Whatever Happened to Karl Buhler?

ADRIAN BROCK example of Karl Buhler (1879-1963). One York University suspects that Buhler was chosen because the example is such a striking one. If Buhler is mentioned at all in texts on the history of psychology, it is in connection with his early Abstract work as Oswald Kiilpc's assistant at the Uni- The work of Karl Buhler is not particularly versity of Wiirzburg (e.g. Hothersall, 1990; well known in English-speaking countries. If Brcnnan, 1991; Hcrgcnhahn, 1992; Leahcy, Buhler is mentioned at all in texts on the his- 1992a; Schultz & Schultz, 1992). It was tory of psychology, it is in connection with his Buhler's work on 'imageless thought' which early work at the University of Wiirzburg. This sparked off the famous controversy with work represents only the start of Buhler's Wilhelm Wundt over the methods of the career in psychology. He subsequently pro- 'Wiirzburg School'. Boring (1950) wrote: duced important work on perception, Geslall theory, developmental psychology, theoretical Buhler was severely criticized by Wundt, by psychology and the psychology of language. Durr, who was one of his observers, and by Buhler's work has had a profound — though von Aster. Titchcncr, of course, criticized the largely unnoticed — influence on later entile movement. Buhler, however, left the thinkers. It has also been the subject of a total picture of thought without important revival of interest in Europe in recent years. change, and we may thus close our account of This article provides an overview of Buhler's the Wurzburg school and return once again life and work. to Kiilpc. (pp. 4O6A01).

Boring mentions Buhler only in the context In a wide-ranging article on the historio- of Kiilpe's students at Wurzburg and as the graphy of psychology, Wcimcr (1974) has editor of Kiilpe's posthumous "Vorlesungen" discussed what he calls "the suppression of [Lectures] (Kiilpe, 1920). With regard to the psychological history" (p. 248). Weimer latter, Boring only comments that "Buhler points out that 'history' is inevitably selective. may even have introduced llusscrl to Kiilpc" I Iistorians of psychology — particularly those (p. 408). If this was Buhler's only work of any who arc practising psychologists —- have significance, then his minor role in the his- some general idea of what psychology is and tory of psychology would be perfecdy jus- how it ought to be done. This will lead them tified. Let us lake a closer look at this to select out certain aspects of psychology's 'minor' Figure in order to see why Buhler is past and to ignore others. Weimer argues such an interesting case. that this process is not always a conscious one. Few historians of psychology will delib- Concept of Gestalt erately suppress 'history'. They arc simply Biihlcr's work as part of the 'Wiirburg not aware of its existence. Works which did School' represents only the start of his career not have a major impact on psychology will in psychology. He subsequendy moved, disappear from the 'collective memory' of together with Kiilpe, to the University of psychologists. Bonn in 1909 and to the University of Weimer illustrates these points with the Munich in 1913. It was during his stay in Bonn that Biihler became interested in Canadian l'sychology/l'sychologie canadienne, 35:3 Ehrenfels' concept of 'Gestalt' and applied 320 Brock this to the study of perception. The results ary. Bolgar (1964) wrote: of this work appeared under the title, Die Gestaltwahrnehmungen [The Gestalt Percep- Any account of Biihler's life would be incom- tions] (Buhler, 1913). This was one of the plete if il did not convey his impact as a earliest attempts to experiment with Gestalt teacher. His curiosity was contagious, his lan- phenomena.1 During his stay in Munich, guage was vivid and rich in new terms, his Biihler turned his attention to developmental arguments were vigorous and unexpected, psychology. His major work on the subject — whereas his obvious enjoyment of the business Die geistige Entwicklung des Kindes [The of thinking held his audience of several hun- Mental Development of the Child] — dred students spellbound through many appeared in 1918 (Biihlcr, 1918). This work courses in general psychology, (p. 678) was widely used in teacher-training institutes and had already reached its 6th edition by Many of Buhler's students went on to become 1930 (Buhler, 1930a). An abridged version of prominent in the United States. Egon the book — Abri$ der geistigen Entwicklung Brunswik moved to Berkeley and established des Kindes [Oudine of die Mental Develop- a close collaboration with Edward Tolman ment of the Child] — appeared in 1919 whom he had befriended in Vienna. Paul (Buhler, 1919). This had reached its 5th Lazarsfeld moved to Columbia and eventually edition by 1929 (Buhler, 1929a). An English became President of die American Sociologi- translation appeared in the following year cal Association. Else Frenkel-Brunswik is per- (Buhler,, 1930b). These works helped to haps best known as one of the authors of The establish Biihler's reputation as one of Authoritarian Personality (Adorno, Frenkel- Europe's leading authorities on develop- Brunswik, Levinson & Sanford, 1950). The mental psychology. Buhler is one of the most productivity of die Vienna Institute alone frequendy-cited authors in Vygotsky's Thought would merit Buhler an important place in the and Language (1934/1986). history of psychology (C Buhler, 1965a; Buhler had become director of the Vienna Wellek, 1968; Weimer, 1974). Psychological Institute in 1922. With die help and support of his wife, Charlotte Buhler, he Possible Integration rapidly transformed it into one of the major Buhler turned his attention to theoretical centres of psychology in Europe. Like the and mctiiodological issues in the 1920s. In Leipzig Institute many years earlier, it Die Krise der Psychologie [The Crisis of Psy- attracted students from all over die world. chology], he examined the different 'schools' Charlotte Buhler (1965a) wrote that the of psychology (e.g., Gestalt psychology, Vienna Institute had students from 18 differ- behaviourism, psychoanalysis) and oudincd ent countries at the 11th International Con- proposals for how dicir results might be gress of Psychology in Paris. Some of the integrated. The work originally appeared as better known figures who studied there an article in the journal, Kant-Studien [Kant include: Hedda Bolgar, Egon Brunswik, Studies] in 1926 (Buhler, 1926b). It was Rudolf Ekstein, Herbert Fcigl, Else Frenkel- reissued as a book in 1927 and again in 1929 Brunswik, Heinz Harunann, Marie Jahoda, (Biihler, 1927; 1929b). This work is regarded David Klein, Paul Lazarsfeld, Konrad Lorenz, as a 'classic' in German-speaking countries. Neal Miller, Karl Popper, Rene Spitz, Edward A third edition of the book was published in Tolman, Goodwin Watson and Albert Wellek. 1965 and a fourtii edition in 1978 (Buhler, Biihler's reputation as a lecturer was legend- 1965a; 1978). In his review of the third edi- tion, G. W. Allport (1966) wrote:

1 Buhler subsequently became involved in a dispute with Kofika over the originality of 'Gestalt' psychol- One wonders why some of the most important ogy (Biihler, 1926a). psychological treatises in the German Ian- Whatever Happened to Karl Biihler? 321 guage have remained untranslated for dec- Biihler decided to reject the offer. He was ades. One thinks, for example, of Fechner's now at the peak of his career. He had Psychophysik, of Brcntano's Psychologic vom already made important contributions to the empirischen Standpunkt, and of the work here psychology of diought, perception, Gcstalt under review, Buhlcr's Die Krise der theory, developmental psychology and Uicor- Psychologie. The last named was published in etical psychology. The best was yet to come. 1927, reissued in 1929, and again in 1965. Biihler went on to produce a series of Recently, I have heard rumors that all three important works on language and expression of these neglected classics arc now in the in the 1930s: Die Axiomatik der Sprachwissen- process of belated translation. I hope that the schaflen [The Axiomatization of the Lan- rumors become realities, (p. 201). guage Sciences] (Biihler, 1933a); Ausdrucks- theorie [Theory of Expression] (Biihler, Unfortunately, the work has still not been 1933b); Sprachtheorie [Theory of Language] translated into English. This may explain why (Biihler, 1934). The latter has been des- it is so rarely discussed by English-speaking cribed as "the richest, most original and theoretical psychologists.2 precise book that has ever been written on 3 Biihler became one of the most eminent the subject" (Marias, 1967; p. 15). This work psychologists of the time. He lectured has had a profound — though largely unnot- throughout Europe during his years in iced — influence on later thinkers. In their Vienna (Czechoslovakia, France, Germany, book on Symbol Formation, Werner and Great Britain, Hungary, Norway, Spain, Kaplan (1963) wrote: Sweden). He spent academic 1927/8 in the United Slates where he gave guest lectures In this presentation, we shall draw consider- at Stanford, Johns Hopkins and Harvard ably on the views of Karl Biihler whose Universities. He also spoke at the APA con- Sprachlheorie, we believe, presents the most vention in 1927 and took part in the advanced psychological analysis of the general 'Wittenberg Symposium' on feelings and structure of language, (p. 52) emotions (Biihler, 1928a; 1928b). Biihler returned to the United States in 1929 to give The authors add in a footnote: a series of guest lectures at die University of Chicago and to take part in the 9th Interna- It is regrettable that Biihler's book is neither tional Congress of Psychology in New Haven discussed nor even cited in any of the recent (Biihler, 1930c). He was elected President of works on language by American psychologists, the German Psychological Society in the (p. 52) same year — a position which he held until 1931. Biihler's international reputation — as This situation has hardly changed today. well as that of the Vienna Institute — was Biihler's book is ncidicr cited nor mentioned confirmed when, in 1930, he was offered the in modern textbooks on the psychology of chair at Harvard University which had been language (e.g., Fodor, Bever & Garrett, 1974; vacated by William McDougall in 1927. Clark & Clark, 1977; Foss & Hakes, 1978; Aitchcson, 1983; Garnham, 1985).4 2 Vygotsky wrote on 'the crisis of psychology' in 1927 but the work, was not published until 1982. Theory of Language This work has also not been translated into English Biihler's theory of language was well known — though it is available in German translation to Werner and Kaplan from Germany. It (Vygotsky, 1982/1985). For a comparison of the two works, see Pleh (1988). Maicrs (1990) has argued that both these works are of relevance to the con- 3 "Esta Teoria del Lenxuaje de Karl Buhler es fed vez tinuing 'monism pluralism' debate in theoretical el libro mas rico, original y preciso quc sc ha escrilo psychology. sobre el tema." 322 Brock remained one of the best-kept secrets of the giants in the history of psychology. Why is it refugees from Central Europe who came to that his work is virtually unknown to psychol- Britain and the United States in the 1930s. ogists in English-speaking countries? This Biihlcr provided the theoretical basis for the takes us back to "the suppression of psycho- Linguistic Circle of Prague. Two of its central logical history". Weimer (1974) suggests that members, Roman Jakobson and Jan Muka- Boring may have felt 'snubbed' when Buhler rovsky, were heavily indebted to him (e.g., rejected the offer of McDougall's chair at Jakobson, 1960; Mukarovsky, 1977). Jakobson Harvard — an offer which had been ten- (1973) wrote that Biihler's work was "for dered by Boring himself. He writes: linguists probably the most inspiring among all the contributions to the psychology of Boring proceeded to write Buhler out of the language" (p. 41). Biihler also had a pro- history of psychology after 1930. In the first found impact on philosophy. One of the (1929) edition of his history, there are half a leading epistemologists of the 20th century, dozen references to Buhler on ten pages: a Karl Popper, studied with Biihler in Vienna considerable amount for a 'contemporary' and productively developed many of Buhler's figure who had not yet reached his peak influ- ideas (e.g., Popper, 1963; 1971). In his auto- ence. Kohler, in comparison, had fifteen, and biography, Popper (1976) wrote: Koffka and Wcrthcimer had six each. In the 1950 edition, by contrast, there were two ref- From my teachers at the Institute I learned erences to Buhler (and two more citations of very little, but I learned much from Karl research), while Kohler had twenty-one, Buhler, Professor of Psychology at the Uni- Koffka ten and Werlheimcr seventeen. The versity of Vienna ... Most important for my only research of Buhler's cited by Boring was own future development was his theory of the the early work at Wurzburg. (p. 252) three levels or functions of language, (pp. 73-74) A more charitable explanation would be that Boring had revised his opinion of Buhler's Buhler also influenced the work of major importance between 1929 and 1950. When philosophers such as Ernst Cassirer and Buhler was forced to leave Vienna in 1938, Michael Polanyi (e.g., Cassirer, 1929/1957; he had a frosty reception in the United Polanyi, 1958). There is now a growing litera- States.6 Most of the available academic posi- ture which points to the striking similarities tions had already been taken by the earlier between Buhler's work and the later philos- ophy of Ludwig Wittgenstein (e.g., Toulmin, 5 This view has been challenged (Kaplan, 1984). 1969; Barlley, 1973; Bloor, 1983; Eschbach, The issue is difficult to prove since Wittgenstein 1984a; Innis, 1988). This has led one biogra- docs not mention Bfihler in ally oi his published or unpublished works (Eschbach, 1988a). No one pher to conclude: "If any individual thinker fioubLs, however, that there are some remarkable can be said to have influenced Wittgenstein similarities between their ideas (Innis, 1988). ... it must have been Karl Buhler" (Bartlcy, 1973; p. 144).' 6 Biihler was arrested shortly after German troops Buhler is clearly one of the intellectual entered Vienna in March 1938. On April 9, his name ap|jt>arcd on the first list of professors who were to be dismissed "for political and world-view 4 Arthur Bliimenthal's historical work, Language anil reasons" (Ash, 1987; p. 157). Charlotte Buhler, who Psychology, contains a partial translation of otic of had one Jewish parent, held a visiting professorship Buhler's early articles on language (Blmnenihal, in Norway at the lime. Her name appeared on a 1970). Buhler's theory of language is far too com- later list of professors who were to be dismissed "on plex to summarize in a few lines. The most detailed racial grounds" (Ash, 1987; p. 157). After interven- account in English can be found in Innis (1982). Of tion from abroad, Karl Biihlcr was released from course, this is no substitute for reading the original confinement and given the choice of forced retire- works (Buhler, 1933/1082a, 1934/1990). ment or emigration. Whatever Happened to Karl lliihler? 323

wave of refugees who had left Germany after (Buhler, 1960). The German Psychological 1933. His major works had never been trans- Society look the opportunity to award him lated into English. The dominant trend in its highest honour — 'The Wilhelm Wundt American psychology and linguistics was Medal* — for distinguished contributions to behaviourism. Garvin (1964) wrote: psychology (Ungchcucr, 1984). Buhler returned to the United Slates where he spent With the end of Buhlcr's career in Europe his final years. Certain changes were taking ciiine also the end of his contact with the place which might have helped to prepare mainstream of linguistic thought. In the the way for a greater appreciation of his United Slates both psychologists and linguists work. Psychology had begun to throw off the were at the time too strongly committed to shackles of behaviourism and there was a behaviorism to receive the newly arrived rep- growing interest in language and diought. It resentative of a school of thought considered is no accident diat die works of Piaget and 'menialislic'. (p. 634) Vygotsky from die 1920s and -30s were sud- denly 'discovered' around this time." There The only academic position which Buhler was no corresponding interest in Biihler's could obtain was at the tiny St. Scholastica work. His major works had never been trans- College in Duluth, Minnesota. Cut oil" from lated and were known to only a few. Buhler his culture and language — as well as the was invited to take part in a conference of facilities and stimulation of a large university linguists at the University of Indiana in 1962 — he found it very difficult to adapt to but he was already 83 years old and too ill to American psychology or to life in the Ameri- attend. He died in Los Angeles on October can Midwest. He continued to do research 26, 1963 having never held a university appointment in die United States or a posi- but his work was rejected by publishers and 7 tion commensurate with his status in Europe has never appeared in print. After several (Garvin, 1964; Wellek, 1968; C. Buhler, unsuccessful attempts to find a position at a 1972).9 more prominent institution, Buhler left academia in 1945 and became a clinical This whole episode has been virtually psychologist at the Cedars of Lebanon Hospi- ignored by American historians of psychology tal in Los Angeles •— a posidon which he for whom Buhler is still a relatively held until 1955. After his retirement, he 'unknown' figure.10 Apart from the need to helped his wife widi her psychodicrapy prac- introduce Buhler to an English-speaking tice in Hollywood (Eschbach, 1990). audience — and to explain how one of Europe's leading psychologists could suffer Shackles of Behaviourism such isolation and neglect in United States Buhler had never been forgotten in his — there is another reason why Biihler's life native Germany. He was invited to attend the and work should be re-examined. The last 1960 International Congress of Psychology in few years have seen a revival of interest in Bonn and was made 'Honorary President' Biihler's theories in Europe. Some writers for the occasion. An expanded version of his have begun to speak of a "Buhler-Renais- address was published in German as a book 8 Some writers have seen the 'cognitive revolution' 7 Buhler had been a prolific author before 1938. of the 1960s as evidence of a Kuhnian paradigm- Quite incredibly, he published nothing at all in the shift (e.g., Palermo, 1971; Gardner, 1985; Baars, United States after this date. The only works that he 1980). As Danzigcr (1992) pointed out in a recent published in English were two articles which CPA address, this view is highly ethnocentric. It can appeared in the Dutch journal, Aria Psychologica only work if one looks no further than the United (Buhler, 1952; 1954). These were on human and Slates. There was no need for a cognitive revolution animal navigation systems — topics which were far in Europe. Psychology had never gone 'behaviorist' removed from his interests in Vienna. in the first place (Brock, 1991, Lcahcy, 1992b). 324 Brock sance" (Koerner, 1984; Eschbach, 1988b). in Germany — were also held in 1984. A The start of this interest can be traced back selection of papers from both these confer- to the reissue of Die Krise der Psychologic ences was subsequently published in (he and Sprachtheorie in 1965 (Buhlcr, 1965a; Netherlands (Eschbach, 1988c). Biihler's 1965b). These were followed by new editions works are still being published in Europe. A of Abrifi der geistgen Entwicklung des Kindes, group of researchers at the University of Ausdruckstheorie and Die Axiomatik der Essen (Germany) and the Max Planck Insti- Sprachwissenschaften (Biihler, 1967; 1968, tute for Psycholinguistics (Netherlands) is 1969a). A collection of unpublished manu- currently preparing a ten-volume edition of scripts — accompanied by an intellectual 'Collected Works'. Half of these volumes will biography — also appeared around this time contain previously unpublished material (Buhler, 1969b). These publications led to a (Emrich, 1990). growing interest in Biihler's work." Buhler continues to be a relatively neglect- ed figure in English-speaking countries. The Collected Works main reason for this is that his major works The year 1984 is of particular importance were never translated into English. This since this was the 50th anniversary of the first situation has begun to change. An English edition of Sprachtheorie (Buhlcr, 1934). A translation of Die Axiomatik der Sprachwissen- number of publications were prepared to chaften appeared in 1982 (Buhler, 1933/ coincide with this date. These include two 1982a). More recently, an English translation volumes — entitled, Buhler-Studien [Buhler of Sprachtheorie has appeared — 56 years Studies] —which contain 25 essays on differ- after it was originally published (Buhler, ent aspects of Buhler's life and work 1934/1990) .n One suspects that it will not be (Eschbach, 1984b). Another volume of essays long before Die Krise der Psychologie is trans- appeared in the same year (Graumann & lated into English. It is this work which Hermann, 1984). Two conferences devoted exemplifies Biihler's constant desire to to Biihler's work — one in Austria and one reflect upon the theoretical foundations of psychology. The issues which he discussed 9 It was around this time that Brandt (1963) wrote have never been resolved and his work con- to the American Psychologist to complain of "linguis- tinues to be of interest to psychologists in tic isolation" (p. 70). He noted that, in the most recent issue of that journal, he could not find one German-speaking countries. A translation of single reference to a foreign-language publication. this work — together with the recent transla- It should be noted that the insularity ot American tion of Sprachtheorie — could help to spark psychology goes beyond the problem of linguistic off a revival of interest in the English-speak- isolation (Brandt, 1970). A survey of members of ing world. It seems safe to predict that the Society of Experimental Social Psychology — "an elite organization of American social psychol- ogists" (Rosnow, 1981; p. 34) — found that 33% 11 Biihler's works continued to be reissued. A had never read the European Journal of Social Psy- fourth edition of Die Krise der Psychologie appeared chology and 43% had never read the British Journal in 1978 and a third edition of Sprachthenrie in 1982 of Social and Clinical Psychology (Lcwicki, 1982). It (Buhler, 1978; 1982b). is hardly surprising that American psychology has been described as "our monocultural science" 12 The work was translated by a Canadian, Donald (Kennedy, Scheirer & Rogers, 1984) Goodwin. In his translator's preface, Goodwin (1990) writes: Though it is a historical work and 10 Charlotte Buhler is much better known than her must be read as such, in translating the Theory of husband in the United States. After the initial diffi- Language, I have hoped it will become a contempor- culties of the 1940s and -50s, she experienced mod- ary work as well, for it addresses topics of consider- erate success. She lived until 1974 and became a able contemporary relevance" (p.xlv). It should be prominent spokesperson for 'humanistic' psychol- noted that the 'linguistic turn' in philosophy and ogy in later years (e.g., C. Buhlcr, 1965b; 1969; the social sciences has helped to prepare the way 1971; Buhler & Allen, 1972). for this revival of interest in Buhlcr's work. Whatever Happened lo Karl Buhler? 325

Biihler will eventually receive the recognition interwar Vienna: The Vienna Psychological that he was unable to obtain during his own Institute, 1922-1942. In M.G. Ash & W.R. lifetime. Woodward (Eds.), Psychology in twentieth-century thought and society, (pp. 143-164) Cambridge, England: Cambridge Paper presented at the 101st annual meeting University Press. of the American Psychological Association in Baars, BJ. (1986). The cognitive revolution in Toronto. I would like to thank Kurt Danzigcr psychology. New York: Guilford Press. and Richard Walsh-Bowers for their helpful Bartlcy, W.W., m (1973). Wittgenstein. comments on an earlier draft. Comments Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott. should be sent lo Adrian Brock, Department Bloor, D. (1983). Wittgenstein: A social theory of Psychology, Oglelhorpc University, 4484 of knowledge. New York: Columbia Univer- Peachlree Road, Atlanta, Georgia, 30319-2797 sity Press. U.S.A. Blumenlhal, A.L. (1970). Language and psy- chology: Historical aspects of psycholinguis- lics. New York: Wiley. Resume Bolgar, II. (1964). Karl Buhler: 1879-1963. Les travaux de Karl Buhler ne sont pas American Journal of Psychology, 77, 674-678. trcs connus dans les pays anglophoncs. Si Boring, E.G. (1950). A history of experimental on y fait allusion dans certains textes psychology. (2nd ed.) New York: Appleton- portant sur l'histoire de la psychologie, on Century-Crofts. parlcra surtout de ses premiers travaux a Brandt, L.W. (1963). Linguistic isolation? l'Univcrsite de Wiirzburg. Mais cctte American Psychologist, 18, 70-71. epoque n'etail qu'un prelude au reste de Brandt, L.W. (1970). American psychology. la carriere de Buhler en psychologic. II a American Psychologist, 25, 1091-1093. par la suite enrichi le domaine par des Brennan, J.F. (1991). History and systems of travaux important^ sur la perception, la psychology. (3rd ed.) Englewood Cliffs, NJ: theoric dc la forme, la psychologie Prenticc-IIall. genetique, theorique et du langagc. Us ont Brock, A. (1991). Imageless thought or stimu- cu unc influence profonde, mais en lus error? The social construction of private grande partie passee inapcrcuc, sur les experience. In W.R. Woodward & R.S. penseurs qui suivirent scs traces. Au cours Cohen (Eds.), World views and scientific des dernieres annees, en Europe, on a discipline formation, (pp. 97-106) Dordrecht, constate un regain de popularite des Netherlands: Kluwcr. travaux de Buhler. Cet article brosse un Buhler, C. (1965a). Die Wiener psychologis- portrait de sa vie et dc son ocuvre. che Schule in der Emigration. |Thc Vienna psychological school in emigration.] Psy- chologische Rundschau, 16, 187-196. References Buhler, C. (1965b). Some observations on the Adorno, T.W., Frenkcl-Brunswik, E., Levinson, psychology of the third force. Journal of DJ. & Sanford, R.W. (1950). The authoritar- Humanistic Psychology, 5, 54. ian personality. New York: Harper & Row. Buhler, C. (1969). Humanistic psychology as Aitchison, J. (1983). The articulate mammal: An an educational program. American Psychol- introduction to psycholinguistics. (2nd cd.) ogist, 24, 736-742. London, England: Hutchinson. Buhler, C. (1971). Basic theoretical concepts Allport, G.W. (1966). An appreciation of Die of humanistic psychology. American Psy- Krise der Psychologie by Karl Buhler. Jour- chologist, 26, 378-386. nal of General Psychology, 75, 201-204. Buhler, C. (1972). Charlotte Buhler. In L.J. Ash, M.G. (1987). Psychology and politics in Pongratz, W. Traxel & E.G. Wchner (Eds.), 326 Brock

Psychologic in Selhstdarstellungen. (pp. 9-42) theory. (O. Ocscr, Trans.) New York: Bern, Switzerland: Huber. Harcourt, Brace & Co. (Original work pub- Biihler, C, & Allen, M. (1972). Introduction to lished in 1929). humanistic psychology. Monterey, CA: Buhlcr, K. (1930c). Erlebnis, Bcnchmen und Brooks-Cole. Werk. [Experience, behaviour and work.l Buhler, K. (1913). Die Gastaltwahrnehmungen. In E.G. Boring (Ed.), Ninth international Experimentelle Untersuchungen zur congress of psychology: Proceedings and psychologischen und asthetischen Analyse der papers, (pp. 102-103) Princeton, NJ: Psycho- Raum- und Zeitanschaung. [The Gestalt per- logical Review. ceptions: Experimental investigations for a Buhler, K. (1933a). Die Axiomatik der psychological and aesthctical analysis of Sprachwissenschaften. |The axiomatization views of space and time. I Stuttgart, Ger- of the language sciences.) Kant-Studien, 38, many: Spemann. 19-90. Buhler, K. (1918). Die geistige Entwicklung des Buhler, K. (1933b). Ausdruckstheorie: Das Kindes. (The mental development of the System an der Geschichte aufgezeigl. [ Theory child.] Jena, Germany: Fischer. of expression: The system as shown by Buhler, K. (1919). Abrifi der geistigen history.] Jena, Germany: Fischer. Entwicklung des Kindes. [Outline of the Buhler, K. (1934). Sprachlheorie: Die mental development of the child.] Leipzig, Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache. [Theory of Germany: Quelle & Mayer. language: The representational function of Buhler, K. (1926a). Die "neue Psychologie1 language.] Jena, Germany: Fischer. Koffkas. [The 'new psychology' of Koffka.] Buhler, K. (1952). The skywise and neighbor- Zeitschrift fur Psychologie, 99, 145-159. wise navigation of ants and bees. Ada Psy- Buhlcr, K. (1926b). Die Krise der Psychologie. chologica, 8, 225-263. [The crisis of psychology.] Kant-Studien, 31, Buhler, K. (1954). The essentials of contact 455-526. navigation. Ada Psychologica, 10, 278-316. Buhler, K. (1927). Die Krise der Psychologie. Buhlcr, K. (1960). Das Gestaltprinzip im Lehen [The crisis of psychology.] Jena, Germany: der Menschen und der Tiere. [The Gestalt Fischer. principle in the life of human beings and Buhlcr, K. (1928a). The origin of language. animals.] Bern, Switzerland: Hubcr. Psychological Bulletin, 25, 169-170. Buhler, K. (1965a). Die Krise der Psychologie. Buhlcr, K. (1928b). Displeasure and pleasure [The crisis of psychology.] (3rd cd.) in relation to activity. In C. Murchison Stuttgart, Germany: Fischer. (Ed.), Feelings and emotions: The Wittenberg Biihlcr, K. (1965b). Sprachlheorie: Die Symposium, (pp. 195-199) Worcester, MA: Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache. [Theory of Clark University Press. language: The representational function of Buhler, K. (1929a). Abrifi der geistigen language.] (2nd ed.) Stuttgart, Germany: Entwicklung des Kindes. [Outline of the Fischer. mental development of the child.] (5th Buhler, K. (1967). Abri$ der gcisligen ed.) Leipzig, Germany: Quelle & Mayer. Entwicklung des Kindes. [Outline of the Buhler, K. (1929b). Die Krise der Psychologie. mental development of the child. | (9(h [The crisis of psychology.] (2nd ed.) Jena, ed.) Heidelberg, Germany: Quelle & Meyer. Germany: Fischer. Buhler, K. (1968). Ausdruckstheorie: Das Sys- Buhlcr, K. (1930a). Die geistige Entwicklung tem an der Geschichte aufgezeigt. [Theory of des Kindes. [The mental development of expression: The system as shown by his- the child.] (6th cd.) Jena, Germany: tory.] (2nd ed.) Stuttgart, Germany: Fischer. Fischer. Buhler, K. (1930b). The mental development of Buhler, K. (1969a). Die Axiomatik der the child: A summary of modern psychological Sprachwissenschaften. [The axiomatization Whatever Happened to Karl Biihler? 327

of the language sciences.] Frankfurt, Ger- interpretation: Karl Biihler's synchytic con- many: Klostermann. cepts and I.udwig Wittgenstein's family Biihler, K. (1969b). Die Uhrcn der Lebewesen resemblances.] In A. Eschbach (Ed.), und Fragmente aus dent Nachlafi. (The clocks Buhler-Studien, vol. 2. (pp. 175-206) Frank- of living beings and fragments from the furl, Germany: Suhrkamp. estate.] Vienna, Austria: Bohlau. Eschbach, A. (Ed.) (1984b). Buhler-Studien. Biihler, K. (1978). Die Krise der Psychologie. [Biihler Studies.] Frankfurt, Germany: [The crisis of psychology.] (4th ed.) Frank- Suhrkamp. (2 vols.) furt, Germany: Ullstein. Eschbach, A. (1988a). Karl Buhler und Buhler, K. (1982a). The axiomatization of the Ludwig Wittgenstein. [Karl Buhler and language sciences. In R.E. Innis (Ed.), Karl Ludwig Wittgenstein.] In A. Eschbach Buhler: Semiotic foundations of language (Ed.), Karl Biihler's theory of language, (pp. theory, (pp. 91-164) New York: Plenum 385-406) Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Press. (Original work published 1933). Benjamins. Buhler, K. (1982b). Sprachtheorie: Die Eschbach, A. (1988b). Vorwort. [Preface.] In Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache. [Theory of A. Eschbach (Ed.), Karl Buhler's theory of language: The representational function of language, (pp. viii-xix) Amsterdam, Nether- language.] (3rd ed.) Stuttgart, Germany: lands: John Benjamins. Fischer. Eschbach, A. (Ed.) (1988c). Karl Buhler's Buhler, K. (1990). Theory of language: The theory of language: Proceedings of the con- representational function of language. (D.F. ferences held at Kirchberg, August 26, 1984 Goodwin, Trans.) Amsterdam, Netherlands: and Essen, November 21-24, 1984. Amster- John Benjamins. (Original work published dam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. 1934). Eschbach, A. (1990). Editor's introduction — Gassircr, K. (1957). The philosophy of symbolic Karl Buhler: Sematologist. In K. Buhler, forms, vol. 3. (R. Mannheim, Trans.) New Theory of language, (pp. xiii-xliii) Amster- Haven, CT: Yale University Press. (Original dam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. work published 1929) Fodor, J.A., Bever, T.G., & Garrett, M.F. Clark, H.H. & Clark, E.V. (1977). Psychology (1974). The psychology of language: An intro- and language: An introduction to psycholin- duction to psycholinguistics and generative guistics. New York: Harcourt Brace Jano- grammer. New York: McGraw-Hill. vich. Foss, DJ. & Hakes, P.T. (1978). Psycholinguis- Danzigcr, K. (1992, June). Docs the history of tics: An introduction to the psychology of psychology have a future? Address given at language. Englcwood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- the 53rd annual meeting of the Canadian Hall. Psychological Association, Quebec, Canada. Gardner, H. (1985). The mind's new science: A [To be published in Theory and Psychol- history of the cognitive revolution. New York: ogy.1 Busk Books. Emrich, U. (Ed.) (1990). Max-Planck-Ge- Garnhain, A. (1985). Psycholinguistics: Central sellscliafl Berichte und Mitleilungen, Heft topics. London, England: Mcthuen. 2/90: Max-Planck-lnstitul fur Psycholinguistik. Garvin, P. (1964). Note. [Karl Buhler obitu- [Max Planck Society reports and announce- ary.] Language, 40, 663-664. ments, booklet 2/90: Max Planck Institute Goodwin, D.F. (1990). Translator's preface. In for Psycholinguistics.] Munich, Germany: K. Buhler, Theory of language, (pp. xlv-xlvi) Max-Planck-Gcsellschafl. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. Eschbach, A. (1984a). Vcrstchcn und Inter- Graumann, C.F. & Hermann, T. (Eds.) pretation. Karl Biihler's synchytische (1984). Karl Biihlers Axiomatik: h'Unfzig Jahre Begriffe und I.udwig Wittgensteins Axiomatik der Sprachwissenschaften. [Karl Familienahnlichkeiten. [Understanding and Buhler's axiomalizalion: Fifty years of 328 Brock

'Axiomatization of the language sciences'.] Maicrs, W. (1990). The significance of Frankfurt, Germany: Klostermann. Buhlcr's 'axiomatic' and Vygotsky's 'gen- Hergenhalm, B.R. (1992). An introduction to eral psychology' for theoretical psychology the history of psychology. (2nd ed.) Belmont, and its persistent monism-pluralism debate. CA: Wadsworth. In W.J. Baker, M.E. Hyland, R. van Hothersall, D. (1990). History of psychology. Hezewijk 8c S. Tcrwcc (Eds.), Recent trends (2nd cd.) New York: McGraw-Hill. in theoretical psychology, vol. 2. (pp. Innis, R.E. (1982). Key themes in Buhlcr's 377-388) New York: Springer. language theory. In R.E. Innis (Ed.), Karl Marias, J. (1967). Nota preliminar del Btihler: Semiotic foundations of language traductor. [Preliminary note by the transla- theory, (pp. 1-73) New York: Plenum Press. tor.] In K. Buhler, Teoria del lenguaje. (pp. Innis, R.E. (1988). The thread of subjectivity: 15-16) Madrid, Spain: Revista de Occidentc. Philosophical remarks on Buhler's language Mukarovsky, J. (1977). The world and visual theory. In A. Eschbach (Ed.), Karl Buhler's art: Selected essays by Jan Mukarovsky. (P. theory of language, (pp. 77-106) Amsterdam, Steiner &J. Buduck, Trans.) New Haven, Netherlands: John Benjamins. CT: Yale University Press. Jakobson, R. (1960). Linguistics and poetics. Palermo, D. (1971). Is a scientific revolution In T.S. Sebeok (Ed.), Style in language, (pp. taking place in psychology? Science Studies, 350-377) Gambridge, MA: MIT Press. J, 135-155. Jakobson, R. (1973). Main trends in the science Pleh, G. (1988). Two conceptions of the crisis of language. London, England: Allen 8c of psychology: Vygotsky and Biihlcr. In A. Unwin. Eschbach (Ed.), Karl Buhler's theory of Kaplan, B. (1984). Einige Bemerkungcn zu language, (pp. 407-413) Amsterdam, Neth- Einfliisscn aiif Wittgenstein. [Some remarks erlands: John Benjamins. about influences on Wittgenstein. | In A. Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal Knowledge: Eschbach (Ed.), Buhler-Studien, vol. 2. (pp. Towards a post-critical philosophy. Chicago: 207-226) Frankfurt, Germany: Suhrkamp. University of Chicago Press. Kennedy, S., Sheirer, J. & Rogers, A. (1984). Popper, KR. (1963). Conjectures and refuta- The price of success: Our monocultural tions: The growth of scientific knowledge. New science. American Psychologist, 39, 996-997. York: Basic Books. Koerner, K. (1984). Karl Biihlers Sprachthco- Popper, KR. (1971). Objective knowledge: An rie und Ferdinand de Saussures 'Cours'. evolutionary approach. Oxford, England: fKarl Buhler's theory of language and Fer- Clarendon. dinand dc Saussure's 'Gours'.] In A. Esch- Popper, KR. (1976). Unended quest: An intel- back (Ed.), Buhler-Studien, vol. 2. (pp. lectual autobiography. Glasgow, Scotland: 89-115) Frankfurt, Germany: Suhrkamp. Collins. Kiilpc, O. (1920). Vorlesungen her Psychologie Rosnow, R.L. (1981). Paradigms in transition. [Lectures on psychology.] Leipzig, Ger- Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. many, Hirzel. Schullz, D.P. & Schultz, S.E. (1992). A history Lcahcy, T.H. (1992a). A history of psychology: of modern psychology. (5th ed.) Fort Worth, Main currents of psychological thought. (3rd TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. ed.) Englewood Gliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Toulmin, S. (1969). Ludwig Wittgenstein. Leahey, T.H. (1992b). The mythical revol- Encounter, 58, 58-71. utions of American psychology. American Ungchcuer, G. (1984). Biihler und Wundt. Psychologist, 47, 308-318. IBuhler and Wundt.] In A. Eschback (Ed.), Lewicki, P. (1982). Social psychology as viewed Buhler-Studien, vol. 2. (pp. 9-67) Frankfurt, by its practitioners: Survey of SESP Germany, Suhrkamp. members' opinions. Personality and Social Vygotsky, L.S. (1985). Die Krisc der Psycho- Psychology Bulletin, 8, 409416. logie in ihrer historischen Bedeutung. [The Whatever Happened to Karl Buhler? 329

crisis of psychology in its historical mea- The problematic nature of history. Science ning. J In L. Wygotski, Ausgewahlte Schriften, Studies, 4, 235-258. vol. 1. (pp. 57-278) Cologne, Germany: Wcllek, A. (1968). The impact of the German Paul-Rugensiein. (Original work published emigration on the development of Ameri- in 1982). can psychology. Journal of the History of the Vygotsky, L.S. (198b). Thought and language. Behavioral Sciences, 4, 207-229. (A. Kozulin, Trans.) Cambridge, MA: MIT Werner, H. & Kaplan, B. (1963). Symbol for- Press. (Original work published 1934) mation: An organismic-developmental Wcimer, W.B. (1974). The history of psychol- approach to language and the expression of ogy and its retrieval from historiography: I. thought. New York: Wiley.