{"title":"John Wilkins (1614–1672): New Essays. Edited by William Poole","authors":"J. Subbiondo","doi":"10.1075/hl.00044.sub","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/hl.00044.sub","url":null,"abstract":"This article reviews John Wilkins (1614–1672): New Essays 978-90-04-34808-0€ 129.00$ 149.00","PeriodicalId":51928,"journal":{"name":"Historiographia Linguistica","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2019-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59516272","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Le centenaire de la publication du Cours de linguistique générale (1916) de Ferdinand de Saussure nous a invité à reconsidérer l’importance de cet ouvrage et le rôle de son auteur pour la fondation d’une linguistique intégrée dans une sémiologie. Il n’y a aucun doute que cet auteur fut extrêmement important pour le développement de la linguistique structurale en Europe et qu’avec son concept du signe linguistique il a fait œuvre de pionnier pour le tournant sémiologique. Mais l’accueil favorable d’une théorie dans le milieu scientifique ne s’explique pas seulement par sa qualité intérieure, mais par plusieurs conditions extérieures. Ces conditions seront analysées sur trois plans: (1) l’arrivée de la méthode des néogrammairiens à ses limites qui incitait alors à l’étude de l’unité du signifiant et du signifié; (2) la simplification et l’outrance de la pensée structurale dans le Cours, publié en 1916 par Charles Bally et Albert Sechehaye et (3) la préparation de la réception de la pensée sémiologique par plusieurs travaux parallèles.
费迪南德·德·索绪尔（Ferdinand de Saussure）的《普通语言学课程》（1916年）出版一百周年邀请我们重新考虑这本书的重要性及其作者在符号学综合语言学基础中的作用。毫无疑问，这位作者对欧洲结构语言学的发展极为重要，他通过语言符号的概念开创了符号学的转变。但是，一个理论在科学界的受欢迎程度不仅可以解释为其内在质量，还可以解释为若干外部条件。这些条件将从三个层面进行分析：（1）新语法学家的方法达到其极限，从而鼓励研究能指和所指的统一性；（2）查尔斯·巴利（Charles Bally）和阿尔伯特·塞切哈耶（Albert Sechehaye）于1916年出版的《课程中结构思想的简化和超越》，以及（3）通过几部平行作品准备接受符号学思想。
{"title":"Le tournant sémiotique du début du XXème siècle","authors":"G. Hassler","doi":"10.1075/hl.00039.has","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/hl.00039.has","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Le centenaire de la publication du Cours de linguistique\u0000 générale (1916) de Ferdinand de Saussure nous a invité à\u0000 reconsidérer l’importance de cet ouvrage et le rôle de son auteur pour la\u0000 fondation d’une linguistique intégrée dans une sémiologie. Il n’y a aucun doute\u0000 que cet auteur fut extrêmement important pour le développement de la\u0000 linguistique structurale en Europe et qu’avec son concept du signe linguistique\u0000 il a fait œuvre de pionnier pour le tournant sémiologique. Mais l’accueil\u0000 favorable d’une théorie dans le milieu scientifique ne s’explique pas seulement\u0000 par sa qualité intérieure, mais par plusieurs conditions extérieures. Ces\u0000 conditions seront analysées sur trois plans: (1) l’arrivée de la méthode des\u0000 néogrammairiens à ses limites qui incitait alors à l’étude de l’unité du\u0000 signifiant et du signifié; (2) la simplification et l’outrance de la pensée\u0000 structurale dans le Cours, publié en 1916 par Charles Bally et\u0000 Albert Sechehaye et (3) la préparation de la réception de la pensée sémiologique\u0000 par plusieurs travaux parallèles.","PeriodicalId":51928,"journal":{"name":"Historiographia Linguistica","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2019-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41411664","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article shows that an interest in differences and similarities in patterns of lexical motivation across languages has a long, if discontinuous, history in Western linguistic thought. The aim of the article is to trace this history by presenting examples that highlight the enduring fascination of authors from very different traditions with recurrent patterns of lexico-semantic associations. It also discusses the significance attributed to these patterns, which ranges from their practical value in etymological research to proving the psychic unity of mankind.
{"title":"Spotlights on the notion of lexical motivation across languages in the Western linguistic tradition, from the 16th century to the present","authors":"M. Urban","doi":"10.1075/hl.00038.urb","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/hl.00038.urb","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000This article shows that an interest in differences and similarities in patterns of lexical motivation across languages has a long, if discontinuous, history in Western linguistic thought. The aim of the article is to trace this history by presenting examples that highlight the enduring fascination of authors from very different traditions with recurrent patterns of lexico-semantic associations. It also discusses the significance attributed to these patterns, which ranges from their practical value in etymological research to proving the psychic unity of mankind.","PeriodicalId":51928,"journal":{"name":"Historiographia Linguistica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2019-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49641414","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Ideas on language in Early Latin Christianity: From Tertullian to Isidore of Seville. By Tim Denecker","authors":"J. Uría","doi":"10.1075/hl.00031.uri","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/hl.00031.uri","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51928,"journal":{"name":"Historiographia Linguistica","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2018-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59516399","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Édouard Pichon (1890–1940), qui est l’un des introducteurs de la psychanalyse en France, est surtout connu pour la grammaire Des mots à la pensée (1930–1950) qu’il a écrite avec Jacques Damourette (1873–1943). On sait moins qu’il a cherché à concilier la représentation mentale des sons avec les propositions phonologiques de Troubetzkoy. Dans une note manuscrite publiée pour la première fois dans cet article, il a tenté d’établir une distinction dans le vocalisme du français par la combinaison des traits d’aperture et de longueur. Il conjecture en particulier entre le /o/ et le /ɔ/ en syllabe finale ouverte une opposition qui n’est attestée dans aucun registre du français central. Il considère cette opposition comme un usage propre aux classes supérieures, transformant l’image orthographique des mots en un artefact de la perception.
{"title":"Édouard Pichon, phonologue","authors":"G. Bergounioux","doi":"10.1075/HL.00030.BER","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/HL.00030.BER","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Édouard Pichon (1890–1940), qui est l’un des introducteurs de la psychanalyse en France, est surtout connu pour la grammaire Des mots à la pensée (1930–1950) qu’il a écrite avec Jacques Damourette (1873–1943). On sait moins qu’il a cherché à concilier la représentation mentale des sons avec les propositions phonologiques de Troubetzkoy. Dans une note manuscrite publiée pour la première fois dans cet article, il a tenté d’établir une distinction dans le vocalisme du français par la combinaison des traits d’aperture et de longueur. Il conjecture en particulier entre le /o/ et le /ɔ/ en syllabe finale ouverte une opposition qui n’est attestée dans aucun registre du français central. Il considère cette opposition comme un usage propre aux classes supérieures, transformant l’image orthographique des mots en un artefact de la perception.","PeriodicalId":51928,"journal":{"name":"Historiographia Linguistica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2018-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41403655","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
During his work on his Chinese and English Dictionary (1842–1843) Walter Henry Medhurst (1796–1857) dramatically changed his compilation strategy by shifting from depending almost exclusively on Robert Morrison’s (1782–1834) Chinese-English dictionary, Zidian 字典 (1815–1823) to depending on multiple sources including Kangxi zidian 康熙字典 (1716), Morrison’s Wuche yunfu 五車韻府 (1819–1820), and Medhurst’s own A Dictionary of the Hok-këèn Dialect of the Chinese Language (1832). By applying Lexicographic Archaeology to four linguistic case studies, this article discusses the reasons for this unusual lexicographical phenomenon. The authors argue that changes in information in Morrison’s Zidian after the 41st radical influenced Medhurst’s choices.
{"title":"A remarkable compilation shift","authors":"Rui Li, A. S. Hansen","doi":"10.1075/HL.00027.LI","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/HL.00027.LI","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000During his work on his Chinese and English Dictionary (1842–1843) Walter Henry Medhurst (1796–1857) dramatically changed his compilation strategy by shifting from depending almost exclusively on Robert Morrison’s (1782–1834) Chinese-English dictionary, Zidian 字典 (1815–1823) to depending on multiple sources including Kangxi zidian 康熙字典 (1716), Morrison’s Wuche yunfu 五車韻府 (1819–1820), and Medhurst’s own A Dictionary of the Hok-këèn Dialect of the Chinese Language (1832). By applying Lexicographic Archaeology to four linguistic case studies, this article discusses the reasons for this unusual lexicographical phenomenon. The authors argue that changes in information in Morrison’s Zidian after the 41st radical influenced Medhurst’s choices.","PeriodicalId":51928,"journal":{"name":"Historiographia Linguistica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2018-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41647854","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In the history of 20th-century Latin linguistics, the Catholic Dutch professors Joseph Schrijnen (1869–1938) and Christine Mohrmann (1903–1988) are known as the key figures of the ‘Nijmegen School’. They developed the disputable and indeed strongly debated hypothesis that the kind of Latin used by early Christians was a Sondersprache or langue spéciale (later Gruppensprache or langue de groupe) characterized by different types of ‘christianisms’. The aim of this article is to contribute to a critical historiography of the Nijmegen School by looking into the reception of its ideas among contemporary Latin linguists. In particular, it tries to reconstruct the evolving appraisals by Alfred Ernout (1879–1973) and Einar Löfstedt (1880–1955), on the basis of (a) the former’s reviews of studies published by the Nijmegen School (in contrast to reviews by other contemporary linguists), (b) studies published on neighbouring or overlapping subjects by Einar Löfstedt, and (c) a letter to Mohrmann from each of them, both of which are preserved in the archives of the Katholiek Documentatie Centrum in Nijmegen. In the case of Ernout, it is argued that he was probably always sceptical about the Sondersprache hypothesis, but that in his reviews of the 1930s this scepticism was mitigated to a ‘reticent’ attitude, possibly for reasons to do with the politics of science. In the case of Löfstedt, it is shown that he initially approved of the hypothesis and even integrated it into his own works, but that he gradually diverged from the Nijmegen School, partly on account of (Schrijnen and) Mohrmann’s polemical misrepresentation of his comments on gentes and pagani being semantic Umprägungen rather than Neuprägungen.
在20世纪拉丁语言学史上，荷兰天主教教授Joseph Schrijnen（1869–1938）和Christine Mohrmann（1903–1988）被称为“奈梅亨学派”的关键人物。他们提出了一个有争议的、事实上也有强烈争议的假设，即早期基督徒使用的拉丁语是一种Sondersprache或languagee spéciale（后来的Gruppensprache或langue de groupe），其特征是不同类型的“基督主义”。本文的目的是通过考察奈梅亨学派思想在当代拉丁语言学家中的接受情况，为奈梅亨派的批判史学做出贡献。特别是，它试图重建Alfred Ernout（1879–1973）和Einar Löfstedt（1880–1955）不断发展的评价，其基础是（a）前者对奈梅亨学派发表的研究的评论（与其他当代语言学家的评论相反），以及（c）他们每人给Mohrmann的一封信，这两封信都保存在奈梅亨Katholiek文献中心的档案中。就Ernout而言，有人认为他可能一直对Sondersprache假说持怀疑态度，但在他对20世纪30年代的评论中，这种怀疑被缓和为“沉默”的态度，可能是因为科学政治的原因。在勒夫施泰特的案例中，可以看出，他最初赞同这一假设，甚至将其融入了自己的作品中，但他逐渐偏离了奈梅亨学派，部分原因是（Schrijnen和）Mohrmann在辩论中歪曲了他对士绅和异教徒的评论，认为他们是语义上的Umprägungen，而不是Neuprägungen。
{"title":"Among Latinists","authors":"Tim Denecker","doi":"10.1075/HL.00029.DEN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/HL.00029.DEN","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000In the history of 20th-century Latin linguistics, the Catholic Dutch professors Joseph Schrijnen (1869–1938) and Christine Mohrmann (1903–1988) are known as the key figures of the ‘Nijmegen School’. They developed the disputable and indeed strongly debated hypothesis that the kind of Latin used by early Christians was a Sondersprache or langue spéciale (later Gruppensprache or langue de groupe) characterized by different types of ‘christianisms’. The aim of this article is to contribute to a critical historiography of the Nijmegen School by looking into the reception of its ideas among contemporary Latin linguists. In particular, it tries to reconstruct the evolving appraisals by Alfred Ernout (1879–1973) and Einar Löfstedt (1880–1955), on the basis of (a) the former’s reviews of studies published by the Nijmegen School (in contrast to reviews by other contemporary linguists), (b) studies published on neighbouring or overlapping subjects by Einar Löfstedt, and (c) a letter to Mohrmann from each of them, both of which are preserved in the archives of the Katholiek Documentatie Centrum in Nijmegen. In the case of Ernout, it is argued that he was probably always sceptical about the Sondersprache hypothesis, but that in his reviews of the 1930s this scepticism was mitigated to a ‘reticent’ attitude, possibly for reasons to do with the politics of science. In the case of Löfstedt, it is shown that he initially approved of the hypothesis and even integrated it into his own works, but that he gradually diverged from the Nijmegen School, partly on account of (Schrijnen and) Mohrmann’s polemical misrepresentation of his comments on gentes and pagani being semantic Umprägungen rather than Neuprägungen.","PeriodicalId":51928,"journal":{"name":"Historiographia Linguistica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2018-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48088893","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article reviews Linguistic Bibliography for the Year 2015 and supplement for previous years €549,00$659.00
本文回顾了2015年的语言参考书目，并补充了前几年€549 $659.00
{"title":"Editée par/Edited by Anne Aarssen, Ekaterina Bobyleva, René Genis, Sijmen Tol and Eline van der Veken, with the\u0000 assistance of Femmy Admiraal, Nadia van den Berg and Nozomi Cho. Linguistic Bibliography for the Year 2015 and supplement\u0000 for previous years","authors":"P. Swiggers","doi":"10.1075/HL.00035.SWI","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/HL.00035.SWI","url":null,"abstract":"This article reviews Linguistic Bibliography for the Year 2015 and supplement for previous years €549,00$659.00","PeriodicalId":51928,"journal":{"name":"Historiographia Linguistica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2018-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45056379","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：