🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: sci.lang
Article #3108

linguistics vs philology

#3108
From: Mark Israel
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 1994 00:30
51 lines
2923 bytes
In article <2vno1s$eg4@csi0.csi.uottawa.ca>, I wrote:
> In article <199407062210.PAA17283@netcom12.netcom.com>, Karen Kay <karenk@NETCOM.COM> writes:

>> Is theoretical physics a science?
>
> Absolutely!  Theoretical physics makes correct practical 
> predictions.  Look at the recent discovery of variations in the 
> background radiation, at exactly the level that theoretical 
> physicists had predicted.  What comparable triumph has linguistics 
> had?

In article <199407100444.VAA07983@netcom10.netcom.com>, Karen Kay <karenk@NETCOM.COM> writes:

> Hittite, I believe. Linear B?

   Sorry that I was unclear.  Detection of variations in the 
background radiation is a *recent* practical result that demonstrates
the validity of *recent*, *theoretical* physics.  In return, I was
hoping for a recent practical result that demonstrates the validity
of *recent*, *theoretical* linguistics.

   Hittite was deciphered in 1915 by Hrozny Bedrich, whose studies 
had been in Theology and History.  Linear B was deciphered in 1952 by 
Michael Ventris, whose degree was in Architecture.  

   Neither of these triumphs -- and I agree they were spectacular -- 
in any way validates modern theoretical linguistics, i.e. the work of
Chomsky or his rivals.

   I like philology, but it seems to me that philology was doing just 
fine before linguistics came along and subsumed it.  In what way has
linguistics assisted philology?

> And some Chinese stuff discovered in Dunhuang supplied some missing
> links there, I think.

   Scott, do you know anything about this?

> There's a nice prediction in my diss.:)
>
> I could tell by the distribution of a certain set of particles that
> the date of a particular text was later than the date of publication.
>
> Luckily I found a citation that mentioned the editing of this text
> about the time that I had projected it resembled being written. But
> I didn't find the citation till I had already determined it was later.

   Congratulations!  And in what way did theoretical linguistics help
you make that prediction?

misrael@csi.uottawa.ca			Mark Israel
Technical Details
Message-ID: <2vso7d$s0e@csi0.csi.uottawa.ca>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!yeshua.marcam.com!MathWorks.Com!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!uotcsi2!misrael
References: <199407100444.VAA07983@netcom10.netcom.com>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 10b097,826aa1babacf3c92
X-Google-Attributes: gid10b097,public
X-Google-Thread: 10a20a,46af33b4381bd91f,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid10a20a,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-07-11 22:05:47 PST
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!yeshua.marcam.com!MathWorks.Com!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!uotcsi2!misrael
From: misrael@csi.uottawa.ca (Mark Israel)
Newsgroups: sci.lang,bit.listserv.words-l
Subject: linguistics vs philology
Date: 12 Jul 1994 00:30:37 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, University of Ottawa
Lines: 51
Message-ID: <2vso7d$s0e@csi0.csi.uottawa.ca>
References: <199407100444.VAA07983@netcom10.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaml3.csi.uottawa.ca