Über Trampelpfade, sichtbare Hände und Sprachwandelprozesse

Zweitveröffentlichung

What variational linguistics can learn from Galician

This short overview reviews, in the first part, some of the most important fields of investigation where studies on Galician have contributed to variational linguistics, including macro- and micro-sociolinguistic studies (sections 1-3). The second part (sections 4-7) postulates some possible theoretical and empirical areas which we recommend to be included in future research. We propose a critical application of new models of linguistic variation, including recent frameworks such as studies on grammaticalisation, OT, intonational phonology, etc., but also call for the inclusion of established insights into language variation common in the European tradition. The high concentration of research institutions and the strongly dynamic situation of contemporary Galician could serve as an empirical touchstone for these theoretical frameworks, and Galician linguistics should apply them in a critical, flexible and creative way. This means that research on Galician will not only learn from theory but also contribute to it. We also briefly mention some of the areas where the studies of Galician have already contributed some important results to an overall perspective on linguistic variation

Eugenio Coseriu: Beyond Structuralism

Eugenio Coseriu counts among the most important linguistic scholars of the second half of the 20th century. He is known mainly as a structuralist and a Romance linguist, but his work is in fact far more expansive in scope, including a comprehensive linguistic theory as well as writings on a wide range of issues, from semantics, syntax, typology, variational linguistics, language change, pragmatics and text linguistics to Vulgar Latin, the history of the philosophy of language and the history of Romance linguistics. Coseriu’s thought is founded on solid philosophical principles, and his life brought him into contact with a number of different academic traditions and cultures. However, for a variety of reasons (among which, the languages in which he tended to publish: Spanish, Italian, French and German), knowledge of his thought is rather marginal in the Anglo-American world. This book aims to go some way to addressing this situation by offering an overview in English of Coseriu’s main contributions to linguistics, and indeed to other disciplines. It is of general interest for the study of linguistics, the history of linguistics, and the philosophy of language, as well as for a broader reading public. . first comprehensive English introduction to Coseriu’s work and thought . compact overview . allows for an initial study as well as for deeper insight

Discourse traditions and the historicity of language: discourse traditional knowledge and discourse universes

This chapter has a strongly theoretical focus and is divided into three sections. The first section tackles the relationship between discourse traditions (DTs)and the general question of language historicity; the second section is dedicated tothe definition and classification of DTs; and the final section addresses the notionof“universe of discourse”and its possible relationship with DTs or discursive tradi-tionality in general. As regards the first matter, a variety of proposals have beenmade to situate DTs within a coherent theory of language. Koch (1997) and Oester-reicher (1997) suggest a duplicated“ historical level” departing from Eugenio Coser-iu’s distinction between a universal, a historical, and an individual level of lan-guage (see Coseriu 1985). Other scholars (Lebsanft 2006) have criticized thisapproach: we will argue here that as early the 1950s Coseriu (s.a.) advocated for ahistoricity of the individual level (Kabatek 2018; 2021). The second section presentsthe similarities and differences of the various proposals and offers a classificationof DTs based on both form and content. Finally, the notion ofuniverse of discourseand its relationship to DTs will be addressed: a more general and more traditionalview on universes of discourse (Urban 1939; Coseriu 1955–1956) considers these asbundles of DTs, whereas an alternative, more recent view (Coseriu 2002) limits thenotion to only four universes based on the semiotic relationship between subjectsand objects

What is an isogloss?

This short contribution discusses the term and concept of isogloss: the space where a linguistic phenomenon exists or, by metonymic extension, the line that separates a particular linguistic phenomenon from another. Although the concept is currently used as an established and canonical term in linguistics, it is reasonable to explore its scope and the real sense that it carries, as well as to consider its origins and potential ambiguity in use. The main issue with the concept is that it seems to be theoretically necessary yet at the same time is not empirically attestable, which runs contrary to essential epistemological principles. We will seek to show that a) there is no contradiction between the existence of isoglosses as discrete units and the continuity of phenomena on the empirical level, b) the supposed end of the era of the diatopic anchorage of language in times of modern migration is a myth, c) that isoglosses should not be considered as established lines but rather as projections resulting from processes of individual constructions of spaces, and finally, d) that a central task of dialectology and of historical linguistics consists of the identification of the multi-layered superposition of different isoglosses that reflects the complex history of a language or variety