Abstract

AbstractLinguistics, and typology in particular, can have a bright future. We justify this optimism by discussing comparability from two angles. First, we take the opportunity presented by this special issue ofLinguistic Typologyto pause for a moment and make explicit some of the logical underpinnings of typological sciences, linguistics included, which we believe are worth reminding ourselves of. Second, we give a brief illustration of comparison, and particularly measurement, within modern typology.

Highlights

  • Linguistics, and typology in particular, can have a bright future

  • Analysing the grammar of a single language, just like doing cross-linguistic typology, demands a typological method, in the sense we introduced at the start of Section 1, not a classificational one

  • The variation found in the grammar of one language can often be related meaningfully to cross-linguistic typologies, especially when the comparison is framed in relation to underlying attributes, of the kind that are identified during substruction

Read more

Summary

What typological science is like

Linguistic typology is part of a wider intellectual undertaking, in which we can benefit from the successes of others. The typological method was not inherently about assigning objects to discrete categories (though this was an often-used technique), but about grappling in a scientific way with possible dimensions of comparison to use in the study of some domain of interest: how to discover them, evaluate them, and understand their contribution to the ultimate scientific goal of understanding the domain of inquiry Owing to this history of ideas, since the late 1800s, an immense amount of philosophical and practical work has been carried out – within psychology, anthropology, sociology, archaeology and biology – into methodological questions which inherently still lie at the heart of linguistic typology today. As a prelude to that discussion, we have emphasized that much core scientific work in linguistics will consist in proposing and evaluating multiple conceivable ways of dividing up dimensions of linguistic variation, in identifying the dimensions themselves and considering their many alternatives, and in reevaluating the outer limits of domains.

The productive comparison of scientific proposals
Grammar writing as a typological undertaking
Comparison
A note on standardization
Why measure and how
Measuring the Russian genitive
Additional dimensions and their canonical extremes
What canonical analysis can reveal
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call