Language as activity, linguistic knowledge and cognitive psychology: a Coserian perspective

Abstract

In this contribution, I compare Integral Linguistics (IL) and Mainstream Cognitive Linguistics (MCL) with regard to their different conceptualization of the nature of language and, hence, of the object of study of linguistics. I show that in IL linguistic analyses are taken to provide an explication of linguistic activity and implicitly conscious linguistic knowledge, which follows from IL’s conceptualization of language as being primarily a creative human activity. In MCL on the other hand linguistic analyses are taken to pertain directly to hypothesized cognitive unconscious computational mechanisms which enable conscious language use, but which operate below the level of consciousness. Building on two lines of arguments from the philosophy of cognitive science, I show that MCL’s claim that linguistic analyses relate directly to cognitive unconscious mechanisms is highly problematic, while IL does not run into similar problems. I conclude the contribution by suggesting two possible solutions to create a more coherent conception of the object of linguistics for CL. CL can take inspiration from IL and shift its focus to the conscious human mind as its object of investigation, or it can continue to target the subpersonal computational mechanisms enabling language use, if MCL adjusts its epistemology and methodology accordingly.