LINGUIST List 15.654

Sat Feb 21 2004

Review: History of Linguistics: Duskova (2003)

Editor for this issue: Naomi Ogasawara <naomilinguistlist.org>


What follows is a review or discussion note contributed to our Book Discussion Forum. We expect discussions to be informal and interactive; and the author of the book discussed is cordially invited to join in.

If you are interested in leading a book discussion, look for books announced on LINGUIST as "available for review." Then contact Sheila Dooley Collberg at collberglinguistlist.org.

Directory

  • Stijn Verleyen, Dictionary of the Prague School of Linguistics

    Message 1: Dictionary of the Prague School of Linguistics

    Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 23:11:03 -0500 (EST)
    From: Stijn Verleyen <stijn.verleyenkulak.ac.be>
    Subject: Dictionary of the Prague School of Linguistics


    Duskova, Libuse, ed. (2003) Dictionary of the Prague School of Linguistics, John Benjamins, Studies in Functional and Structural Linguistics 50.

    Announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/14/14-1842.html

    Stijn Verleyen, University of Leuven (campus Kortrijk)

    INTRODUCTION

    The late Josef Vachek (1909 - 1997) devoted a considerable part of his career to the diffusion and the defence of the ideas developed by the Prague Linguistic Circle. He edited several volumes with translations of original texts from the founding members of the Prague School, thus providing access to less well-known texts (cf. Vachek (ed.) 1964, Vachek 1966, Vachek (ed.) 1983). Also, he consistently held a functional view of language, as opposed to more formal approaches such as generative grammar. One of his publications was a dictionary of the Prague School of Linguistics, compiled in collaboration with Josef Dubsk�, and published in 1960 (in French) under the aegis of the ''Comit� International Permanent des Linguistes''. The book was far more than a dictionary, though, to the extent that it reflected the entire theoretical and conceptual foundations of the Praguian approach, as they appear in the most important articles and books by members of the School.

    This book has now been made available in English (as it has been in Czech) by a team of editors and translators, under the direction of Libuse Duskova, a disciple of Bohumil Trnka and Joseph Vachek. They have tried to remain as faithful as possible to the original text, but have updated page references, mentioning new translations of the works cited, etc. Also, all quotes are in English, contrary to the original edition, which preserved the original language of the article or book cited. Finally, some minor modifications have been made in the form of the entries. At the end, we find a very useful index of French, German and Czech equivalents of the headwords listed in the dictionary.

    The new edition is preceded by a substantial introduction (pp.1-23), summarizing the most important aspects of the Prague School theory and the accomplishments of linguists working or having worked in the Praguian tradition (both the founding members and more recent continuators of the functional-structural approach).

    CONTENTS

    The dictionary covers the period 1928-1958, with an emphasis on early work in general linguistics by authors directly linked to the Prague School activities, such as Karcevski, Trubetzkoy and Jakobson. In his original preface (pp.31-36), in which he succinctly recapitulates the history of the Prague Circle, Vachek defends his choice for French as the basic language by referring to the fact that, at that time, phonological terminology (which is no doubt the essential part of Prague School Theory) was elaborated in most detail in French (cf. ''projet de terminologie phonologique standardis�e'' [1931] and the French translation of Trubetzkoy's ''Grundzuge'' [1949]. Vachek's dictionary is preceded by a list of the excerpted sources, in which we find the names of the most important Praguian linguists.

    Reading through the dictionary, one gets a fairly good impression of the essential views of the Prague Circle. A prominent feature of Prague School theorizing is the basic functional perspective, which is present at all levels of linguistic description. The concept of function is not to be understood in the quasi-mathematical sense of Hjelmslev and the Copenhagen Circle (cf. ''function in the Prague conception'', p. 81), but it is closely linked to meaning. In phonology, meaning distinction is a criterion to distinguish phonemes from (contextual or free) variants. The degree to which phonemes differentiate meanings (''functional load of phonemes'', p.82) may determine whether they are preserved or merged with other phonemes.

    In syntax, the functional approach can be seen in the development of FSP (''Functional Sentence Perspective'', p.82). This functional perspective led to a very broad conception of linguistic phenomena within the Prague School. Language was not conceived as a closed system, but rather as a dynamic whole of systems, some elements being central, others more peripheric. There is an obvious 'sociolinguistic bias' in the writings of prominent Prague School linguists. For example, variational phenomena are considered very important (''language and society'', p. 98), and contacts between languages are taken into account (''language unions'' [Sprachbunde], p.100). Also, problems of standard language and literary language are treated (see various entries pp. 106-107). Furthermore, the Saussurean dichotomy between 'langue' as a system of signs and 'parole' as the use to which the system was put (see ''language and speech'', p.99), is weakened by the Prague School. Contrary to what Saussure believed, the study of 'parole' is as important as the study of 'langue', because the structure is revealed (or even shaped) by the use that is made of it.

    We have already noted that phonology was an area of major importance, a fact that is clearly reflected in the large number of entries devoted to phonological concepts and terms. The major reference in this area is of course Trubetzkoy's ''Grundzuge der Phonologie''. As is well known, Praguian phonologists did not limit their attention to synchronic phonology. One of their basic tenets was that synchrony and diachrony (entry p. 154) were not as rigidly distinct as Saussure thought they were, but that, on the contrary, a language system is dynamic and partly causes its own development. There is a clear emphasis on language-internal explanation (cf. for example ''biology and historical phonology'', p. 56). Even borrowing phenomena, for instance, are clearly treated with regard to their effect on the receiving system (''loan/borrowing'', p.107).

    In diachronic matters, Praguian linguists (most notably Trubetzkoy and Jakobson) were interested above all in final causes rather than in efficient ones. Jakobson in particular (e.g. 1928) held a teleological view of language change, considering change in language as restoring a disturbed equilibrium (''therapeutic sound changes'', p. 158), or even as avoiding disturbance altogether (''prophylactic tendencies'', see ''homonymy and phonological development'', p. 87). On the whole, one may say that the Prague School view of linguistic change was closely akin to Sapir's notion of ''drift'' (see ''tendencies in language development'', p. 73).

    EVALUATION

    Vachek's dictionary is most certainly an excellent synthesis of the essential views of the Prague School of Linguistics, and we can only applaud the fact that it has been made available in English, a language in which, as the editors point out, ''most of the subsequent work on Prague functional structuralism has been done'' (p.27). The editors and translators have delivered a good translation, providing access to important source texts. This volume will be of great interest to historiographers of linguistics, as well as to practicing functional linguists, who will find in this book many notions and concepts that are still of vital importance in linguistic theory.

    REFERENCES

    Jakobson, Roman. 1971 [1928]. ''The Concept of the Sound Law and the Teleological Criterion'', Selected Writings I, 1-2. The Hague: Mouton. Prague Linguistic Circle. 1931. ''Projet de terminologie phonologique standardis�e''. Travaux du cercle linguistique de Prague 4. 309-323.

    Trubetzkoy, N. S. 1949. Principes de phonologie [French translation of the 1939 original by J. Cantineau]. Paris: Klincksieck.

    Vachek, Josef (in collaboration with Josef Dubsk�). 1960. Dictionnaire de linguistique de l'�cole de Prague. Utrecht: Spectrum [Comit� International Permanent des Linguistes, commission de terminologie].

    Vachek, Josef. (ed.) 1964. A Prague School Reader in Linguistics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press

    Vachek, Josef. 1966. The linguistic school of Prague: an introduction to its theory and practice. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Vachek, Josef. (ed.) 1983. Praguiana: some basic and less well-known aspects of the Prague linguistic school. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

    ABOUT THE REVIEWER

    Stijn Verleyen is a PhD student at the University of Leuven, campus Kortrijk (Belgium). His main research interest is in the history and epistemology of 20th-century diachronic linguistics. He is currently writing a PhD on 20th-century theories of diachronic phonology.