19th-century linguistics: practice and theory P. Swiggers

The 19th century marks, in many respects, a new era in the history of linguistic reflection and practice. The most important evolution was the rise, at the dawn of the 19th century, of comparative-linguistic studies, which received its place in the academic curricula; this turned the study of language from the historical-comparative point of view into an established scientific discipline. Various facts testify to the institutionalization process of linguistics in the first seventy years of the 19th century: (a) the introduction of the term ‘linguistics’ (first in German: Linguistik ), and the subsequent efforts to define the field of linguistics as distinct from that of ‘philology’; (b) the creation of terms for fields of study (e.g., ‘Indo-European’, ‘Romance’, ‘Celtic’, etc.) and for methodological principles (e.g. ‘sound laws’) (c) the formation of ‘research models’ (defined not so much by a set of theoretical principles, but rather by a consensus concerning empirical documentation and methodological principles). Historical-comparative grammar became the scientific canon of linguistic study in the 19th century, both in Europe and in the United States, which was the ‘new player’ in the study of language. The establishment of comparative grammar was a gradual process, starting from a stage of ‘comparative philology’ and culminating in the uniformitarianist model of historical-comparative grammar defined by the junggrammatische Schule . The fundamental stages of this process can be followed through the successive compendia of Indo-European comparative grammar published in the course of the 19th century (Bopp, Schleicher, Brugmann & Delbrück).

The primacy of historical-comparative grammar (focussing on the study of the Indo-European and Semitic language groups) will be at the core of our analysis of 19th -century linguistics. but we will pay due attention to two other main trends in 19th -century linguistics: (A) reflections on the nature of language, on the relation between language, mind, and reality, and on the universal properties of language; this trend is exemplified in the work of W. von Humboldt and of his followers (esp. H. Steinthal and F. Misteli) (B) a type of ‘evolutionary linguistics’ – occasionally practiced by full-fledged comparatists (e.g. Schleicher) – the aim of which was to identify stages in the evolution of languages (seen as monolithic blocks), in their relationship with racial and cultural data. This trend is represented in the works of F. Max Müller and of the French school of linguistique naturaliste (H. Chavée, A. Hovelacque, J. Vinson, etc.).

We will also consider the dynamics of 19th -century linguistics, with an eye at (i) the criticisms formulated against established models (e.g. the criticism of Neogrammarian work by G.I. Ascoli, H. Schuchardt, W. Whitney and M. Bréal, foreshadowing Saussure’s criticism of the Neogrammarian model); (ii) the mechanism of ‘revolutionary rhetorics’ used by adherents of emerging models (e.g. the Neogrammarians); (iii) the transfer of the German model of historical-comparative grammar to France; (iv) the struggle for scientific recognition of some types of ‘synchronic linguistics’ (descriptive grammar; modern language teaching); (v) the rise of linguistic ‘paradisciplines” such as neurolinguistics, psycholinguistics (psychology of language), and anthropological linguistics. Finally, we will address a topic of direct relevance to the general focus of the volume; what was known and what was written by 19th -century linguists about the languages of Europe ?