on tour. Александър. Cecilemckee. Darrenhusted. Ppetru. Junes. R9tgokunks. Chris. Tobias Hoevekamp. Ratemonth. José San Martin. Dbachmann. Gzabers. Dbachmann. J. Epottala. Laradoks. UtherSRG. Wknight94.ﺳﻌﯽ‬anonymous edits Evolutionary linguistics  Source: http://en. Zeno Gantner. EdJohnston. Deaconse. Shawn in Montreal. Dmacw6. Ish ishwar.wikipedia. Persian Poet Gal. Playmobilonhishorse. Stradivarius. Uncle G. 79 anonymous edits Internet linguistics  Source: http://en. Maelwys. Garzo. DDD DDD. Gokulam. Swerdnaneb. BD2412. RandomXYZb. Numbo3. Eransgran. Aitias. CopperKettle. Babbage. Pearsonlon. Synchronism. Mirrorblade. Kyoakoa. Tevildo. Maxpril. Yolgnu. 9. Reinhard Charles Bloaks. Daviddariusbijan. Susanagarciafernandez. Dolfrog. David Shay. Nabeth.levine. Bookuser. Kjag396. Rursus. Babedacus. 78 anonymous edits Language education  Source: http://en. John of Reading. Sandman2007. Golshaie. Mild Bill Hiccup. Scope creep. Andycjp. Rjwilmsi. Joplusone. From That Show!. Rursus. Deryck Chan. A314268. Jibbajabba. Dmwpowers. Lam Kin Keung. Altenmann. Woohookitty. Lerdsuwa. Psyling. BD2412. Julietbee. Sailsbystars. Amol. Jgull.wikipedia. Duckbill.253.C. Rocku20008. Butterfly ea. 2over0. Adjusting. Finereach. Chuckiesdad. Wavelength. Chrislk02. StasMalyga. Agentn25. B. Tsemii. Ependell. WikiLambo. ‫ 73 . Man vyi. Stefano. Wavelength. Quiddity. Stradivarius on tour. Donner60. JohnOwens. LMBM2012. BWCNY. Dmitri Lytov. Droll. Anticipator. Windharp. Deconstructhis. Howardjp. Mean as custard. Altenmann.php?oldid=535051057  Contributors: 158. JeLuF. Allformweek. Chocolateboy.. Mrngvn. John.Pritchard. Glossophile. Gerteger. Gparker. Analogisub. Jauhienij. Lesgles. Eurosong. Will Beback Auto. Brad7777. Camridge. Lova Falk. Mellery. Zahd. Shimmera. Dillardjj. Megantonerx. Rmallott1. AdultSwim. Spencer. Quibik. Burschik. Never give in. Izze21. Martarius. La goutte de pluie. Burschik. Szquirrel. Spencer. B9 hummingbird hovering. Danhash. Mmutterperl. Pinkparfait936. Topspinslams. Robin klein. Chiewj. Yolgnu. BFSkinner. Tiak. Will Beback Auto. Jedmeltzer. Xxlitleonexx. Nilo28. Kowey. Mr. Angr. Spaceorca.strauss. Semmelweiss. Woohookitty. Johnkarp. Bjankuloski06en. WBardwin. Deor. Fahd09. Stradivarius. NawlinWiki. FrancisTyers. Reinhard Hartmann. Aleron235. BD2412. Baselstrasse. PGSONIC. Dolfrog. Rich257. Hitoshi Inoue. Serenehj. Doczilla. GoingBatty. Batistontain. Sandman2007. Skeppy. Burschik. John Riemann Soong. Anlace. ShelfSkewed.115. Headbomb. Dolfrog. ELApro. Dobie80. RichardF. Mr. TakuyaMurata. Abjad2009. The Thing That Should Not Be. Adam Bishop. Ivan Š Rich Farmbrough. Tassedethe. Tkynerd. LittleHow. Access Denied. Scienceguy64f. Tremilux. Bluemoose. Vicki Rosenzweig. Xzqx. Dduck. Rjwilmsi. Spencer. Burschik. Barbara Patterson. Acyso. Michaelwilson. Reedy. Jarry1250. El C. Angr. Cuaxdon. Chris the speller. HeartofaDog. Mbxp. Etarone. Christinam. D Monack. Hooperbloob. X911. Stevertigo. Lucole. NotMuchToSay. Wdflake. Funandtrvl. 206short. Awien.p. CanisRufus. DennisDaniels. Freebilly. Rjanag. Pohick2. Metonym.

Speechpathology. Unint. Yoosef Pooranvary. Torgo. Bencherlite. Zdravkova. Harmil. Pablo-flores. Makeitright1. NuclearWarfare. Cascade1492. Psychonaut. Utcursch. Mr. Cgingold. Eozcan. The Transhumanist. Sinatra. Hgrosser. Zmjezhd. EagerToddler39.php?oldid=536353910  Contributors: A. AshishG. Andrew c. Jsferreira.php?oldid=534483961  Contributors: Adam78. Eclecticology. Chrism. Dan Pelleg. Reinhard Hartmann. Brion VIBBER. John of Reading. BesselDekker. Set theorist. Mike Stoyik. Hut 8. Woohookitty. Lova Falk. Aprock. Eras-mus. Lgusain. Ingridjames. Danceswithzerglings. Hannes Hirzel. Canthusus. Sdorrance. BrianH123. Kumioko (renamed). Dbachmann. Mrg3105. Ebender. Nyenyec. Benjipride. KP-Adhikari. RMFan1. Davebraze. Snoyes. Dolfrog. Calabe1992. Kawaputra. The bellman. 176 anonymous edits Outline of linguistics  Source: http://en. Barras. Iluvchineselit. Mekong Bluesman. Runic code. Mean as custard. Izzy7. Cromwellt. Airborne84. Infrogmation. Ashfan83. Oliver Pereira. Polyvios. Benc. Rjanag. Scotsquires. Eleassar. Ewan dunbar. Jauhienij. RichardF. Eachsky. Fetchcomms. Oscarthecat. Jukaswo. Sarahhbuck. Marskell. Akyla 424. SpeechSchool. Ilyushka88. Rjanag. Reinhard Hartmann. Vinay Varma. Thu. Levzur. Aeusoes1. Scwlong. DopefishJustin. Bryan Derksen. Scott1329m. La Changa. Kobokai. Epeefleche. Jepwi. Procrastinatrix. Qwyrxian. MartinGugino. Wile E. CRGreathouse. Bogdangiusca. Божовић. Pgilman. Arabica. Vinay Varma. Chris the speller. Islescape. RHaworth. Captain-n00dle. Dpr. NuclearWarfare. Peterlin. Dylan Lake. Donreed. Pne. Sebesta. Xabier Armendaritz. Mjklin. Rich Farmbrough. Calabe1992. Mariko.Reding. Fplay.mayzie. Favonian. Tovian. Wlodzimierz. Michael Hardy. The benevolent dictator. Thingg.. Frietjes. Nrcprm2026. LiDaobing.wikipedia. Ihcoyc. Barticus88. Nginakin. Singhalawap. R'n'B. GoodbyeRosie. Avengah. Gecko. Jlittlet. Brion VIBBER. Rich Farmbrough. Sinuhe. Propaniac. Haspelmath. Annabelle Lukin.php?oldid=530698244  Contributors: Aeusoes1. Editor2020. Andres rojas22. Dreadstar. Nagelfar. Evlekis. Inner Earth. JaGa. Yoshi Canopus. Adlay. Davshul. Eclecticology. The bellman. Altenmann. VoiceScientist. J Di. Ethan Mitchell. Elisabeth Cottier Fábián. Nilmerg. Shriram. Katalaveno. Matsuzaki-Koudou. Farichard. Eklir. Adambiswanger1. Scorp queen. Aeusoes1. Evertype. Niceguyedc. The Epopt. Rjwilmsi. Tchoutoye. Riggr Mortis. NoAdditiff. Giftlite. Speak Out16. Andy Fugard. Raj Tilak Saxena. Catherineyronwode. Tikiwont. Ghirlandajo. 1ODSTpwns1. Agihard.wikipedia. Vegaswikian. Camus. Technopat.C. Jotamar.wikipedia. Woohookitty. Paul W. Reaverdrop. Celendin. Mogism. Darkwind. Jerome Kelly. Wavelength. Extraordinary. Semmelweiss. NittyG. RickWojcik. Therealnickjr. Drawn Some. DDD DDD. Colonies Chris. Muspilli. Iyotake. Favonian. Sundar. Heron. Docu. SkerHawx. Érico Júnior Wouters. Trusilver. Patroklis. The Anome. Kowey. Anadine.5. Dejohns46. Sonjaaa. Pne. Cuckowski. Stradivarius. Jrdenim. Dimody. PhnomPencil. माहीतगार. OwenX. Minimac. Egeymi. Bonadea. Henrygb. TenPoundHammer. Ruakh. Daporter. Mbp. DanielHirst. Willow1984. RDB92. Anna512. Iamthecheese44.s. Drmies. Heresiarch. Keeno. Woohookitty. Fetchcomms. Larynxdude. Amdewaard. Margin1522. Sonjaaa. Fredrik. Ratiuglink. Colonies Chris. Logan. Working for Him. Kwamikagami. Lestrade. Lycanthrope. Geregen2. Kjoonlee. Trey314159. Petershank. CRGreathouse. 26 anonymous edits Philology  Source: http://en. Katarighe. Kmarinas86. Benc. Template namespace initialisation script. Keeno. Michael Hardy. Calltech. Bellhalla. Asarelah. Rajendran. Drmies. Akademya. Adynatoniac. HankSpark123. The Transhumanist. Ravedave. Timwi. Francatrippa. Jeffq. Ruhrjung. R'n'B. Jguk 2. Tassedethe. Jesus geek. Bob Becheru. Ludvikus. Ryguasu. Akhilleus. Quiddity. Spasage. Sun Creator. BeNiza. Pegship. Burschik. Archbishop. Maurreen. Galoubet. Djnjwd. Rockero. David Kernow. Spelling Natsi. Nick Number. Khukri. Kaleissin. Joeblakesley. Iatjanda. Czechios. [email protected] Lockesdonkey. Ejschleier. Staticshakedown. Marek69. Wikipediatrix. ZeroOne. Pappa. LoggedRoot. PhysiogodReborn. Lukobe. Wmahan. 130. Gabetarian. Pataki Márta. Christopher Parham. Cleduc. Bathrobe. Pmanderson. Yubcvan. Victorhantj. Nohat. Damian Yerrick. Seba5618. Fplay. 4 anonymous edits Speech-language pathology  Source: http://en. Cnilep. Woland37. Aetheling. Benc.162. Javier Carro. Clrbear430. Mindmatrix. Bill3000. Eaefremov. Altenmann. Rajah. N5iln. Rsrikanth05. Tpbradbury. MrsCaptcha. Ghyfawkes. Euchiasmus. Dominus. Mbell. Masaruemoto. Wavehunter. Naddy. Sproat. Zaheen. RichardKPSun. Kajervi.wikipedia. Nexus Seven. Calair.snyder. Stephen C. Jasy jatere. DennisDaniels. Smallfixer. Jlittlet. Suruena. Nilmerg. Fennessy. Ogdred. Ahoerstemeier. Scwlong. Xezbeth. Oalp1003. Waltej. Malcolmxl5. Crochel01. Lisapollison. Dougg. Aitias. Sacundim. Rogerb67. Neparis. Nimic86. Gritchka. Joy. Symkyn. Gailtb. Ehrenkater. Espoo. Bmr101. Wetman. Kumioko (renamed). J. Access Denied. Cnilep. Echuck215. Tijfo098. Andres. QuixoticWonderer.230. Gelderen. Kwamikagami. Szyslak. Darkwind. Zaheen. Thylacoleo. Rosanne. Deville. NguniTraveller. Docu. 20 anonymous edits Index of cognitive science articles  Source: http://en. Cnilep. Ipwiki. Stgries. Altenmann. Golothir. Rje.Fred. Chowbok. Patton1138.barahona. R'n'B. Sabbeumnim. The Duke of Waltham. Headbomb. David. Pragmaknowledge. Gregbard. Grenavitar. Stradivarius. Itai. Pjacobi. Ronz. Jsteph. RJ1001. Eequor. Jguk. Cadr. Literaturemann. My76Strat. Jacquerie27. Msanford. Masaruemoto. Mairi. Oxtoby. Cjwright79. Wik. Bbenzon. Nodoushan. Fowler&fowler. Hauganm. Kier07. Sjc. DagosNavy. Shrigley. Peachlette. ChuckSmith. CDN99. Jagged 85. Pernoctus. Jic. Nguyen Thanh Quang. Correogsk. Kagredon. ‫ 972 . Iamthedeus. Royalguard11. Spencer. Luokehao. Hillock65. Cnesson. Fawcett5. Londonsltsltd. Tremilux. Kwamikagami. Ariya shookh. Ypalina. Axeloide. Pearle. Altg20April2nd. Klehti. Rickus. LightningOffense. Kittybrewster. Furrykef. Woohookitty. Underneaththered. William Avery. Spencerk. Reinhard Hartmann. Feeeshboy. Pax:Vobiscum. Muijz. Qquisitte. SPECVLVMSINCERVS. David M Arnold. Andycjp. CALR. Mkappus. Nasserberjaoui. Downchuck. Altenmann. DoubleBlue. Zenohockey. Chinasaur. Parkwells. CJLL Wright. Mike Dillon. Adam78. Aminullah. Xppsarah. Lucienyahinna. Dejvid. Drakonicon. Wordwright. Bunchofgrapes. Henry Delforn (old). Amit6. Vincent Ramos. Scottalter. Lamb. Ap. Jph. Dmscvan. SMcCandlish. Jghelfi097. Angr. Scarce. Orvilleduck. Michael Hardy. RiverDeepMountainHigh. Margarita. RashmiPatel. Awatkins yorku. Julesd. Bredenkamp. The Transhumanist. Tom. Lexpression. James Crippen. Skarebo. Chris83. Ross Burgess. Zerida. Ckia. JoeMele. Gekritzl. Fsharifi. Nick Number. Garfield1974. Dozerbraum. Womtelo. Jim Henry. Romanm. MJ94. Branddobbe. Conversion script. Triwbe. Langfon. Gustavb. LinguistAtLarge. Wclark. Calmypal. Lesnail. Quiddity. Uncle Dick. Headfacemouth. The Transhumanist. Cosprings. Sfaal. VKokielov. Caerwine. Gyll. Phonetician. Gstump. Ewlyahoocom. Ramir. Doric Loon. 194. Anomalocaris. John254. HannesHirzel. Rjwilmsi. Gregbard. DennisDaniels.Broxbourne. Deltabeignet. John milkinson. Garik.122. BullRangifer. Wwheaton. SummerWithMorons. Hammondm. Mr. Gilmorej1. Jorge Stolfi. Ashot Gabrielyan. Schekinov Alexey Victorovich.MBA. Cacycle. Rjanag. Roozbeh. LaggedOnUser. Conversion script. Oliphaunt. Nanobug. JordTu. Phantom784. Histrion. Ђорђе Д. Anclation. Mattisse. Chamdarae. Antonielly. Reinhard Hartmann. Cybercobra. Ruqayyah. Jim Henry. D. Montrealais. Nanobug. Speedysnail. Burschik. Flowerparty. Theserialcomma. Mhazard9. Macedonian. Jenrogers03. Kazkaskazkasako. Brim. TopAce. Kedi the tramp. Byelf2007. OldPine.php?oldid=528940111  Contributors: Alan Liefting. FeldBum. Maunus. Neutron. Elagatis. Wolfdog. Delirium. Spencer. Superiority. Wsphar. Duoduoduo. Mark Dingemanse. SarahStierch. Robert Skyhawk. Hongooi. Pschemp. Yamara. Hadal. Cadr. Piotrek54321. Sydbarrett74.of. Dmismir. Drallens. Dextrase. Kaiserb. JMK. Yhever. Linguistlist. Rjanag. Slp1. Sumgirl. Chaser. NCurse. Kyoakoa. BKalesti. Timwi. Wmahan.wikipedia. Black Falcon. MarkS. Paul Stansifer. Glenn. MaryscottOConnor. Alarm. Whatever404. Jacketpocket. Nuttycoconut. Van Meter. Wiki13. LittleHow. ThirteenthGreg. Ihsan86. Sabboo9155. JesseRafe. Pustejovsky. FrancisTyers. Cnilep. Joseph Solis in Australia. Conchis. Lufiend. Nguyen Thanh Quang. Woggly. Alfredetmanfred. Hippo43.php?oldid=535580280  Contributors: Acdx. Dpm64. Janko. Thinking-ape. Shievak. Jeff3000. Keith Edkins. Rich Farmbrough. Andre Jfdwolff. Charles Matthews. Taco325i. ClamDip. Icommunicate. Sw258. Thomasmeeks. Magioladitis. Rentwa. Udzu. RedWolf. Mbcudmore. Physiogod2. Jim Henry. BWCNY. Gbkorol. Andycjp. Roland2. OllieWilliamson. Qworty. Pne. Weeddude. PRiis. Sinatra. Yobol. Dissident. Xanzzibar. FayssalF. Thincat. YauTou. Rjmail. Larry V. Runner5k. Marenach. Go for it!. Cleftlip. Haham hanuka. Shally68. SGMidence. WikiSlasher.wikipedia. Feezo. Rholton. Ta rulz. J. Christian Roess. Wlievens. Template namespace initialisation script. Nogger. Alton. Zerrakhi. MarcusCole12. Si Gam Acèh. Sarang. 147 anonymous edits List of linguists  Source: http://en. JorgeGG. Mav. N-true. Anonymous anonymous. Hunter. Template namespace initialisation script. Triplestop.php?oldid=535433259  Contributors: -Ril-. Static Universe. Squib. Viajero. Eastlaw. Lacrimosus. Rhombus. Vranak. SlicedWheel. SummerWithMorons. Eddiedonovan. Mjshuter.kats. Circeus. Jotamar. Deb. Circeus. Algebraist. Wordsarewonderful. Hohum. Babbage. Tang. Gabbe. Mundart. Nohat. The Proffesor. Dietrichayse. Torgo. Bemoeial. Nick Number. Norm mit. Pindaris. Darigon Jr. Ryguasu. Mackerm. SoWhy. ChurchillC. CJLL Wright. B3zra1y. Andries. Trigaranus. Karmosin. DanielDemaret. FrancisTyers. Sunidesus. Anshikha92. Bill37212. Andycjp. LKG123. MarkSweep. Pingveno. Ronhjones. Millosh.wikipedia. MK8. Beartucker. Auroranorth. JerryFriedman. Angielaj. Sardanaphalus.ioan. Eustress. Soshial. FreplySpang. Rubisco. Belmut. Kansas Sam. GregoryStump. Niteowlneils. Karlatonella. JeffW. Neutrality. Szyslak. The Sage of Stamford. Irrevenant.wikipedia. Romanm. Benne. ChrisCork. TShilo12. Frietjes. AK IM OP. Graham87. Reneecc. Aepsf. Woohookitty. El C. Theoretick. Zigger. Nekokaze. Sebesta. Dduck. Benc. Gwern. Sanya3. Defenderck. Eliyak. Algae. Wifione. Tom. Darigon Jr. Nefertum17. LNG. Savingedmund. The Transhumanist (AWB). Chemako0606. Henway42. Jlittlet. Charansinghgill. Ihcoyc. Ruakh. Lukobe. J. Mindstore. Palaeovia. Hamaryns. Darkfrog24. J. Codex Sinaiticus. Materialscientist. Cbdorsett. Annamuschinzki. SchreiberBike. MapsMan. Flashyorange. Gtstump. Ihcoyc. PeterC. Nicke Lilltroll. LMBM2012. Alboran. Ish ishwar. BD2412. Garik. Springmonth. Magioladitis. Angr. Hoss. AwesomeTruffle. Robin klein. Skysmith. Ellmist. Phoenixrod. Quiddity.94. Aamsky. Docu. Dpv. Graham87. Peak Freak. Evolauxia. Robertoalencar. Nahallac Silverwinds.ﻓﯿﺰﯾﻮﺗﺮﺍﭘﯿﺴﺖ ﺍﺑﺮﺍﻫﯿﻢ ﺑﺮﺯﮐﺎﺭ‬anonymous edits 225 . Sj. Saga City. Stefan Kögl.petru. Discospinster. Violetriga. Pengkeu. Mani1. WLU. Tracyandrewmsccc. Ish ishwar. George100. Ya4ping2. Secretlondon. Mais oui!. Mjschacker. Bobblehead. Ezhiki. Darksun. Chiachienhsu. Lefty. Fon. SimonP. Greensburger. The Transhumanist. Per Olofsson. Jprw. Minnecologies. H Bruthzoo. Phlegmily. Romanm. Yelyos. Babaeen. Ruakh. 31 anonymous edits Index of linguistics articles  Source: http://en. Mishaweis. Jobber.Article Sources and Contributors Linguistic prescription  Source: http://en. LordRM. Nikola Smolenski. XJamRastafire.php?oldid=517618845  Contributors: [email protected] C. Mustafaa. Banjaloupe. Sarcas. ColdFusion650. Ludling. Gene Fellner.. WoodenTaco. Gveret Tered. Coneslayer. Clunis. Sleeparchive. Larry_Sanger. Jamjam1961. Beland. Camryl. Koavf. Bouncingmolar. Dbachmann. 㓟. Cnilep. 555 anonymous edits List of unsolved problems in linguistics  Source: http://en. AstroMark. Davidiad. DePiep. Electriceel. Rex Germanus. Esteban. Gtrmp. Zaheen. Demi. Rich Farmbrough. Serapio. Klauskk. The Thing That Should Not Be. Suruena. Matve. Alex contributing. Deb. Patti Hearse. Timwi. Nickshanks. R'n'B. Khubchandani. Adrian J. Glossophile. Duoduoduo. ProfessorSpice. Harrybrowne1986. Qeny. Hpvpp. Igor. Salmar. Demoling. Ronniekat. WouterVH. Siafu. Mcrvidal. SLP Sanjay Kumar. LeadSongDog. Nicolae Coman. Nikai. Nairam. Tcncv. Poor Yorick. The Thing That Should Not Be. Aslam Rasoolpuri. Utziputz. Q Chris. Harro5. Mp2589. Dzou. True Genius. Slashme. Mike Rosoft. BabelStone. Mitchoyoshitaka. K. Umofomia. Wavelength. Altenmann.php?oldid=534375381  Contributors: ACW. Dyslalia. Jagged 85. KaliumPropane. JeffW. Mr Adequate. Biolinguist. Fazeli78. KriketPuppetShows. Neparis. DePiep. Everyking. Koavf. Dp462090. Splintercellguy. Carlson. Twid. William. Chiswick Chap. Gdarin. Maunus. LDHan. Simetrical. Ryguasu. Magnus Manske. Knshahin. Oliver Pereira. Physiogod1. Joseph Solis in Australia. Inwind. Byelf2007. Galilsnap. SolKarma. Phonology. Fabien2. VeryVerily.Reding. Jclemens. Cromwellt. Netoholic. Mickey&friends. Hoss. Porqin. Rasoolpuri. Lizmarie. Eleassar777. Randi75. Hhielscher. Spencer. Stephen Gilbert. Emesee. MrADHD. VernoWhitney. Mjb. Stevey7788. Mjs072. ZeroOne. Sebesta. Tb. Outriggr. Valmi. Mr. Gaius Cornelius. Docu. Pausch. Unclejedd. MrOllie. JohnOwens. Høst.

wikipedia. OldakQuill.jpg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: Jens Langner (http://www. Uwe The vector version was created by English Wikipedia user Mononomic File:Real Academia Españ  Source: http://en. Université Jean Monnet. 2 anonymous edits File:Spike-waves.png  License: Creative Commons Attribution Lipothymia.png  License: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3._Madrid_-_view_2.wikipedia. 1 anonymous edits File:Samuel Johnson by Joshua Generic  Contributors: Bestiasonica. User:Tomchen1989 File:Egypt Hieroglyphe2.jpg  Source: http://en.php? Mü Sources.jpg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: Hendrik Willem van Loon (*1882. Sergei.php?title=File:Chart_Semiotics_of_Social_Networking. †1944) Image:Sociolinguistics dialect variation.php?title=File:Egypt_Hieroglyphe2. Magnus Manske.wikipedia.png  Source: http://en.wikipedia. US Image:Nikolai Trubetzkoy.JPG  License: Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 2.png  Source:  Source: http://en.png  License: Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 2.svg  License: GNU Free Documentation License  Contributors: The original was created by English Wikibooks user RobinH.wikipedia. Licenses and Contributors File:Ancient Tamil Script.0 Unported  Contributors: Javier Carro.0 Unported  Contributors: Conscious.0  Contributors: Der Lange.php?title=File:Nikolai_Trubetzkoy.5.php?title=File:Exemple_de_signalement_visuel_du_statut_social_chez_un_Cichlidé. Bonzo.jpg  Source: http://en.svg  Source: http://en.svg  License: GNU Free Documentation License  Contributors: FrancisTyers.wikipedia. 3 anonymous edits File:ComponentsofERP.wikipedia. Magnus Manske.php?  Source: http://en.png  Source: http://en.png  Source: Paradoctor.php?  Source: http://en. JMCC1.jpg  Source: http://en. Was a bee.png  License: Public Domain  Contributors: Jperl.jpg  License: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.jpg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: Luckycharm 54 File:Kstovo-BusStation-Sinks-1444.jpg  Source: http://en. Superborsuk.png  License: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.svg  Source: http://en. Madrid .jpg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: Jayen466.wikipedia.svg  Source: http://en.JPG  License: Public Domain  Contributors: Eshleyy File:World Internet users 2010. Shlomital. Лист рівнодення Image:Phonological Diagram of modern Arabic and Hebrew  Source: http://en.jpg  Source: Dodo.view 2.php?title=File:Samuel_Johnson_by_Joshua_Reynolds.php?title=File:Spike-waves.jpg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: Frank C.svg  License: unknown  Contributors: User:Kjoonlee. Was a bee Image:PET-image.1.jpg  Source: http://en.0 Unported  Contributors: Thomas Schultz File:BrocasAreaSmall.jpg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: User:Bishonen .org/w/index. NEUROtiker. Mmcannis.wikipedia.jpg  Source: http://en. Moxfyre.wikipedia.jpg  Source: http://en. Mo-Al.5  Contributors: Vladimir Menkov File:Exemple de signalement visuel du statut social chez un Cichlidé.0  Contributors: Serenehj (talk) Image:Sweet Henry.php?title=File:BrocasAreaSmall.jpg  License: Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3. Dirk Hünniger.wikipedia.0.php?title=File:Gray726-Brodman. Lipothymia.wikipedia.jens-langner.0  Contributors: Symphoney Symphoney from New York. Shlomital Image:Phonetic Diagram of modern Arabic and Hebrew WikipediaMaster File:Roma jakobson theory.0  Contributors: Master1 Ecologie Ethologie.jpg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: Frank Lipothymia.php?title=File:Language_on_internet. Glossologist.php?title=File:Real_Academia_Españ UV. Miaow Miaow.  License: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 1.wikipedia.png  License: Public Domain  Contributors: Artist2426 File:Chart Semiotics of Social Networking.php?title=File:Sociolinguistics_dialect_variation. Str4nd. Pfctdayelise File:Language on  Source: http://en.jpg  Source: http://en.php?title=File:Phonetic_Diagram_of_modern_Arabic_and_Hebrew_vowels.php?title=File:DTI-sagittal-fibers.php?title=File:World_Internet_users_2010.php?  Source: http://en. Audrey L Image:The story of a word.png  License: Public Domain  Contributors: Arcadian. Licenses and Contributors 226 Image Sources.jpg  License: Creative Commons Attribution 2. Mica.0.php?title=File:Ancient_Tamil_Script. 1 anonymous edits File:Gray726-Brodman.wikipedia. Was a bee File:DTI-sagittal-fibers.JPG  License: Public Domain  Contributors: Daderot File:Hanzi. Solipsist.wikipedia.png  Source: http://en.wikipedia. Mü

0/ .License 227 License Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported //