October 27, 2009

LIN G U IS TIC M O D ELS A S

FO U N D ATIO N FO R
C O N TR A S TIN G

M odels and m aps

The experience of language, as cognition

and communication, is inordinately complex

(Widowson:1996:18)
It is impossible either to investigate or to
learn the language in all its totality
As learners (or aquirers) we make (a)
selection(s) along the way and in accordance
with the social roles we acquire and assume
As linguists and researchers, we strive to
provide some explanation of linguistic
complexity

 How is it done?
By abstracting from the language what

appears to be of essential importance

Abstraction necessarilly calls for
idealization and atomization of actual
data, as a necessary part of model
construction
MODELS USUALLY BEAR NO RESEMBLANCE
TO THE WAY WE EXPERIENCE THE REALITY
Take a look at the following:

Belgrade,Serbia

N itrogene atom

London U nderground

 MODEL = an idealized version of reality

Only features which are considered important

are given prominence ; others, which are

considered incidental, are left out
Models are, like maps, simplified and selective
Their validity is always relative, never absolute
; if otherwise, they would cease to be
models /maps
Their purpose is to explain experience, not to
correspond to it

 Very important to decide which

dimensions to focus on, which to

idealize and which to disregard
No model represents all the
particularities of the language , but
rather marks off distinctive points
that delimit the scope of scientific
(linguistic) enquiry

 Traditionalism sees language as linear

A HUNGRY CAT CHASES A LITTLE MOUSE

Structuralism focuses on binary structure

of language and points to the order and

levels at which words group together
S
NP VP
a hungry cat
mouse

chases

a little

Linguistic description
The analysis of a language across its levels and

categories
Description can be based on different models
Different models (or rather their application in
description) will render different descriptions
Two languages described on the basis of the
same model can be easily contrasted; if two
languages are described following the principles
of two different models, it would be impossible to
contrast them : e.g. cf. The above examples or
the following sentences: He conquered her
heart./ Osvojio je njeno srce.

D om inant linguistic m odels of

the 20th century
Structuralism
The most famous schools of linguistic structuralism:
The Geneva School (Ferdinand de Saussure) :
1916 'Cours de lingustique generale' edited

posthumously by Charles Bally and A. Sechehaye :

a collection of famous lectures held by de
Saussure at Geneva University;
not entirely a record of his linguistic views and
stands;
this book acted a missionary in general linguistics
to Ferdinand de Saussure it brought the fame of
one who started a new era in the scientific field of
linguistics.

 'Language' as the chess metaphor:

One may take any piece, made of any material and

assign it a set value

the linguistic sign is arbitrary, on the one

hand and once decided on, it becomes

obligatory
The linguistic sign represents a direct
associative link between the acoustic
phenomenon by which something gets marked
(signifiant) and the marked notion (signifie).
the establishment of semiology

 Language is a system of signs related between

themselves in such a way that the value of a sign is

influenced by the presence or absence of other signs.
(e.g. Values of alophones in phonetic context)
[v] in love vs. [v] in value voiceless vs. voiced

Saussure made difference between the language as a

property of the (language) community and its

immediate realization by an individual member of the
language community. The first he called langue , and
the latter parole, which represents the actual, real
instances of language in speech acts.

The P rague Linguistic

C ircle
Jakobson, Trubetskoy, Mathesius,

Isachenko, Trnka, Vachek

Distinctive features in phonology ( pub / rub ,
man / men )
Jakobson introduces the principle of binary
opposition (dichotomies): linguistic units are
organized in pairs , the opposition between
presence / absence of a certain feature being
the defining criterion: e.g. /f/ : /v/ - voiceless :
voiced
exploded : unexploded
aspirated : unaspirated

 The Copenhagen School

(Brondal, Hjelmslev)
highly formal, although in its
fundament structural
interested in how categories of logic
get manifested in language through
language facts

The A m erican School

(B loom f e
ild, Sapir, W horf)
The elements of language form a system, or a

structure
Each language has its own immanent structure;
prescriptive approach is therefore ruled out
Synchrony over diachrony: synchronic research takes
priority over diachronic
The aim of linguistics is to describe language, that is
a social phenomenon, in an objective and
mechanicistic way: form and distribution are taken
into account; meaning is put aside. (cf. Jabberwocky)
Language is a form of behaviour, a system of
automatic responses to the given stimuli (S -> r.....s> R: Bloomfield ,1933)
Method and techniques of analysis: ICA examples :

W ord-form ation level

Horizontally all elements seem to be

at the same proximity, but

structurally, it is clear that they
belong to different levels:
UN GRACE FUL

FUL

DIS GRACE

Construction form ation level

E.g.

Is

Because :

John
John

coming
is coming

Little Tommy Tucker sings for his

supper.

Recom m ended reading:

Sosir, Ferdinand, de (1996) Kurs opte

lingvistike, Izdavaka knjiarnica Zorana

Stojanovia, Sremski Karlovci; Novi Sad
Bugarski, R.(1984) . Jezik i lingvistika. Beograd:

Nolit (Biblioteka sazvea).

Bugarski, R. (1983) Lingvistika o oveku.

Beograd: Prosveta (Biblioteka XX vek).

Bloomfield, L. (1933) Language. Holt. Rinehart
and Wilson. New York. (only Chapter 2)