Abstract
The present investigation explores the language definitions (i. e. the language ontologies) that have emerged in the field of sociolinguistics. In general, it examines three types of sociolin-guistic studies: Labovian sociolinguistics (Labov 1972), the Ethnography of Communication (Gumperz/Hymes 1964) and Conversation Analysis (Sacks 1992). Firstly, it offers an account on the ontology of language developed by Chomskyian linguistics (1986) which is used as a starting point to contrast the three sociolinguistics’ language ontologies. Then, the paper pre-sents Labov’s ontology of language (Labov 1977), the criticism that it has faced and examines proposals that aim to integrate social facts and linguistic structure. With regard to the Ethnog-raphy of Communication, accounts about its ontology of language (Hymes 1974, 1986) and its ontology of culture (Sapir 1921; Hymes 1972) are presented and a possible explanation about the relationship between language and culture is offered. With respect to Conversation Analysis, its ontology of language is presented (Ochs et al. 1996) as well as its analytic in-sight and an account about grammar as an interactional resource is given. The final section proposes that, for these three types of sociolinguistics, “language” is a social, functional and behavioural entity which is socially and behaviourally structured. “Language” transmits social meanings, reflects the social order and expresses the identity of its speakers.
Highlights
In his book A Realist Theory of Science Bhaskar (1975: 16) formulates what he calls the “epistemic fallacy”: “statements about being can always be transposed into statements about our knowledge of being”
There may be linguistic patterns of human language that exist even though they have not been discovered yet, and these unknown linguistic patterns are significant for the ontology of language, i. e. for what language is
Despite the fact that language is the object of study in linguistics (i. e. the scientific study of language), it is not a simple task to formulate an ontology of language that could work for all the different ways of doing linguistics
Summary
In his book A Realist Theory of Science Bhaskar (1975: 16) formulates what he calls the “epistemic fallacy”: “statements about being can always be transposed into statements about our knowledge of being”. E. its epistemology) is what language is Language is reduced to what we know about it. Bhaskar argues that the being of a given entity G. language) is independent of the knowledge we have of the entity. There may be linguistic patterns of human language that exist even though they have not been discovered yet, and these unknown linguistic patterns are significant for the ontology of language, i. There may be linguistic patterns of human language that exist even though they have not been discovered yet, and these unknown linguistic patterns are significant for the ontology of language, i. e. for what language is
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
