#3328. Joseph の言語変化に関する洞察,5点[language_change][contact][linguistic_area][folk_etymology][teleology][reanalysis][analogy][diachrony][methodology][link][simplification]


 連日の記事で,Joseph の論文 "Diachronic Explanation: Putting Speakers Back into the Picture" を参照・引用している (cf. 「#3324. 言語変化は霧のなかを這うようにして進んでいく」 ([2018-06-03-1]),「#3326. 通時的説明と共時的説明」 ([2018-06-05-1]),「#3327. 言語変化において話者は近視眼的である」 ([2018-06-06-1])) .言語変化(論)についての根本的な問題を改めて考え直させてくれる,優れた論考である.
 今回は,Joseph より印象的かつ意味深長な箇所を,備忘のために何点か引き抜いておきたい.

[T]he contact is not really between the languages but is rather actually between speakers of the languages in question . . . . (129)

 これは言われてみればきわめて当然の発想に思われるが,言語学全般,あるいは言語接触論においてすら,しばしば忘れられている点である.以下の記事も参照.「#1549. Why does language change? or Why do speakers change their language?」 ([2013-07-24-1]),「#1168. 言語接触とは話者接触である」 ([2012-07-08-1]),「#2005. 話者不在の言語(変化)論への警鐘」 ([2014-10-23-1]),「#2298. Language changes, speaker innovates.」 ([2015-08-12-1]) .
 次に,バルカン言語圏 (Balkan linguistic_area) における言語接触を取り上げながら,ある忠告を与えている箇所.

. . . an overemphasis on comparisons of standard languages rather than regional dialects, even though the contact between individuals, in certain parts of the Balkans at least, more typically involved nonstandard dialects . . . (130)

 話題は変わって,民間語源 (folk_etymology) が言語学上,重要であることについて.

Folk etymology often represents a reasonable attempt on a speaker's part to make sense of, i.e. to render transparent, a sequence that is opaque for one reason or another, e.g. because it is a borrowing and thus has no synchronic parsing in the receiving language. As such, it shows speakers actively working to give an analysis to data that confronts them, even if such a confrontation leads to a change in the input data. Moreover, folk etymology demonstrates that speakers take what the surface forms are --- an observation which becomes important later on as well --- and work with that, so that while they are creative, they are not really looking beyond the immediate phonic shape --- and, in some instances also, the meaning --- that is presented to them. (132)

 ここでは Joseph は言語変化における話者の民間語源的発想の意義を再評価するにとどまらず,持論である「話者の近視眼性」と民間語源とを結びつけている.「#2174. 民間語源と意味変化」 ([2015-04-10-1]),「#2932. salacious」 ([2017-05-07-1]) も参照.
 次に,話者の近視眼性と関連して,再分析 (reanalysis) が言語の単純化と複雑化にどう関わるかを明快に示した1文を挙げよう.

[W]hen reanalyses occur, they are not always in the direction of simpler grammars overall but rather are often complicating, in a global sense, even if they are simplificatory in a local sense.

 言語変化の「単純化」に関する理論的な話題として,「#928. 屈折の neutralization と simplification」 ([2011-11-11-1]),「#1839. 言語の単純化とは何か」 ([2014-05-10-1]),「#1693. 規則的な音韻変化と不規則的な形態変化」 ([2013-12-15-1]) を参照されたい.

[T]he grammars linguists construct . . . ought to be allowed to reflect uneconomical "solutions", at least in diachrony, but also, given the relation between synchrony and diachrony argued for here, in synchronic accounts as well.

 ・ Joseph, B. D. "Diachronic Explanation: Putting Speakers Back into the Picture." Explanation in Historical Linguistics. Ed. G. W. Davis and G. K. Iverson. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 1992. 123--44.

Referrer (Inside): [2018-08-23-1]

[ | 固定リンク | 印刷用ページ ]

Powered by WinChalow1.0rc4 based on chalow