A survey of structural linguistics
2 likes2,496 views
This book provides a survey of the major approaches to structural linguistics that developed in the 20th century. It summarizes theories from the Prague School, Copenhagen School, American structuralism, functional linguistics, and transformational grammar. The book also examines topics like mathematical linguistics and machine translation. It compares key concepts and debates between different scholars and linguistic traditions. Overall, the book aims to give readers a comprehensive but concise overview of the different traditions within structural linguistics and how they relate to one another.
A survey of structural linguistics
- 1. LEPSCKY’S A SURVEY OF STRUCTURAL LINGUISTICS: A REVIEW AHMED QADOURY ABED This book is an English version of the author's earlier Linguistica Strutturale, Torino(1966)(p.11). But it is not simply an English translation, since the contents have been up- dated to take in relevant work published in the intervening years, and in some chapters there has been considerable rearrangement of the material, more especially, as might be expected, in the chapter on transformational grammar due to the suggestions of many scholars like Martinet and Palmer. The chapter titles and their ordering remain the same, facilitating a comparison of two treatments by one author of the subject over the space of four years. The chapters are : (i) Introductory Notions (21-42) ; (ii) Ferdinand de Saussure (42-53) ; (iii) The Prague School (53- 65); (iv) The Copenhagen School (65-74) ; (v) The Beginning of American Structuralism (74-92) ; (vi) Functional Linguistics (92-110) ; (vii) Structural Linguistics (110-126); (viii) Transformational Grammar (126-139); (ix) Mathematical Linguistics and Machine Translation (139-151); Notes (compact references) (151-179);a brief bibliography (180-182),Terminological Index (183-186);and Index of Names (187-192). Within this framework, Lepschy provides an account of the development of twentieth- century synchronic linguistics, and instances of diachronic ones are cited incidentally (p.93ff), and a critical comparative survey of the main trends and schools in the subject today (p.119-125,138). Lepschy's title justifies itself. Structural thinking in one or another version characterizes almost all modern approaches to language; and what the author gives us here is a survey. The various schools and doctrines are summarized, with reference to the main protagonists and their publications; the account is amplified by full bibliographical details for each chapter in the Notes. Attention is drawn to the connections, historical and contemporary, between different scholars and theories, and Lepschy includes his own very fair critical comments (p.137). All of this makes the book of very considerable value to both under- and post-graduate students of linguistics and to the general reader, since it is as comprehensive as possible (p.12). This should not be taken as a disparaging evaluation of the book. As he says in the Preface, there are now a number of introductions to linguistics in English, and this book is not intended as just one more. The initial reader who is prepared to use it in conjunction with one or more general introductions and with reference to the select bibliography (p.181f) will learn a great deal about the subject from Lepschy. This SURVEY is a very good picture of the different approaches to linguistics in this century and of how they fit together, and also to realize that despite the monopolistic tendencies of some authorities one of the most interesting characteristics of linguistics to-day is the rich diversity of competing ( as in the notion of sign in Saussure, Firth , Bloomfield , and Harris) and in part complementary interpretations of linguistic theory and practice( as in the debate whether Chomsky was influenced or he himself influenced American structuralism)(p.137) . The materials are presented in the form of brief citation, paraphrase , and extensive reference ,which are all considered an important part of the text not only as a source of what is said but also as a guide to
- 2. further reading. Another aspect of his procedure is to be as objective as possible (p.38), without suppressing his own views (p.12). For example, his views have emerged from two essential sources :(i) the treatment of the insights of Saussure, Bloomfield, the Prague school, and the functionalists , and (ii) his critical evaluations of other trends ,like comparing the main features of glossematics and other trends of structural linguistics (p.69), and the notion of universals in rationalists and empiricists (p.136f). The other aspect is the particular way of titling his chapters and their sections . All the chapters (except the first two) are entitled by the name of the schools (like The Prague School (p.53) and The Copenhagen School (p.65)), or trends (like Functional Linguistics (p.92) and Structural Linguistics (p.110). The first chapter is an introductory devoted to be an account of ‘structuralism’ and its three senses (p.35f). Chapter Two carried the name of Ferdinand de Saussure, and two reasons are behind this : (i) Saussure adopted a different and a more traditional view of the history of linguistics (p.37),and (ii) his dichotomies are adopted with and without criticism, like the dichotomy of synchrony/diachrony on the one hand and ‘langage’ ,’la langue’ ,and ‘parole’ ,on the other (p.48). Titling sections is based on the name of the scholars (9 times) and the basic notions or terms in structural linguistics (17 times).Chapter VIII Transformational Grammar is one piece, in the sense that no sections are there. Lepschy adopted the strategy of comparison in every chapter. This strategy has two faces: (i) comparing the notions among scholars of one trend as in Hjelmslev’s theories with Uldall’s theories (p.73) ,and (ii) comparing notions among scholars of different trends as in presenting Chomsky’s criticism to the taxonomic linguistics of Bloomfield and his followers (p.118). This strategy is so fruitful, especially reference to the original data were stated in subscripts. Another way of comparison is represented by the illustrated, chronological treatment of notions or terms from the eighteenth century till the 1970s. Among those tackled were ‘abstraction’, ‘structure’, and the ‘communicative ‘function of language. For example a careful account was documented of the use of the term ‘structure’ in ancient and more recent authors in linguistics and other fields. Recently, the term ‘structural’ is not only to be restricted to the work of American linguistics ,but also designates those trends tied to gain insight into the structural and systematic character of language (p.36). Lepschy adopted this argument in two ways: (i) the validity of the structural principles ,regardless diversity in realization ,as in the notion of ‘la langue’ in Saussure on the one hand , and Bloomfield and others ,on the other ;and (ii) the claim that Chomsky is ‘an heir’ to twentieth- century linguistics , and ,as one of its most interesting developments (p.37 ,137). Suffice to sum up, Lepschy’s SURVEY is a suitable book for those wanted to gain a comprehensive, but illustrative account of structuralism in Europe and America. Examples from the original sources are cited, with their original languages. Lepschy tried to be objective in his book , but moved to be subjective in the last two chapter where Chomsky ‘s developing theories and their twentieth century realizations in mathematical or statistical linguistics and machine translation are considered. This classical, masterpiece treatment of structuralism is also written in simple and concise way, and that is one of its strength to the extent to be mentioned in majority of Wikipedia’s entries on the one hand , and as a suggested reading in all introductions to linguistics, on the other.