#4562. 通時態は共時態に歴史的与件を提供する[saussure][diachrony][language_change][sociolinguistics][link]


ソシュール以来,共時態 (synchrony) と通時態 (diachrony) の関係を巡る論争は絶えたためしがない.本ブログでも,この話題について様々に議論してきた.

 ・ 「#866. 話者の意識に通時的な次元はあるか?」 ([2011-09-10-1])
 ・ 「#1025. 共時態と通時態の関係」 ([2012-02-16-1])
 ・ 「#1076. ソシュールが共時態を通時態に優先させた3つの理由」 ([2012-04-07-1])
 ・ 「#1260. 共時態と通時態の接点を巡る論争」 ([2012-10-08-1])
 ・ 「#2134. 言語変化は矛盾ではない」 ([2015-03-01-1])
 ・ 「#2197. ソシュールの共時態と通時態の認識論」 ([2015-05-03-1])
 ・ 「#2555. ソシュールによる言語の共時態と通時態」 ([2016-04-25-1])
 ・ 「#3264. Saussurian Paradox」 ([2018-04-04-1])
 ・ 「#3508. ソシュールの対立概念,3種」 ([2018-12-04-1])

 Sweetser (9--10) が著書の序章において,ソシュールのチェスの比喩をあえて引用しつつ,似たような見解を示しているので引用したい.

. . . [W]e cannot rigidly separate synchronic from diachronic analysis: all of modern sociolinguistics has confirmed the importance of reuniting the two. As with the language and cognition question, the synchrony/diachrony interrelationship has to be seen in a more sophisticated framework. The structuralist tradition spent considerable effort on eliminating confusion between synchronic regularities and diachronic changes: speakers do not necessarily have rules or representations which reflect the language's past history. But neither Saussure nor any of his colleagues would have denied that synchronic structure inevitably reflects its history in important ways: the whole chess metaphor is a perfect example of Saussure's deep awareness of this fact. Saussure, of course, uses chess because for future play the past history of the board is totally irrelevant: you can analyze a chess problem without any information about past moves. But he could hardly have picked --- as he must have known --- an example of a domain where past events more inevitably, regularly, and evidently (if not uniquely) determine the present resulting state. No phonologist today would reconstruct a proto-language's sound system without attention both to recognized universals of synchronic sound-systems and to attested (and phonetically motivated) paths of phonological change; it is assumed that the same perceptual, muscular, acoustic, and cognitive constraints are responsible for both universals of structure and universals of structural change. And, for a historical phonologist or semanticist trying to avoid imposing past analyses on present usage, it is an empirical question which aspects of diachrony are preserved in a given synchronic phonological structure or meaning structure.


 ・ Sweetser, E. From Etymology to Pragmatics. Cambridge: CUP, 1990.

[ | 固定リンク | 印刷用ページ ]

Powered by WinChalow1.0rc4 based on chalow