SAYANI BANERJEE MA (SEM IV) ROLL NO.

-H-1449 LANGUAGE STRUCTURE

ASSIGNMENT 1

LIST OF IMPORTANT TERMS 1. Trends in Linguistics 2. Bilingualism 3. Synchronic & Diachronic 4. Langue & Parole 5. Competence & Performance 6. In group and Out-group 7. Communicative Competence 8. Gricean Maxims and Speech-Act Theory 9. Syntagmatic & Paradigmatic 10. Ambiguity

1. Trends in Linguistics Linguistic Trends refer to different doctrines, perceptions, theory (-isms) and thoughts pertaining to language throughout culture. There are four Linguistic trends: a. Pre-Structuralism b. Structuralism c. Cognitivism d. Functionalism a. Pre-structuralism Also known as Traditionalism, Pre-Structuralism refers to traditions prevalent in the early 19th Century. It was dominated by Charles Darwins philosophy of the evolution of species which proved to be a landmark in the history of biological sciences. According to Darwin, human beings undergo three processes in his lifetime- birth, growth and death or decay. Linguistics, in this period, was known as Philology, and language was considered to be very much a biological process- a living entity as language, too, undergoes birth, growth

and death. Eric Lenneberg talked of the Biological Foundations of Language. According to his Critical Period Hypothesis, there is a time period in human life- 0-13 years of age- when language learning takes place. The study of idiosyncratic features of language- Language Typology- developed during this period with the purpose of preserving the features of language. This led to the evolution of Language Family- the Stammbaum Model or the Family Tree- based on the principle that language has developed from sources. Philologists believed in the existence of a Proto-Language, that is, there is a mother language out of which many language families have evolved with the aid of the linguistic process called Borrowing in which words and vocabulary of a l anguage is borrowed from others. There is a mother-sisterdaughter relationship between languages and their origin. This period was characterized by an admiration for the classics and all classical languages and texts were considered to be pure. This led to a Minority Psychosis or a fear factor and feeling of insecurity among the users of impure or minority languages. Also, the written form of language was preferred to the spoken form.

b. Structuralism Proposed primarily by Ferdinand de Sassures in his A course in General Linguistics, the main focus in this period shifted to the formal properties of language. Speech was considered derogatory before. It was considered that the language of the classics (Iliad, Odyssey, Ramayana, Mahabharata) is the best form and written language was preferred than the spoken language- also known as Classical Fallacy. According to Ferdinand de Saussure, the French Structuralist, too much admiration for the classics is not desirable. Saussure classified Linguistics into Diachronic and Synchronic. Diachronic refers to the historical development of languages or how a language has evolved through the ages. Synchronic refers to the contemporary usage of language.

Language is not a biological process, it is a kind of structure which can be organized and studied at various levels such as Phonology, Morphology, and Syntax. Phonology is the functional phonetics of a given language as proposed by Leonard Bloomfield. It is a study of how sounds are arranged into patterns. Phonetics is the study of speech sounds depending on physiology, articulation, transmission or reception. It is further divided into Articulatory Phonetics, Acoustic Phonetics, and Auditory Phonetics. Phonetics is universal in nature while Phonology is language specific and tries to investigate as how speech sounds are organized into patterns. Morphology deals with inflectional and derivational markers. It is the internal structure of words. Syntax is the study of the structure of sentences. However Structural linguistics did not give much importance to semantics. Speech was considered primary and writing a secondary representation. Through writing we cannot capture linguistics variations. SLRW (Speaking, Listening, Reading, and Writing) are the four skills of language. To know the language one has to master all these skills. Several grammar and language teaching methods developed during this period Army method Audio-lingual method Audio-visual method Direct method Grammar translation method A line of demarcation was made between prescriptive and descriptive grammar. While Prescriptive or Pedagogical Grammar defines what language should be or ought to be, Descriptive Grammar looks for a deeper understanding of the underlying representations and principles. It takes into account the regional variations of language whereas Prescriptive Grammar considers only the standard variety.

Structuralists distinctly divided the two processes -Acquisition and Learning. Acquisition is a sub-conscious process where a child learns his mother tongue. Learning, on the other hand, is a conscious strategy to learn a foreign language. They believed that language is also a matter of habit formation, quite like other forms of behavior. c. Cognitivism It emerged in the 1960s in response to certain assumptions made in the Structuralist period, propagated mainly by Noam Chomsky and his followers. Cognitivism talks of the role played by cognition in the process of language learning, which was so long negated. Cognition refers to the functions mediated by the human mind. The cognitivists believed that the human mind is not a tabularasa or a blank slate. It has certain predispositions which gets influenced by or manifested by Motherese. Every child of normal brain function, regardless of their community, class, caste, gender or intelligence, is equipped with certain principles and parameters, which are known as Language Acquisition Device (LAD) or Universal Grammar (UG). UG comprises of certain trends, not particular language abilities; it becomes functional through the medium of Motherese. Principles are specified conditions which account for the similarity of human language. For example, all human languages have certain speech sounds, parts of speech, vowel and consonant sounds. It can be treated as a biological plant or bauplan of human language. Parameters are variables left open in the statement of principles which account for the diversity of human languages. Motherese, an important notion in psycho and neuro linguistics, is a linguistic input through which UG becomes functional. Although it is not an exact replica of the adult language, simple syllables, breaking down words, music or rhythm, high pitch and rising intonation, repetition and neologs are used to attract the attention of the child. Cognitivists took into considerations the philosophical principles and dimensions of language. They believed that language can be learned in two ways- Empirical and

Rationalistic. Cognitivists also negated the importance of syntax and semantics. The notion of Competence and Performance was raised in this period. They believed that language is a homogenous entity. d. Functionalism In the 1970s, a challenge was raised for the cognitivists. Dell Hymes, Halliday and Labov proclaimed that language is of no use if we dont know how to use it. In 1953, Wittgenstein wrote: We know the meaning of a word if we know how to use it in a particular context. Hence, contexts became essential for assigning meaning to a word. Functionalists came to consider language as a heterogeneous entity which has several social functions. Language is not just about structures, but about the culture as well in which all members participate. Culture represents our way of life and the way we socialize. Hence, in addition to competence, we need cultural repertoire. Dell Hymes came up with the notion of communicative competence. According to Halliday, the social functioning of language is reflected in linguistic structures- the internal organization of language as a system. Language is a functional prerequisite. Language acquisition or the acquisition of a meaning potential is related to the process of socialization of the child. There is a relation between a childs linguistic structures and his usage of language. The childs selection of a particular combination of options within his meaning potential is realized in the form of a structure. Hence language acquisition is basically the acquisition of social functions of language and of a meaning potential associated with them. In fact, this connection is clearest in a childs speech as adults have the ability to manipulate their language. Besides this, language has other social functions as well like regulatory function, interactional function, etc. However the macro function of language is meaning potential. Language encodes our experiences in the form of content. What we recognize as grammar is actually the inter-functional hook-up- the integration of various functional components into a unified structural for- this total form perform the functions of language. The fundamental categories (Phonetics, Syntax, Morphology) are not just accidentally co-

existing systems or levels of structure; they form the structural form of the language- these are the functional components of grammar. Therefore, language is a multiple coding system, organized into levels. A large number of complex meanings is encoded in a small number of simple sounds. This is achieved by intervention among these levels- the nature and organization of these levels constitute the linguistic form. 2. Bilingualism A bilingual person is someone who speaks two languages. People may become bilingual either by acquiring two languages at the same time in childhood or by learning a second language sometime after acquiring their first language. In 1968, Weinreich proposed three types of bilingualism. In compound bilingualism (also referred to as a fused system), there is a merged semantic base, that is, two different input(encoding) and output (decoding) channels are attached to one central set of real world concept. There is a one to one correspondence of meaning between words in the first and second language, implying that every word in the second language is a replica of the same word in a first language. Compound bilingual speakers thereby employ the strategy of rapid translation while speaking. Thus such speakers formulate his thoughts generally in his native tongue and in a low conscious level, translate it into his second language. Such speakers often display much grammatical and lexical interference from his first language. This usually happens when a person learns his second language after the onset of puberty or when he receives his education in a regional-medium school, where language is taught on a translation-equivalence basis In the coordinate bilingualism the person has two independent lexical and semantic systems corresponding to two different languages for the encoding and decoding of information. The co-ordinate bilinguals can think individually or independently in both the languages. Most people, who grow up learning both languages at the same time, are coordinate bilinguals. These people know the two languages equally well and can use them for any situation. They recognize a single concept with two different words, both equally

easy to use when the situation arises. The coordinate bilingual can understand or say things in either language, but he may not be able to translate between the languages on a word-for-word basis. Subordinate bilingualism occurs when the second language is acquired some time after the first, and so remains dependent upon it. The situation is slightly different for a subordinate bilingual. They may not have learned their two languages equally, or may have attained their bilingualism later in life. As a result, they often use their primary language to subordinate the second language. 3. Synchronic and Diachronic Synchronic study of language focuses mainly on the contemporary usage of language. Synchronic Linguistics focuses on a language system as it is at a particular point of time. The time studied can either be of the present or of the past; the language studied can either be a contemporary, popular language or a currently dead language. Diachronic linguistics, also known as Historical Linguistics, on the other hand, focuses on the historical development of a language. A Diachronic study of language is the study of how a language has developed through the ages. Given by the Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure in his book A Course in General Linguistics , these terms refer to two autonomous, separate divisions of language during the Structuralist period. Although emphasis had been placed on the Diachronic study of language throughout the ages, 20th century has come to regard synchronic description as prior to diachronic description; the latter presupposes that synchronic descriptions at various stages of the development of a language have already been carried out. For example, looking at English language as used by the popular culture of this age is Synchronic study, whereas analyzing how the English language has evolved from its Germanic ancestors and the words borrowed from other languages during this process is a Diachronic study of the language.

4. Langue and Parole Where Langue is the abstract system of language, Parole is the external manifestation of language. Langue (French language) involves the principles of language, the rules and conventions without which no meaningful utterance, "parole" (speech), would be possible. Parole is nothing but the instances of the use of langue. Langue is independent of and pre-exists parole and makes speech possible. Coined by Ferdinand de Saussure in his A Course in General Linguistics, he used an analogy of chess- langue is like the norms of the game, and parole resembles the moves the player chooses-to explain the concept of langue and parole. To learn a language, one needs to master the rules in the langue. A meaningful sentence is created by the arrangement of and the relationship between the elements of langue. The father of modern structural linguistics, Saussure broke down the study of language into three different terms- Language, Langue and Parole. Language is the faculty of speech or ability to speak, which all human beings possess hereditarily. There are two aspects of this faculty: langue and parole. According to him, Langue is something supra-individual, the common possession of all members of a speech community- it is a repository of linguistic signs which each speaker has received from the other speakers of a speech community. Wilkins says: If one took away what was idiosyncratic or innovational, langue would remain. Langue, by definition, is stable and systematic; society conveys the regularities of langue to the child so that he becomes able to function as a member of the speech community Hence, the main assumption of structuralism and semiotics is that for every instance of utterance, there is a system of underlying laws that govern it. Saussures concept of langue and parole has later been termed as system and process by A J Greimas or code and message by Roman Jackobson. The notion of langue and parole emphasizes the importance of language as a social phenomenon.

5. Competence and Performance

While Competence can be described as a native speakers intuitive knowledge of a language, Performance is the native speakers external manifestation of the knowledge. Coined by the famous linguist Noam Chomsky, these terms closely resemble Saussures concept of langue and parole. Competence is that inherent ability which allows a native speaker to formulate new sentences or understand sentences he had no prior knowledge of. It is that cognitive ability which allows an infant to learn to speak correct sentences in his mother tongue (L1) without being explicitly taught the grammatical rules and syntactic features of his language. Although linguists were aware of this phenomenon since the very beginning, Chomsky was the first to point out the existence of this inherent knowledge in a native speaker of the structure of his language. The concept of sentence is competence, while the concept of utterance is performance. The native speaker of a language possesses an internalized set of rules which defines his ability to understand and speak a language. The actual utterance or performance is only evidence of this competence. Competence is the reason why even an uneducated individual can reject the ungrammatical constructions, understand ambiguous utterances, differentiate between a command and a request etc. A speakers performance can help one understand a speakers competence. However, performance is not a direct reflection of competence. Whereas performance can vary and be influenced by nonlinguistic factors, competence of a speaker is a constant and a permanent factor. According to Chomsky, "Linguistic theory is concerned primarily with an ideal speaker-listener, in a completely homogeneous speech-community, who knows its (the speech community's) language perfectly and is unaffected by such grammatically irrelevant conditions as memory limitations, distractions, shifts of attention and interest, and errors (random or characteristic) in applying his knowledge of this language in actual performance." The difference between Saussures langue and Chomskys competence is that while langue is the same with every language user, competence may differ from person to person. While the social aspect is predominant in Saussures ideas, while Chomskys idea of competence emphasizes the psychological aspect and presumes individual differences between human beings. Thus, according to Saussure, two individuals of the same speech

community has the exact same knowledge of the conventions of their native language; but according to Chomsky, one of them may be more competent than the other, thought they share the same conventions of language. According to him, "Linguistic theory is concerned primarily with an ideal speaker-listener, in a completely homogeneous speech-community, who knows its (the speech community's) language perfectly and is unaffected by such grammatically irrelevant conditions as memory limitations, distractions, shifts of attention and interest, and errors (random or characteristic) in applying his knowledge of this language in actual performance." Chomskys view of competence is also based on the idea of an inbuilt language acquisition device (LAD) in humans what enables a person to acquire competence i.e. to internalize the system of the rules of the language, enabling him to generate the infinite number of sentences. Though language is an abstract system, Chomsky views language as a biological and genetically inherited faculty. The concepts were originally introduced by Chomsky as part of the foundations for his Generative grammar. In the Generative tradition, competence is the only level of language that is studied, as it gives insights into the Universal Grammar that generativists see as underlying all human language systems. In his own words, "...by a generative grammar I mean simply a system of rules that in some explicit and well-defined way assigns structural descriptions to sentences." Chomsky's notion of linguistic competence is purely syntactic.

6. In Group and Out Group An in-group is a social category or group with which one can identify strongly. An outgroup, conversely, is a social category or group with which one does not identify. An important characteristic of the in/out-group dichotomy is that groups mark their identities communicatively by the distinctive language and speech styles they create and use, the dress codes they adopt, and the festivals that highlight their unique traditions and rituals. In this way, in linguistic in-out groups, language and communicative features are important

devices for creating an us and them. And, consequently, to belong to a particular group, an individual needs to have a knowledge and follow the cultural and social norms, linguistic jargons, attitudes, registers and styles, value and belief systems, etc. When an in-group identity is made or becomes salient, people often wish to emphasize characteristics of their group. Communicative symbols are often evoked in this regard and, depending on the intercultural setting involved, can include emphasizing organizational jargon, feminist sentiments, adolescent colloquial phrases, or ethnic accents. Also known as Social Identity Theory, this theory states that by expressing its distinctive characteristics, people thereby assume pride in their membership in this group. Such expressed public identification of the group translates into a greater sense of personal worth and increased self esteem. In general, there is a positive correlation between identification with a particular in-group and expressed use of that groups distinctive communication style. Because of their role in intergroup communication, it is important to recognize intergroup boundary which is the line of demarcation between an in-group and an out-group. These are symbolically equivalent to geographical borders, yet have a closer psychological and communicative dimension. Linguistic intergroup bias is more likely to occur when outgroup members are performing a group stereotype consistent action. Linguistic subtleties become prominent, for example, when one listens to language people use to describe or report on the actions of in-groups and out-groups. This implies that the linguistic intergroup bias is a cognitive process that requires little motivation. One important aspect of a linguistic in-group is its status. This refers to the influence and power a group has economically, historically, socially, and linguistically. The concept of group vitality has also received a lot of attention. It refers to how much a group has social advantages in terms of pride in its history, sheer numbers of its members, and the visibility of its culture and communicative codes in the important layers of society. It is made up of three separate, but interrelated, dimensions of status, demographics, and institutional support, all of which aids in deciding whether an in-group has a positive identity or not. On comparing an in-group with an out-group in terms of its languages use

in the media, educational curricula, and in local commerce, the vitality of the groups can be measured objectively. Further, ethno- linguistic identity theory contends that the higher the in-group vitality, the more members willing invest in their in-group emotionally and psychologically, and with respect to collective action to foster their own groups interests. In-groups and their cultures, including their languages and literatures, will survive and flourish, continue to be creative and innovative, and expand and be socially influential, if they have high perceived in-group vitality. In general, high vitality groups are usually dominant groups, those in the upper echelons of any intergroup status hierarchy, whereas low vitality groups are marginalized groups, those relegated toward the bottom end of this continuum. Dominant groups maintain their social privileges and advantages by controlling public information that perpetuates low subjective vitality among subordinate groups. Members of low vitality groups, for their part, may be disposed to assimilate into other more prestigious collectivities to gain enhanced personal worth and dignity. Consequently, they suffer from a minority psychosis and their communication codes often fade away into oblivion which is also known as language or altruistic suicide.

7. Communicative Competence Dell Hymes (1972), a functionalist linguist defined communicative competence not only as an inherent grammatical competence but also as the ability to use grammatical competence in a variety of communicative situations, thus bringing the sociolinguistic perspective into Chomskys abstract nature of linguistic competence. Hymes strongly criticized the inadequate distinction of competence and performance in Chomskys notion of linguistic competence. He found Chomskys notion unreal and commented that for any linguistic progress the practical usage of a theory should be studied along with forms. Hymes undertook ethnographic exploration of communicative competence that included "communicative form and function in integral relation to each other". As such, linguistic competence should fall under the domain of communicative competence since it comprises four competence areas, namely, linguistic (grammatical

rules and knowledge of words), sociolinguistic (social appropriateness), discourse (cohesion and coherence) and strategic (appropriate use of communication strategies). Hence, Communicative competence is a term in linguistics which refers to a language user's grammatical knowledge of syntax, morphology, phonology and the like, as well as social knowledge about how and when to use utterances appropriately. From the moment of its introduction into the linguistic discourse, the notion of communicative competence has undergone continuous change. Thus, instead of the term communicative competence, terms like language proficiency, communicative proficiency, communicative language ability, communicative language competence has been used at different points of time. Nevertheless, their definitions were very close in meaning to the definition of Hymes communicative competence, that is, a competent language user should possess not only knowledge about language but also the ability and skill to activate that knowledge properly in a communicative event. Thus, a complete communicative competence can be achieved when a speaker has grammatical (vocabulary, syntax, phonology), textual knowledge (coherence, cohesion, rhetoric and conversational organization, imaginative functions), functional knowledge (imaginative, ideational, manipulative and heuristic knowledge, cultural references), and sociolinguistic knowledge (dialects and language varieties, registers, natural and idiomatic expressions).

8. Gricean Maxims and Speech-Act Theory In normal conversation one doesnt simply say whatever one wishes, for then communication would be practically impossible. Instead some general guidelines are followed as to what is acceptable and what isn't. H. P. Grice, in 1975, famously characterized communication as a rational agent and came up with the Cooperative Principle which states that the most basic condition for a successful conversation to take place is that both the people involved in the conversation cooperate- that is, a shared principle of cooperation is the necessary factor. He came up with a set of more specific maxims, derived from basic cognitive characteristics, which

enjoin speakers to make contributions in a conversation that are truthful, informative, relevant, clear and concise. Grice pointed out four groups of maxims (principles) which people implicitly obey in communication. These are the Conversational Maxims. A. Maxims of Quality This states that one should not say what one believes to be false and one should not make statements or utter judgmental sentences without having adequate evidence of its truth. B. Maxim of Relevance It is the most important maxim, since it is responsible for preventing random, incoherent conversation lacking any continuity, particular meaning or significance. C. Maxims of Quantity This states that one should speak neither too much, nor too little. One should provide just as much information as is necessary. D. Maxims of Manner One should be brief and orderly in communication and avoid haphazard statement, obscurity of expression and ambiguity. Gricean Maxims are of paramount importance in communication in a civilized society. These maxims allow us to be briefer in communication; since we don't need to say everything we would need to if we were being perfectly logical. They allow us to say things indirectly to avoid discomfort from having to say unpleasant things directly. On the other hand, they also allow us to insult/deride people indirectly without as much danger of confrontation; that is, they allow us to imply dissatisfaction/anger in a civilized way. Speakers often contribute more information than just what is said. To account for such additional information Grice and others developed the idea of conversational Implicatures which gives a principled account of additional meanings and assumptions that hearers use to interpret utterances.ue Lecturer: Speech Act Theory can help to analyze utterances that seem to break Gricean maxims and examine utterances from the perspective of their function, rather than their form 1. Locutionary act -communicative act- we mean what we say, or, direct meaning.

2. Illocutionary act -speakers intention-we say something and mean something else. 3. Perlocutionary act suggestive additional meanings. These notions, in Indian Linguistic tradition, are referred to by Sanskrit Avidha (Denotative meaning), Lakhsana (Connotative meaning) and Vyanjana (Suggestive meaning).

9. Syntagmatic and Paradigmatic According to Ferdinand de Saussure, any individual symbol is arbitrary and depends on the language system (langue) of which it is a part, for comprehensibility. Hence, there is an inter-relationship of symbols within this system, which, Saussure argued, could be classified into a horizontal - linear - sequential arrangement - the syntagmatic; and a vertical - non-linear - associative one formed by the paradigms of memory, custom, and culture- the paradigmatic. Roman Jakobson refined this definition to say that the paradigmatic dimension involves selection amongst possible alternatives, while the syntagmatic involves a process of combination. In semiotics, the sign is the fundamental building block out of which all meaning is constructed and transmitted. Individual signs can be collected together to form more complex signs, i.e. building up from linguistics, groups of sounds form words, groups of words form sentences, sentences form narratives, etc. The constructed signs are called syntagms and each collection may be a paradigm. Thus, in the English language, the alphabet is the paradigm from which the syntagms of English words are formed. The set of English words collected together in a lexicon become the paradigm from which sentences are formed, etc. Hence, paradigmatic analysis is a method for exploring a syntagm by identifying its constituent paradigm, studying the individual paradigmatic elements, and then reconstructing the process by which the syntagm takes on meaning. Hence Syntagmatic relationships define how signifiers interact with one another, while paradigmatic relationships define how signifiers are to be distinguished from one

another.In functioning simultaneously, syntagm and paradigm mutually condition one another. Syntagmatic relations define combinatory possibilities - the way symbols might combine to form an intelligible sequence- the syntax of a language. Paradigmatic relations, on the other hand, are built upon the sets of associated terms which may or may not replace one another. To This relationship helps to select one appropriate term from an associated set of terms and excludes other terms from the same set.

10. Ambiguity Language is a very complex phenomenon where meanings are in a constant flux. Psychological, social and cultural conditions provide a ground on which those meanings manifest. Language cannot exist without ambiguity. Since there is no one "truth" and no absolutes, one can only rely on relative truths arising from groups of people who, within their particular cultural systems, attempt to answer their questions and meet their needs for survival. Historically, Saussure initiated the discussion of the arbitrariness of the sign in his Course of General Linguistics, according to which the signified shifts in relation to context even when the signifier remains the same. In terms of change over time, Saussure states "whatever the factors involved in [the] change, whether they act in isolation or in combination, they always result in a shift in the relationship between the sign and the signification." According to him, there is no mutual correspondence between a signifier and the signified; hence, to ascribe significance becomes much more complicated. The meaning in each situation appears as an effect of the underlying structure of signs which themselves do not have a fixed significance. "Sign is only what it represents for someone." The sign appears as pure reference, as a simple trace.

Something is ambiguous when it can be understood in two or more possible senses or ways. If the ambiguity is in a single word it is called lexical ambiguity. In case of a sentence or clause, it is called structural ambiguity. Language is not a clear and literal vehicle for accurately communicating ideas. But even when language is used literally, misunderstandings arise and meanings shift. People can be intentionally or unintentionally ambiguous. In normal speech, ambiguity can sometimes be understood as something witty or deceitful. Ambiguity is a poetic vehicle. In literature, ambiguity can be expressed by many figures of speech like polysemy, tropes, metaphor, metonym, allegory, homonym, homophone, homograph, paradox. There is also connotative, denotative and implied meaning.

"I-Language" and "E-Language"[edit source | editbeta]

In 1986, Chomsky proposed a distinction between I-Language and E-Language, similar but not identical [7] to the competence/performance distinction. (I-language) refers to Internal language and is contrasted with External Language (or E-language). I-Language is taken to be the object of study in linguistic theory; it is the mentally represented linguistic knowledge that a native speaker of a language has, and is therefore a mental object from this perspective, most of theoretical linguistics is a branch of psychology. E-Language encompasses all other notions of what a language is, for example that it is a body of knowledge or behavioural habits shared by a community. Thus, E-Language is not itself a [8] coherent concept, and Chomsky argues that such notions of language are not useful in the study of innate linguistic knowledge, i.e., competence, even though they may seem sensible and intuitive, and useful in other areas of study. Competence, he argues, can only be studied if languages are treated as mental objects.