Mendeley出力
＜紀要論文＞
初期人類学的言語学の伝統 : アメリカ音声理論の歴史(Ⅱ)
| 作成者 | |
|---|---|
| 本文言語 | |
| 出版者 | |
| 発行日 | |
| 収録物名 | |
| 巻 | |
| 開始ページ | |
| 終了ページ | |
| 出版タイプ | |
| アクセス権 | |
| JaLC DOI | |
| 概要 | 5. Whitney and Anthropology It is important to realize that prior to the anthropological work of Franz Boas, W. D. Whitney started making linguistic studies in a wide perspective of culture and in an ...ethnological setting. Whitney emphasized the encouragement of scientific studies in the cultures and languages of the American Indians on the occasion of his presidential speech (in 1870), and afterwards discussed the relation between language and race in a chapter entitled 'Language and Ethnology' in his Life and Growth of Language (1875). He held an impartial view of languages whether 'primitive' or cultivated, and proceeded to make research in the languages of the American indigenous tribes without any prejudice or preoccupation. This eminent Sanskritist is more widely known as editor in chief of the Century Dictionary (1889-91) than as a specialist-writer contributing such articles as 'philology,'‘ethnology,' and 'anthropology' in the same dictionary. It is worth noticing that his remark,' The study of language is a division of the general science of anthropology' in 'Philology'(The Encyclopaedia Britannica, 9th ed., 1885), is one of the earliest pronouncements concerning the recognition of the scope of anthropological linguistics in America. 6. Synchronic and Descriptive Approaches of Franz Boas The fundamental principle of Boas' anthropology rested on the accurate and complete recordings of ethnological data and the objective analysis of the materials colleted. In his preface to 'Introduction' of the Handbook of American Indian Languages, I (1911), he calls attention' to the essential features of the morphology and phonetics of American languages' and insists upon' the necessity of an analytical study of grammar. 'His linguistic study was from the beginning characteristic of a synchnonic and descriptive principle. Unlike E. Sapir and L. Bloomfield, as R. A. Hall, Jr. puts it, Boas never had a firm grounding in historical linguistics, and' never got beyond the rather superficial "diffusionist" conception of linguistic change. 'On the contrary, Roman Jakobson praized Boas' approach to language as quite free from preoccupation and prejudice which prevailed in the methods of the traditional philological-ethnological studies. 7. From Natural History to Philology (Whitney) Before turning to the study of the Sanskrit literature and general lingristics, W. D. Whitney was deeply concerned with natural sciences, such as natural history and ornithology. As early as 1849, he participated in the Expedition of Lake Superior, which was conducted by his brother, Joseph D. Whitney, a famous geologist, and William is reported to have been in charge of financial accounts and ornithology, and to have made a valuable aid in geographical studies. Here and there in his main work, Language and the Study of Language (1867), we come accross his references to geology and geological approaches in comparison with linguistics and linguistic methods. His attitude of treating and confronting languages was based on a scientific principle, especially when he was forced to deal with the synchronic aspects of linguistic phenomena. 8. From Geography to Anthropology (Boas) Just like W. D. Whitney who was a pioneer of both linguistic and anthropological studies in America, Franz Boas changed his earlier career of academic studies from natural sciences, such as physics and geography, to cultural anthropology as one of the divisions of the humanities. Thus, he was very careful not to confuse linguistics as a social science with linguistics as a natural science. He believed that human language is 'one of the most important manifestation of mental life.' Boas' ethnological experience in Baffin Land (1883-4) was of great consequence, because it proved a significant motivation for his turning to an anthropological study, and was helpful for him to make a distinction between physical and cultural anthropology. According to Jakobson's account of Boas' study, both Boas and his disciple Sapir tried to battle with a naturalistic deviation of linguistic interpretation in an older stage of the development of Indo-European linguistics, and emphasized structural similarity between the elements of languages against a naturalistic view of the classification of languages which was conceived by A. Schleicher. L. Bloomfield also appreciated the contribution of Boas to 'the development of descriptive language study, 'and highly evaluated Boas' studies of American Indian languages carried on a scientific basis. Concerning the relation between ethnology and linguistics, Boas was of the opinion that geographical envioronments have nothing to do with the formation and modification of languages. 9. Linguistics as a Means of Anthropology Boas' concept of language study for an anthropological purpose might well be treated concerning the following items: (ⅰ) the necessity of language study for the purposes of ethnology. (ii) the recognition of an American Indian language as part of anthropological phenemena in general. In an early stage of American anthropological studies, it was usually intepreters who provided white scholars with anthropological data, and the so-called 'tradelanguage' was developed between the Indian tribes and white ethnologists. Boas' opinion about this phase of studies was that a command of a certain Indian language was an indispensable means of obtaining accurate and thorough knowledge of anthropological phenomena. On some occasions, educated Indians were employed to make recordings of what they themselves observed in their own tongues. Boas 'explanation is that without a direct command of the Indian language in question, Indian poems, their ceremonial terms and charms as well as proper names could not be adequately clarified. Thus, the knowledge of Indian languages is 'an adjunct' to a deeper understanding of ethnological phenemena. 10. Language and Thought of the Primitive Tribes Boas' second view on the relation between linguistic study and ethnology is that a genuine study of the Indian languages forms an essential part of the peoples' psychological phenomena. It has been generally believed that modern European languages are much easier to express abstract ideas in single words and generalized conceptions in a single sentence than the languages of the primitive tribes. It is interesting to examine Boas' comparison of English as a representative of European languages with an Indian language. (ⅰ) English: The eye is the organ of sight. (ii) Primitive language: An indefinite person's eye is his means of seeing. An English word eye or organ in this example is used to express a general idea, while the primitive peoples can only remark' this eye here 'or' his instrument of seeing' as a specialized term. In the Kwakiutle language spoken in a part of Vancouver Island, only such expressions as 'her love for him 'or' my pity for you' occur, but 'love' or 'pity' as expressing a general idea does not. Boas' conclusion is this:' the fact that generalized forms of expression are not used does not prove inability to form them, but it merely proves that the mode of life of the people is such that they are not required. 'Accordingly, as Boas remarks, when the primitive people were confronted with the necessity of making generalized forms of expression by a general state of culture, they were not prevented to pass into the state of ability to express such ideas. 11. Linguistics as a Part of Anthropology Boas 'belief in academic disciplines is that cultural anthropology should belong to the humanities, not to natural sciences, because anthropology including ethnology, Boas remarks, is 'a science dealing with the mental phenomena of the life of the peoples.' Thus, Boas calls attention to the difference between linguistic phenomena and ethnological phenomena. The former, he claims, never rises into consciousness of the people in a verbal community, while the latter does often rise into their consciousness. The unconscious character of linguistic phenomena, 'frequently referred to by Boas, was highly praized by Roman Jakobson. Boas 'concept of the unconsciousness of linguistic phenomena eventually led to the setting-up of the imperative character of formal or phonetic patterns of language which was later taken up and adequately formulated by his disciple Edward Sapir. Linguistic study, according to Boas 'opinion, constitutes the most essential part of anthropology, (ⅰ)because 'the fundamental concepts illustrated by human languages are not distinct in kind from ethnological phenomena, 'and (ii) because the peculiar characteristics of languages are clearly reflected in the views and customs of the peoples of the world.続きを見る |
| 目次 | 5．ホイットニーと人類学 6. ボーアズの共時的・記述的方法 7. 博物学から文献学へ（ホイットニー） 8. 地理学から人類学へ（ボーアズ） 9. 人類学の手段としての言語学 10. 未開人種の言語と思想 11. 人類学の一部としての言語学 5. Whitney and Anthropology 6. Synchronic and Descriptive Approaches of Franz Boas 7. From Natural History to Philology (Whitney) 8. From Geography to Anthropology (Boas) 9. Linguistics as a Means of Anthropology 10. Language and Thought of the Primitive Tribes 11. Linguistics as a Part of Anthropology続きを見る |
詳細
| PISSN | |
|---|---|
| NCID | |
| レコードID | |
| 登録日 | 2023.09.01 |
| 更新日 | 2023.11.08 |