|
Summary
1. The
uses of history
2. The
functionalist current
3.
Giambattista Vico's contribution
4. Other
research into the colloquial
5.
References
1. The uses of history
Crapanzano
(1996), in a bright study on narrativity and the construction of the self, makes extensive
use of Herculine Barbin's diary. Barbin documents her coming to terms with sexuality in
the face of the rigid compartmentalisation of 19th century society. Barbin was brought up
as a woman, suffering a severe distance from her hermaphrodite identity. Her gradual
recovery of her masculine side, followed by the unfolding of a problematic sexuality,
arrives finally at a kind of dramatic equilibrium, a process documented in detail in her
diary. Crapanzano's discursive study is built around the critique of this mid 19th century
text.
I allude to
this case because modern pragmatics does not readily delve into such historical material,
nor does it very often refer to studies and findings from other traditions. Crapanzano
(1996) is a fine instance of the productive utilisation of texts, demanding our attention
and questioning us on the uses of history.
Possibly the
most notable instance of the use of history in modern times to explain or justify the
opening of an intellectual breach is Noam Chomskys Cartesian
linguistics. While it is true that a linguistics historian could take issue, the
direction taken by MIT's famous scholar was the correct one: the mentalist and logicist
tradition on which the modern concerns of linguistics are based, taking over from
Saussures methodological Cours de la linguistique general.
Chomsky was
solely interested in pointing up a philosophic tradition. He does not go into
the history of linguistics to reveal the repercussions of Descartes' ideas on the specific
treatment of language, nor controversies over the use of etymologies, or even the
correctness or otherwise of the linguistic classifications currently in vogue (Droixhe
1978). Proceeding in this way, he situates himself at a different level of the current
debate, achieving a revaluation of precedents, unprecedented until then.
Pragmatics and
to some extent discourse analysis also have remained relatively aloof from problems of
this kind. These disciplines emerged out of the new enthusiasm for oral language and new
methods of accessing it and treating it, during the second half of the 20th century. As
such, they typically represent a different trend in linguistics, focusing on communication
issues, and centred on the effects of context. The notions of functional diversity,
situational variation, and meaningful underlying rules, have shaped research along lines
that were not far distant from those proposed by Jakobson, Benveniste and Goffman.
But what point
could there be in resuscitating precedents? Certainly, the alternative systematisation of
researchers like M.A.K. Halliday suggests a
kind of consolidation of linguistic or pragmatic thought quite different in its
premises from those posited by Cartesian logic. To delve into the history of linguistics
to look for clues means in the first place avoiding accusations of being pre-scientific:
such accusations were routinely raised before Saussures researches and the 19th
century spread of philology. It also means having to locate and to define which topics are
of interest, and what level of discussion the debate on precedence should take.
In any case,
such investigation surely is worth the trouble, if an interesting social psychologist like
Shotter (1993), in
a clever study of the construction of talk and the role of the imagination, feels the need
to turn to the Italian Giambattista Vico and his notions of common sense functionalism.
That is the track that we will be on in the pages that follow.
2. The functionalist current
The idea of a
rising line in linguistic research culminating in Saussure's Cours
is plainly simplistic. I would prefer to look back at the coexistence of different ways of
perceiving communication and the role of language, at different stages in the history of
linguistics and philology. To mention only the Renaissance as a point of departure, the
reaction of the humanists to the speculative grammar is perfectly documented in the essay
by Joan
Lluís Vives (1492-1540), In Pseudo-Dialecticos (1519). In this paper
Vives, a native of Valencia, unleashes his argumentative fury (in accord with the
innovative presuppositions of humanistic rhetoric) against the autonomous linguistics
reflection of his time daughter of pure architectural logic, as practiced in Paris
and Oxford. On the other hand, what approach did Vives think was the correct one? We will
not find it specifically in any work on languages or grammar. Vives makes it very clear, in various different places in
his works, that his notion of language is inseparable from communication and learning, and
that writing looks like as an historic support and as an aid for linguistic knowledge and
analysis.
That is
enough, if we are thinking in the functionalism tradition and the effects of context, but
not enough if we expect a more intense study of these cause-effect relationships. Nor is
it sufficient if we are looking for grammar problems and we wish to know the pragmatic
rules that interact with them.
At the same
time, Vives' essay points in an interesting direction: functionalism and the relevance of
communication. This relevance is expressed well with the expansion of rhetoric knowledge,
and shows the continuity between authors. Leonardo
Bruni (1369-1444), to go no further afield, writing of translation, defended the idea
that all words were interconnected in a fascinating way, forming a mosaic, warning of the
ease with which we can fall prey of faux amis or belles infidèles. At the
same time he stressed the necessity of having to hand the greatest amount of contextual
and practical information (De Interpretatione Recta, 1426). Here we are far from
grammatical analysis based on logic, such as would later to be posited as the basis of
universal grammar.
The diversity
of the functionalist tradition also puts us on the motivationalist track. For some reason,
the extension of the arbitrariness hypothesis, linked to critical judgement and the
positive analysis of language (the foundation, certainly, of the major task of grammatical
reconstruction carried out in the 19th century), has pushed the motivationalist trends out
to the periphery of research. The delicate issue here is that during the Renaissance and
the Baroque period these were not simply peripheral currents and, in the absence of a
consistent rational hypothesis, it is difficult to decide what forms part of the
scientific endeavour and what not. In fact, motivationalism provided the basis for the
association of forms and meanings that scholars and critics wove in their approach to the
reconstruction of texts.
But to
progress from text history to general linguistic knowledge is something different.
Certainly Condillac (1715-1780) and his language of action is an
interesting point de repère in this overview. His
idea of the functional and semiotic origin of language is linked to
the motivationalist hypothesis, and to the rejection of abstract grammatical analysis.
Condillac's language of action presupposes an active notion of context, an source for
communication that has to do with the things being done. Condillac's approach, while
practical, avoids Locke's theory of arbitrariness and recognizes the cognitive value of
functionalist associations. A century later, the father of sociology August
Comte would take this point of departure to found a biological (and functional) theory
of language and to address the history of its evolution in terms of the history of signs.
3. Giambattista Vico's contribution
The Italian
writer Giambattista Vico (1688-1744) is surely one of the most interesting links in the
epistemological shift from scholarly tradition to modern positive research. In his New
Science, Vico develops a theory of the origin of human knowledge based mainly on language. To
confront the imposing Cartesian criticism over philologists and historians, New Science
opens with a chapter about chronological and historical notes, apparently discouraging
anyone seeking abstract principles or statements on method. Vico's idea was to base his
hypotheses concerning the linguistic usage and social functions of language on solid
historical criticism.
The central
thesis of New Science is the poetic or creative origin of language. The second book is
in fact devoted to this topic. Here we will find the best functionalist explanations of
linguistic activity, reinforced with substantial sociological insights.
It is
surprising that hispanic linguistics had not detected Vico's rejection of Sánchez de las Brozas grammatical enterprise.
Sánchez was one of the leading grammatical rationalists of the end of the 16th century.
His line of argument was compatible with the (Aristotelian) idea of seeking logical causes
for syntactic principles very much in accord with what
was to be studied in the 20th century under the more or less useful heading of formal
linguistics. Sánchez' rarefied logicism reminds Vico of the fact that people speak
long before they are able to attend grammar classes. "As if peoples who formed
languages had first to go to Aristotles school (...)!" [SN44 455].
Grosso
modo, Vico's functionalism, conceived as closely linking languages and humanity, is
in opposition to Cartesian inspired formalism and logic. It is also in opposition to the
rationalist idea (so widespread in the 20th century) of conceiving poetry as a deviation
from prose of understanding poetic language as something more than everyday
language activity, as something that is added and perhaps escapes us. Vico takes the term
poetic in its classic sense, meaning creative. Uniting these different aspects, Vico's
functional hypotheses have their point of departure in the principle of linguistic
creativity, associated with the first human linguistic productions, which, evidently, are
not (or were not) the elaborated prose of our written language.
It hardly
needs to be said that all this runs counter to many of the presuppositions of modern
linguistics to the extent that such presuppositions differ from the strong
functional hypothesis that we are outlining here. This creative origin, related to the
informal and rough-hewn beginnings of knowledge, and with the first steps taken by
mankind, looks like the union of a powerful fantasy and an initial event: in Vico's
historiographical context, the exclamation of the first men in front of thunder, thinking
of it as the manifestation of God. In a more mundane situation, a cry of fear.
According to
Vico's thought, functions are transformed according to necessities and at the same time
transform the type of knowledge. It is plain that prose here is the result of such a
transformation, an evolution that underwrites rational thought, just as the alphabet is a
transformation of the first writing using signs. Vico connects linguistic and stylistic
transformations with the evolution of writing, in a magnificent
historical tapestry.
A powerful
transformation indeed is that which produced the first linguistic sign. Vico applies
rhetorical knowledge to the analysis of language. The first poetic characters
naturally image forth the contents, as "[the fact] of the first men of the
gentile world conceiving ideas of things in terms of fantastic characters of animated
substances, (...) and of expressing themselves through acts or objects that have a natural
relationship with ideas (as for example, the act of scything three times or taking three
ears of corn to mean "three years") and thus explain themselves through the use
of natural signs" [SN44 431]. Thus, it would be a mistake to think of a generalised
arbitrariness: "In the question of common languages, the fact that they communicate
through conventions has been taken too much for granted by philologists. If languages had
natural origins they must have articulated meaning naturally" [SN44
444].
The idea of
poetic characters, therefore, is linked to the formation of meaning and nascent states:
"It is showed that the first men, as the children of mankind, not being able to form
intelligible genres, had the natural need to invent or contrive poetic characters for
themselves, the latter being types or fantastic universals, in order to reduce the
particular species, as true models or near perfect ideal portrayals, each one reflecting
its genus" [SN44 209]. What is most interesting here is that this operation upon
fantasy is the foundation of fables and myths and the background of meaning we still find
in popular language, since: "The poetic word, contemplated here by virtue of this
poetic logic, circulates for long stretches within historic times, like the great rivers
flow a goodly distance into the sea, and keep the waters of the sea sweet where the
violence of their current takes them" [SN44 412]. Vico does not let pass unnoticed
the relationship between common language and literary construction, nor the pertinence of
narrative in the origin of discourse, a theme more recently thrown into relief by modern
pragmatics. |