1. What is linguistics?

1.1 Definition

Linguistics is generally defined as the scientific study of language. The word “language” preceded by the zero article in English implies that linguistics studies not any particular language, e.g., English, Chinese, Arabic, and Latin, but languages in general. The word “study” does not mean “lean” but “investigate” or “examine.” And the word “scientific” refers to the way in which it is studied. A scientific sutdy of language is based on the systematic investigation of data, conducted with reference to some general theory of language structure. In order to discover the nature of the underlying language system, what the linguist has to do first is to sudy language facts, i.e., to see how language is actually used; then he formulates some hypotheses about the language structure. But the hypotheses thus formed have to be checked repeatedly against the observed facts. In linguistics, as in any other discipline, data and theory stand in a dialectical complementation; that is, a theory without the support of data can hardly claim validity, and data without being explained by some theory remain a muddled mass of things.

Thus the process of linguistic study can be summarized as follows; First, certain linguistic facts are oberved, which are found to display some similarities, and generalizations are made about them; next based on these generalizations, hypothese are formulated to account for these facts; and then the hypotheses are tested by further observations; and finally a linguistic theory is constructed about what language is and how it works.

1.2 The scope of linguistics

The study of language as a whole is often called general linguistics. This deals with the basic concepts, theories, descriptions, models and methods applicable in any linguistic study, in contrast to those branches of study which relate linguistics to the research of other areas.

Language is a complicated entity with multiple layers and facets, so it is hardly possible for the linguists to deal with it all at once. They have to concentrate on one aspect of it at a time.

What first drew the attention of the linguists were the sounds used in languages. This study of sounds used in linguistic communication led to the establishment of a branch of linguistics called phonetics.

Then, as linguists became interested in how sounds are put together and used to convey meaning in communication, they developed another branch of study related to sounds called phonology.

While sounds are primary in linguistic communication, they are represented by certain symbols, i.e., words and even smaller components called morphemes. The study of the way in which these symbols are arranged to form words has constituted the branch of study called morphology.

Then the combination of these words to form permissible sentences in languages is governed by rules. The study of these rules constitutes a major branch of linguistic studies, i.e., syntax.

But the ultimate objective of language is not just to create grammatically well-formed sentences, but to convey meaning. So the study of meaning was gradually developed and became known as semantics.

Language communication does not occur in a vacuum. It always occurs in a context, i.e., it always occurs at a certain time, at a certain place, between participants with particular intentions. When the study of meaning is conducted, not in isolation, but in the context of use, it becomes another branch of linguistic study called pragmatics.

The study of all these aspects of language forms the core of linguistics.

Then, language is not an isolated phenomenon; it is a social activity carried out in a certain social environment by human beings. Naturally, in the course of time the study of language has established close links with other branchs of social studies, resulting in interdisciplinary branches of linguistic study.

Language and society are closely connected. The language a person uses often reveals his social background, and there exist social norms that determine the type of language to be used on a certain occasion; and language changes are often caused by social changes. The study of all these social aspects of language and its relation with society form the core of the branch called sociolinguistics.

Psycholinguistics relates the study of language to psychology. It aims to answer such questions as how the human mind works when we use language, how we as infants acquire our mother tongue, how we memorize, and how we process the information we receive in the course of communication.

Findings in linguistic stuies can often be applied to the soulution of such practical problems as the recovery of speech ability. The sutdy of such applications is generally known as applied linguistics. But in a narrow sense applied linguistics refers to the application of linguistic theories and principles to language teaching, especially the teaching of foreign and second languages. Language teachers should first of all learn the language rules before they can teach these rules to the students; teaching material development, teaching syllabus design, evaluation of teaching arid learning are all guided by linguistic priciples and theories. The emergence of a new teaching approach or method often follows the emergence of a new linguistic theory.

Other related branches include authropological linguistics, neurological inguistics, mathermatical linguistics, and computational linguistics.

1.3 Some important distinctions in linguistics

1.3.1 Prescriptive vs. descriptive

If a linguistic study describes and analyzes the language people actually use, it is said to be descriptive; if it aims to lay down rules for “correct” behaviour, i.e., to tell people what they should say and what they should not say, it is said to be **prescriptive”

Modern linguistics, i.e., linguistic study carried out in this century is mostly descriptive. It differs from the linguistic study normally known as “grammar.” Early grammars were based on “high”(religous,literary)written languase. They set models for language users to follow. And today, the grammar taught to learners of a language is still basically prescriptive. It tells the learner what he should say, or what is supposed to be correct usage. On the other hand, modern linguistics is mostly descriptive. Linguistic study is supposed to be scientific and objective and the task of linguists is supposed to describe the language people actually use, be it “correct” or not. Linguists believe that whatever occurs in the language people use should be described and analyzed in their investigation.

1.3.2 Synchronic vs. diachronic

Language exists in time and changes through time. The description of a language at some point in time is a synchronic study; the description of a language as it changes through time is a diachronic study. A diachronic study of language is a historical study; it studies the historical development of language over a period of time. For example, a study of the features of the English used in Shakespeare’s time would be a synchronic study, and a study of the changes English has undergone since then would be a diachronic study.

In modern linguistics synchronic study seems to enjoy priority over diachronic study. The reason is that unless the various states of a language are successfully studied it would be difficult to describe the changes that have taken place in its historical development. Synchronic descriptions are often thought of as being descriptions of a language as it exists at the present day and most linguistic studies are of this type.

1.3.3 Speech and writing

Speech and writing are the two major media of communication. Modern linguistics regards the spoken language as primary, not the written.

In the past, traditional grammarians tened to over-emphasize the importance of the written word, partly because of its permanence. Before the invention of sound recording, it was difficult for people to deal with utterances which existed only for seconds. Then, the traditional classical education was also partly to blame. People were encouraged to imitate the “best authors” for language usage.

But modern linguistics gives priority to the spoken form of language, which is considered as more basic than the written form for a number of reasons. First, in any human society we know of, speech prcedes writing. The writing system of any language is always a later invention, used to record the speech. While quite a number of languaes in the world today have both spoken and written forms, there are still mnay languages that have only the spoken form. And then in terms of function, the spoken languages is used for a wider range of purposes than the written, and carries a larger load of communication than the written.

1.3.4 Langue and parole

The distinction between langue and parole was made by the Swiss linguist F. de Saussure early this century. Langue and parole are French words. Langue refers to the abstract linguistic system shared by all the members of a speech community, and parole refers to the realization of langue in actual use. Langue is the set of conventions and rules which language users all have to abide by, and parole is the concrete use of the conventions and the application of the rules. Langue is abstract; it is not the language people actually use. Parole is concrete; it refers to the naturally occurring language events. Langue is relatively stable, it does not change frequently; while parole varies from person to person, and from situation to situation. Take for example the structure of a sentence in English. An English sentence must have a subject and a predicate. This is a rule agreed on by all the English speakers. This is part of the langue. while adhering to the same abstract system, each user of English has his own way of applying the rules. Thus each act of speaking is a unique event, different from any other act.

Saussure made this distinction in order to single out one aspect of language for serious study. In his opinion, parole is simply a mass of linguistic facts, too varied and confusing for systematic invesigation, and what linguists should do is to abstract langue from parole, i.e., to discover the regularities governing the actual use of language and make them the subjects of study of linguistics.

1.3.5 Competence and performance

Similar to Saussure’s distinction between langue and parole is the distinction between competence and performance, which was proposed by the American linguist N.Chomsky in the late 1950’s. Chomsky defines competence as the ideal user’s knownledge of the rules of his language, and performance the actual realization of this knowledge in linguistic communication. According to Chomsky, a speaker has internalized a set of rules about his language, this enables him to produce and understand and infinitely large number of sentences and recognize sentences that are ungrammatical and ambiguous. Despite his perfect knowledge of his own language, a spekaer ear still make mistakes in actual use, e.g., slips of the tongue, and unnecessary pauses. This imperfect performance is caused by social and psychological factors such as stress, anxiety, and embarrassment. Similar to Saussure, Chomsky thinks that what linguists should study is the ideal speaker’s competence, not his performance, which is too haphazard to be studied. Although a speaker possesses an internalized set of rules and applies them in actual use, be can not tell exactly what these rules are. So the task of the linguists is to discover and specify these rules.

While Saussure’s distinction and Chomsky’s are very similar, they differ at least in that Saussure took a sociological view of language and his notion of langue is a matter of social conventions, and Chomsky looks at language from a psychological point of view and to him competence is a property of the mind of each individual.

2. What is language?

2.1 Definitions of language

If we take linguistics to be the scientific study of language, our next question then is “What is language?”

This may at first sound like a naive and simple question, yet to this extremely familiar, everyday phenomenon, it is difficult to give a satisfactory definition. You may probaly say “language is a tool for human communication.” But this only tells us what language does, or what it is used for, i.e., its function. As a matter of fact, there are some other systems that can perform the same function. e.g., a secret code, traffic signals, gestures. So this does not distinguish languaes from other means of human commmunication.

Alternatively, one might say “language is a set of rules.” Then this tells nothing about its functions, and there are actually other systems that are also rule-governed.

Modern linguists have proposed various definitios of language some of them are quoted below:

Language is a purely human and non-instinctive method of communicating ideas, emotions and desires by means of voluntarily produced symbols.” – (Sapir, 1921)

Language is “the institution whereby humans communicate and interact with each other by means of habitually used oralauditory arbitrary symbols.” – (Hall, 1968)

“From now on I will consider language to be a set (finite or infinite) of sentences, each finite in length and constructed out of a finite set of elements.” – (Chomsky, 1957)

Each of these definitions has its own special emphasis, and is not totally free from limitations. Sapir uses “ideas,””emotions,” and “desires” in his definition. No matter how broadly we interpret these words, there is much that is communicated by language which is not covered by any of them; and the word “idea” in particular is imprecise. Then apart from language, there are other systems of “voluntarily produced symbols”that can serve the smae purpose.

Hall. like Sapir, treats language as a purely human institution; and the term “institution” makes explicit the view that language that is used by a particular society is part of that society’s culture. But what is most noteworthy in Hall’s definition is his use of the term “habitually used.” which bears a strong trace of the influence of behaviourist psychology so popular at the time the definition was formulated. But nowadays most linguists do not accept this view of language as a set of “habitually used symbols” for ite restricted applicability.

Chomsky’s definition is quite different from the other two definitions quoted above, and also many others proposed. It says nothing about the communicative function of natural or non-natural languages; it says nothing about the symbolic nature of the elements of language. Its purpose is to focus attention on the purely structural properties of languages and to suggest that these properties can be investingated from a mathematically precise point of view.

However, there are some important characteristics of human language linguists have agreed on; these are embraced in the following generally accepted definition:

Langugae is a system of arbitrary vocal symbols used for human communication.

Short as its is, this definition has captured the main features of language. First of all, language is a system, i.e., elements of langugae are combined according to rules. This explains why “iblk” is not a possible sound combination in English, and also why “Been he wounded has” is not an acceptable sentence in English. If language were not constructed according to certain rules, it could not be learned or used consistently.

Second, language is arbitrary in the sense that there is no intrinsic connection between the word “pen” and the thing we use to write with. The fact that different languages have different words for the same object is a good illustration of the arbitrary nature of language. This also explains the symbolic nature of language: words are just symblos; they are associated with objects, actions, ideas, etc. by converntion. This conventional nature of language is well illustrated by a famous quotaton from Skakespeare’s play “Romeo and Juliet”:”A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.”

Third, language is vocal because the primary medium is sound for all langugaes, no matter how well developed their writing systems are. All evidence points to the fact that writeing systems came into being much later than the spoken forms and that they are only attempts to capture sounds and meaning on paper. The fact that children acquire spoken language before they can read or wirte also indicated that language is primarily vocal.

The term “human” in the definition is mean to specify that language is human-specific, i.e., it is very different from the communication systems other forms of life possess, such as bird songs and bee dances.

While certain insects, brids, and animals are belived to be able to communicate with each other, language, as a means of communication for human beings, bears certain features distinguishing it from means of communication othere forms of life may possess. and these fearures have all been includeed in the definition.

2.2 Design features

Design feaures refer to the defining properties of human language that distinguish it from any animal system of communicatoion. By comparing language with animal communication systems, we can have a better understanding of the nature of language.

A framework was propsed by the American linguist Charles Hockett. He specified twelve design features, five of which will be discussed here.

** 1) Arbitrariness**

As mentioned earlier, language is arbitrary. This means that there is no logical connection bwtween menaings and sound, A good example is the fact that differnet sounds are used to refer to the same object in differnet langeuas.

On the other hand, we should be aware that while language is arbitrary by nature, it is not entirely arbitrary. There are words in every langugae that imitate natural soudns, such as rumble, crash,cackle,bang in English. Besides, some compound words are also not entirely arbitrary. For example while “photo” and “copy” are respectively arbitrary, the compound wourd “photocopy” is not entirely arbitrary. But, any way non-arbitrary words make up only a small percentage of the total number of words used in a langugae.

The arbitrary nature of language is a sign of sophistication and it makes it possible for languge to have an unlimited source of expressions.

** 2) Productivity **

Language is productive in that it makes possible the construction and interpretation of new signals by its users. This is why they can produce and understand an infinitely large number of sentences, including sentences they have never heard before. They can send messages which no one else has ever sent before. Much of what we say and hear we are saying or hearing for the first time. If I say “A three-eyed white monkey is sleeping soundly on the bed of the king of France,” none of those who have heard it would have any difficulty understanding it, though it is remotely possible that anyone could have heard it before.