The central role of variation and change in linguistic theory
In this thesis I aim to clarify the implications of variation and change for linguistic theory: to examine how linguists deal with variability and to show the implications of their theoretical choices. Firstly, I discuss in detail what linguistic theories are trying to achieve in terms of description and explanation, and how they should deal with variability. Much modern linguistic theory idealizes languages as invariant states, and goes beyond this to look for language universals. It is also commonly assumed that linguistics should be a study of psychological reality. I show that linguists often adopt these idealizations without explicitly discussing the relation between invariant states and variation, universals and tendencies, the psychological and the non-psychological, even when such theories are used to account for variation and change. I show how these unexamined assumptions have led to over-complex, uninsightful models and inappropriate explanations, both for states and for changes. Following this theoretical discussion, my first case study examines Optimality Theory phonology. I argue that incorrect assumptions about synchronic universals have led to unnecessary and uninsightful elaborations of the
Johnstone, M. J.
The central role of variation and change in linguistic theory. In this thesis I aim to clarify the implications of variation and change for linguistic theory: to examine how linguists deal with variability and to show the implications of their theoretical choices. Firstly, I discuss in detail what linguistic theories are trying to achieve in terms of description and explanation, and how they should deal with variability. Much modern linguistic theory idealizes languages as invariant states, and goes beyond this to look for language universals. It is also commonly assumed that linguistics should be a study of psychological reality. I show that linguists often adopt these idealizations without explicitly discussing the relation between invariant states and variation, universals and tendencies, the psychological and the non-psychological, even when such theories are used to account for variation and change. I show how these unexamined assumptions have led to over-complex, uninsightful models and inappropriate explanations, both for states and for changes. Following this theoretical discussion, my first case study examines Optimality Theory phonology. I argue that incorrect assumptions about synchronic universals have led to unnecessary and uninsightful elaborations of the
central_role variation_change linguistic_theory aim_clarify implication variation_change linguistic_theory examine linguist deal variability show implication theoretical choice firstly discuss_detail linguistic_theory try achieve term description explanation deal variability much_modern linguistic_theory languages invariant state beyond look language_universal also commonly_assume linguistics study psychological reality show linguist often adopt without explicitly discuss_relation invariant state variation universals tendency psychological non psychological even theory use account variation_change show unexamined assumption lead over complex model inappropriate explanation state change following theoretical_discussion first case_study examines optimality_theory phonology argue incorrect assumption synchronic universal lead unnecessary elaboration