<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Semantics &amp; Pragmatics Archives - The Historical Linguist Channel</title>
	<atom:link href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/topics/sp/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/topics/sp/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Sep 2019 19:45:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.0.9</generator>
<site xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">135321646</site>	<item>
		<title>Too much linguistics, too little time</title>
		<link>https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/too-much-linguistics-too-little-time/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=too-much-linguistics-too-little-time</link>
					<comments>https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/too-much-linguistics-too-little-time/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lisa Gotthard]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Nov 2017 09:00:38 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Morphology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Phonology & Phonetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Semantics & Pragmatics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sociolinguistics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Syntax]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[morphology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[semantics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pragmatics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sociolinguistics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lisa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[historical linguistics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[subfields]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[phonetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[phonology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[syntax]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/?p=180</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Hello, it’s me, Lisa, again. I just couldn’t stay away! This week, I have been given the challenging task of outlining the subfields of linguistics1. The most common responses I get when I tell people I study linguistics are variations of “What is that?” and &#160;“What can you do with that?”. This leads me to &#8230; </p>
<p class="link-more"><a href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/too-much-linguistics-too-little-time/" class="more-link">Continue reading<span class="screen-reader-text"> "Too much linguistics, too little time"</span></a></p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/too-much-linguistics-too-little-time/">Too much linguistics, too little time</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com">The Historical Linguist Channel</a>.</p>
]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Hello, it’s me, Lisa, again. I just couldn’t stay away! This week, I have been given the challenging task of outlining the subfields of linguistics</span><span style="font-weight: 400;"><sup>1</sup>. The most common responses I get when I tell people I study linguistics are variations of “<em>What is that?</em>” and &nbsp;“<em>What can you do with that?</em>”. This leads me to explain extremely broadly what linguistics is </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">(eh, er, uhm, the science of languages? Like, how they work and where they come from…. But I don’t actually learn a language! I just study them. One language or lots of them. Sort of.)</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">, and then I describe various professions you can have from studying linguistics. What all of those professions have in common is that I can do none of them, since they are related to subfields of linguistics that I haven’t specialised in (looking at you <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic_linguistics"><i>forensic</i></a> and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applied_linguistics"><i>applied linguistics</i></a>)</span><span style="font-weight: 400;">. My own specialties, </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">historical linguistics</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;"> and </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">syntax</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">, lead to nothing but long days in the library and crippling student debt, but let’s not dwell on that. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Linguistics is a minefield of subdisciplines. To set the scene, look at this very confusing mind-map I made:</span></p>
<p><img data-attachment-id="184" data-permalink="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/too-much-linguistics-too-little-time/new-mind-map-2/" data-orig-file="https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/New-Mind-Map.png?fit=2028%2C1280&amp;ssl=1" data-orig-size="2028,1280" data-comments-opened="1" data-image-meta="{&quot;aperture&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;credit&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;camera&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;caption&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;created_timestamp&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;copyright&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;focal_length&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;iso&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;shutter_speed&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;title&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;orientation&quot;:&quot;0&quot;}" data-image-title="New-Mind-Map" data-image-description="" data-image-caption="" data-medium-file="https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/New-Mind-Map.png?fit=300%2C189&amp;ssl=1" data-large-file="https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/New-Mind-Map.png?fit=525%2C331&amp;ssl=1" loading="lazy" class="alignnone wp-image-184 size-full" src="https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/New-Mind-Map.png?resize=525%2C331" alt="" width="525" height="331" srcset="https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/New-Mind-Map.png?w=2028&amp;ssl=1 2028w, https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/New-Mind-Map.png?resize=300%2C189&amp;ssl=1 300w, https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/New-Mind-Map.png?resize=768%2C485&amp;ssl=1 768w, https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/New-Mind-Map.png?resize=1024%2C646&amp;ssl=1 1024w, https://i0.wp.com/thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/New-Mind-Map.png?w=1575&amp;ssl=1 1575w" sizes="(max-width: 767px) 89vw, (max-width: 1000px) 54vw, (max-width: 1071px) 543px, 580px" data-recalc-dims="1" /></p>
<p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Now ignore that mind-map because it does you no good. It’s highly subjective and inconclusive. &nbsp;However, it does demonstrate how although these subfields are distinct, they end up intersecting quite a lot. At some point in their career, linguists need to use knowledge from several areas, no matter what their specialty. To not wear you out completely, I’m focusing here on the core areas of linguistics: </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">Phonetics and phonology</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;"> (</span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">PhonPhon</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;"> for short<sup>2</sup>), </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">syntax</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">, </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">&nbsp;morphology</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">, and </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">semantics</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">. I will also briefly talk about </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">Sociolinguistics</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;"> and </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">Pragmatics<sup>3</sup></span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Right, let’s do this.</span></p>
<h4><b>Phonetics and Phonology </b></h4>
<p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Let’s start with the most recognisable and fundamental component of spoken language: sounds! </span></p>
<p><span style="font-weight: 400;">The </span><b>phonetics</b><span style="font-weight: 400;"> part of phonetics and phonology is kind of the natural sciences, physics and biology, of linguistics. In phonetics, we describe speech production by analysing sound waves, vocal fold vibrations and the position of the anatomical elements of the mouth and throat. We use cool latinate terms, like </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">alveolar</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;"> and </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">labiodental</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">, to formally describe sounds, like </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">voiced alveolar fricative</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;"> (= the sound /z/ in </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">zoo</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">). The known possible sounds speakers can produce in the languages of the world are described by the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA), which Rebekah will tell you all about next week<sup>4</sup></span><span style="font-weight: 400;">. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-weight: 400;">The </span><b>phonology</b><span style="font-weight: 400;"> part of phonetics and phonology concerns itself with how these phonetic sounds organise into systems and how they’re used in languages. In a way, phonetics gives the material for phonology to build a language’s sound rule system. Phonology figures out, for example, what sounds can go together and what syllables are possible. All humans with a well-functioning vocal apparatus are able to produce the same sounds, yet different languages have different sound inventories; for example, English has a sound /θ/, the sound spelled &lt;th&gt; as in </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">thing</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">, while Swedish does not. Phonology maps these inventories and explains the rules and mechanisms behind them, looking both within one language and comparatively between languages.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Speaking of Rebekah, she summarised the difference between Phonetics and Phonology far more eloquently than I could so I’ll quote her: “</span><span style="font-weight: 400;">Phonetics is the concrete, physical manifestation of speech sounds, and phonology is kind of the abstract side of it, how we conceptualize and store those sounds in our mind.”</span></p>
<h4><b>Syntax (and morphology, you can come too)</b></h4>
<p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Begin where I are doing to syntax explained? </span></p>
<p><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">Why this madness!</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">, you may exclaim, post reading the above sentence. That, friends, is what it looks like to break syntax rules; the sentence above has a weird word order and the wrong inflections on the verbs. The same sentence obeying the rules would be: Where do I begin to explain syntax?</span></p>
<p><b>Syntax</b><span style="font-weight: 400;"> is one of my favourite things in the world, up there with cats and </span><a href="https://www.ocado.com/productImages/208/208231011_0_640x640.jpg?identifier=811cb401a4da04f122a38165b932d67a"><span style="font-weight: 400;">OLW Cheez Doodles</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;">. The syntax of a language is the rule system which organises word-like elements into clause structures based on the grammatical information that comes with each element. In plain English: Syntax creates sentences that look and sound right to us. This doesn’t only affect word order, but also </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">agreement patterns</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;"> (syntax rules make sure we say </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">I sing</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">, </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">she sings</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;"> and not </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">I sings</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">, </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">she sing</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">), and how we express semantic roles<sup>5</sup></span><span style="font-weight: 400;">. Syntax is kind of like the maths of linguistics; it involves a lot of problem solving and neat solutions with the aim of being as universal and objective as possible. The rules of syntax are not sensitive to </span><a href="http://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/introduction-to-the-blog-and-some-words-on-descriptivism/"><span style="font-weight: 400;">prescriptive</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;"> norms – the syntax of a language is a product of the language people </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">actually</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;"> produce and not what they </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">should</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;"> produce.</span></p>
<p><b>Morphology</b><span style="font-weight: 400;"> is, roughly, the study of word-formation. Morphology takes the smallest units of meaningful information (</span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">morphemes</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">), puts them together if necessary, and gives them to syntax so that syntax can do its thing (much like how phonetics provides material for phonology, morphology provides material for syntax). A morpheme can be an independent word, like the preposition </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">in</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">, but it can also be the </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">-ed</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;"> at the end of </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">waited</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">, telling us that the event happened in the past. This is contrasting phonology, which deals with units which are not necessarily informative; the ‘</span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">ed</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">’ in </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">Edinburgh</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;"> is a phonological unit, a syllable, but it gives us no grammatical information and is therefore not a morpheme. Languages can have very different types of morphological systems. English tends to separate informative units into multiple words, whereas languages like Swahili can express whole sentences in one word. Riccardo will discuss this in more detail in a few weeks.</span></p>
<h4><b>Semantics (with a pinch of pragmatics) </b></h4>
<p><b>Semantics</b><span style="font-weight: 400;"> is the study of </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">meaning</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;"> (she said, vaguely). When phonetics and phonology has taken care of the sounds and morphology and syntax have created phrases and sentences from those sounds, semantics takes over to make sense of it all – what does a word mean and what does a sentence mean and how does that interact with and/or influence the way we think? Let’s attempt an elevator pitch for semantics: Semantics discusses the relationship between words, phrases and sentences, and the meanings they denote; it concerns itself with the relationship between linguistic elements and the world in which they exist. (Have you got a headache yet?).</span></p>
<p><span style="font-weight: 400;">If phonetics is the physics/biology of linguistics and syntax is the maths, Semantics is the philosophy of linguistics, both theoretical and formal. In my three years of studying semantics, we went from discussing whether a sentence like </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">The King of France is bald</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;"> is true or false (considering there is no king of France in the real world), to translating phrases and words into logical denotation ( </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">andVP</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;"> = </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">λP</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">[</span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">λQ</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">[</span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">λx</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">[</span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">P</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">(</span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">x</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">) ∧ </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">Q</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">(</span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">x</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">)]]]</span><span style="font-weight: 400;"> ),</span><span style="font-weight: 400;"> to discussing universal patterns in linguistics where semantics and syntax meet and the different methods languages use to adhere to these patterns, for example </span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_classifier"><span style="font-weight: 400;">how Mandarin counts “uncountable” nouns</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;">.</span></p>
<p><b>Pragmatics</b><span style="font-weight: 400;"> follows semantics in that it is also a study of meaning, but pragmatics concerns the way we interpret utterances. It is much more concerned with discourse, language in actual use and language subtexts. For example, pragmatics can describe the mechanisms involved when we interpret the sentence ‘</span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">it’s cold in here</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">’ to mean ‘</span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">can you close the window?</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">’. </span></p>
<h4><b>Sociolinguistics and historical linguistics</b></h4>
<p><b>Sociolinguistics</b><span style="font-weight: 400;"> has given me about 80% of my worthy dinner table conversations about linguistics. It is the study of the way language interacts with society, identity, communities and other social aspects of our world, and it also includes the study of geographical dialects (</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectology"><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">dialectology</span></i></a><span style="font-weight: 400;">). Sociolinguistics is essentially the study of language variation and change within the above areas, both at a specific point in time (</span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">synchronically</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">) and across a period of time (</span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">diachronically</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">); my post last week, as well as </span><a href="http://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/introduction-to-the-blog-and-some-words-on-descriptivism/"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Riccardo’s</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;"> and </span><a href="http://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/the-myth-of-language-decay/"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Sabina’s</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;"> posts in the weeks before, dealt with issues relevant for sociolinguistics.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-weight: 400;">When studying the HLC’s speciality </span><b>historical linguistics</b><span style="font-weight: 400;">, which involves the historical variation and change of language(s), we often need to consider sociolinguistics as a factor in why a certain historical language change has taken place or why we see a variation in the linguistic phenomenon we’re investigating. We also often need to consider several other fields of linguistics in order to understand a phenomenon, which can play out something like this:</span></p>
<ul>
<li><i style="font-size: 1rem;">Is this strange spelling variation found in this 16th century letter because it was pronounced differently (phonetics, phonology), and if so, was it because of a dialectal difference (sociolinguistics)? Or, does this spelling actually indicate a different function of the word (morphology, semantics)?</i></li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;"><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">What caused this strange word order change starting in the 14th century? Did it start within the syntax itself, triggered by an earlier different change, or did it arise from a method of trying to focus the reader’s attention on something specific in the clause (</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_structure"><span style="font-weight: 400;">information structure</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;">, pragmatics</span><span style="font-weight: 400;">)? Did that word order arise because this language was in contact with speakers of another language which had that word order (</span><span style="font-weight: 400;">sociolinguistics, </span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_typology"><span style="font-weight: 400;">typology</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;">)?</span></i></li>
</ul>
<p>To summarise, phonetics and phonology gives us sounds and organises them. The sounds become morphemes which are put into the syntax. The syntactic output is then interpreted through semantics and pragmatics. Finally, the external context in which this all takes place and is interpreted is dealt with by sociolinguistics. Makes sense?</p>
<p><span style="font-weight: 400;">There is so much more to say about each of these subfields; it’s hard to do any of them justice in such a brief format! However, the point of this post was to give you a foundation to stand on when we go into these topics more in-depth in the future. If you have any questions or anything you’d like to know more about, you can always comment or email, or have a look at some of the literature I mention in the footnotes. Next week, Rebekah will give us some background on the IPA – one of the most important tools for any linguist. Thanks for reading!</span></p>
<h4>Footnotes</h4>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><span style="font-weight: 400;"><sup>1</sup>I had to bring out the whole arsenal of introductory textbooks to use as inspiration for this post. Titles include but are not limited to: </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">Beginning Linguistics</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;"> by Laurie Bauer; </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">A Practical introduction to Phonetics</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;"> by J.C. Catford; </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">A Historical Syntax of English</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;"> by Bettelou Los; </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">What is Morphology?</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;"> By Mark Aronoff and Kristen Fudeman; </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">Meaning: A slim guide to Semantics</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;"> by Paul Elborne; </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">Pragmatics</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;"> by Yan Huang; and </span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">Introducing Sociolinguistics</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;"> by Miriam Meyerhoff. I also consulted old lecture notes from my undergraduate studies at the University of York.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-weight: 400;"><sup>2</sup>This is of course not an official term, just a nickname used by students.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-weight: 400;"><sup>3</sup>We’ll hopefully get back to some of the others another time. For now, if you are interested, a description of most of the subfields is available from a quick google search of each of the names you find in the mind map.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-weight: 400;"><sup>4</sup>If you want a sneak peek, you can play around with this <a href="http://www.yorku.ca/earmstro/ipa/">interactive IPA chart</a> where clicking a sound on the chart will give you its pronunciation.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-weight: 400;"><sup>5</sup>This is more visible in languages that have an active case system. English has lost case on all proper nouns, but we can still see the remains of the English case system on pronouns (</span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">he</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">&#8211;</span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">him</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">&#8211;</span><i><span style="font-weight: 400;">his</span></i><span style="font-weight: 400;">). </span></p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/too-much-linguistics-too-little-time/">Too much linguistics, too little time</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com">The Historical Linguist Channel</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://thehistoricallinguistchannel.com/too-much-linguistics-too-little-time/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">180</post-id>	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
