Philology and Linguistics

8/3/2019 Philology and Linguistics

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/philology-and-linguistics 1/7

Linguistic Society of America

Linguistics and PhilologyAuthor(s): George Melville BollingSource: Language, Vol. 5, No. 1 (Mar., 1929), pp. 27-32Published by: Linguistic Society of AmericaStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/408995 .

Accessed: 02/09/2011 10:20

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Linguistic Society of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Language.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=lsa

http://www.jstor.org/stable/408995?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/408995?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=lsa



LINGUISTICS AND PHILOLOGY

GEORGE MELVILLE BOLLING

OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY

[Discussion of the terms 'linguistics' and 'philology' as used in American

English.]

To the recently renewed discussion'of the terms 'linguistics'and

'philology'something may perhapsbe added. The problem s not tostake out theoretical claimsto portionsof the fieldof scholarship,2 ut

simplyto recognizecertainactuallyexistingtypes of scholarlyactivityand apply to them labels in such a wayas to minimizethe risk ofmis-

understanding. Three such stimuli seem to me to be present in our

environment,and I shall endeavorto suggestthem withoutwishingtoinsistuponthe desirabilityof the verbaldescriptions mployed.

A. The study of man'sspeech-habits.B. Thestudy of what his speech-habitshave enabled man to accom-

plish,that is the study of civilizationas a whole.3C. The establishmentand interpretationof the texts of such docu-

ments as need that treatment.

To B Sturtevant-Kentdecline to react on the groundthat 'no onescholarcan cover so largea field'. The objection s true but not to the

point. It assumesthat our efforts must be individualisticrather than

cooperative. If the issue wereto be raisedat all, it shouldratherbe :Cana libraryto cover so largea field ever be accumulated? Even then theanswer No' must be given, if we havein minda library hat can answerall possiblequestions. The same,however, s true of A and C as well;and the fact neednot troubleus. Ourstudies areaspirations;hat their

1E. H. Sturtevant and R. G. Kent, 'Linguistic Science and Classical Philo-

logy', Classical Weekly22. 9-13; Holger Pedersen in a review of the publicationsof the Linguistic Society, Litteris 5. 148-59 (1928).

2 For that reason I shall not discuss the 'relationship' between philology and

linguistics.Viewed

concretelyit would mean the

relationshipas it exists in some

individual or group, and that is ever-shifting.

aFor I would go beyond Sturtevant-Kent and say that all, not practically all,civilization is the result of language.

27



28 GEORGE MELVILLE BOLLING

idealsare unattainable s a guaranteeof theirpermanence,ndmay bestbe regardedas a merit. The unwearyingquest of Truth is better than

the possessionof Truthherself.3a What concernsus is the presenceorabsence of an ideal, not its attainability;and a serviceabletest is theexistenceor lack of corresponding rganizations4o aid and coordinateour efforts.

To A corresponds the LINGUISTICOCIETY f AMERICA. Here a

tendencyto subdivisionhashardlyas yet set in. Thisis due of course othe relativeyouth of the science,to the precariousness f its holdin this

country,andnot to any smallnessof the field. The ModernLanguageAssociation, n spiteof its name,belongsunderanotherheading,so that

the real exceptions eemto be AmericanSpeech 1925on) and the Inter-national Journal of American Linguistics (1917 on). The exceptions are,as exceptionsshouldbe, significant:one is an internationalenterprise,and both deal with problemsthat ought to be of peculiarconcerntodwellers n this country.

Correspondingo B wehavethe AmericanCouncilof LearnedSocietiesDevoted to Humanistic Studies. Here consciousnessof unity camelate (1919),and we maynote as symptomaticthe cumbersomeitle ascontrastedwith that of its

counterpartthe AmericanAssociationfor

the Advancementof Science. Thereasonfor this is clear: B comprisesanoverwhelmingmass of material; he workershaveattacked it eclecti-

cally and their eclecticisms are reflected in the earlierorganizations.Even so, the breadthof their interests s the noteworthy hing. Thusthe AmericanPhilologicalAssociation started with an interest in lan-

guage, but long ago this beganto shift 'to the fields of literature and

interpretation, o ancient life in general,and in particular o art and

archaeology'.' If nevertheless,archaeologyseems inadequatelyrepre-

sentedin this organization,t must be remembered hat the Associationhas an interlocking membershipand holds joint meetings with the

Archaeologicalnstituteof America. The latter too is far from imitingits interestsas narrowlyas its namemightsuggest. Witnessthe broad

The sentiment is Lessing's. In homelier form is the English saying:Always to court and never to wedIs the happiest life that ever was led.

I4shall limit myself to this country; and as I am thinking of pure, not applied,science, organizations such as the National Council of Teachers of English,

the American Association of Teachers of Spanish, the American Association ofTeachers of Italian do not come into consideration.

6 F. G. Moore, 'AHistory of the Association', TAPA 50. 14 (1919).



LINGUISTICS AND PHILOLOGY 29

programsof the schools it has founded and fostered: the AmericanSchools of ClassicalStudies at Athens and in Rome, the American

Schoolsof OrientalResearch n Jerusalemand in Bagdad. I may citealso the AmericanOrientalSociety which is now seeking,in unionwiththe Archaeologicalnstituteand the Councilof LearnedSocieties, or thefoundationof a Schoolof Indo-IranianResearch. The broadoutlookoftheseendeavorspreventsputtingthemundereitherA orC;and if weareto finda unitywithin them (andthe fact of theirorganization onstrainsus to seek it), it can be done I think only by regarding hem as eclecti-

cally chosenpartsof B.There seemto be two alternatives. We mightwith LeonardBloom-

field' make 'national culture' rather than human cultureour highestunity. But, while it is true that oureclecticismsoften approximateorfollow linesof nationalcleavage ('national'being nterpretedmost liber-

ally), the organizationsnamedreveal a consciousnessof largerunitiesthat forbidsourstoppingat the boundaries f nationality. So I should

prefer to regardthe study of the culture of any one nation as but a

portionof the study of human culture. The secondalternative wouldbe to divideB into two parts, historyandphilology;but the distinctions

attemptedseem

evanescent,'and it is admitted that

they'are

never,and nevershouldbe absolute,only relative'. I shouldagreeratherwithGercke so wirdam EndeallePhilologieauchGeschichtsforschung,ndalle historischeForschung st im Grundestreng philologischeArbeit'.

To C, whether we consider t as a whole or have regardto possible(nationalistic) subdivision, there is no correspondingorganization.Societiesand periodicalsdevotedto the study of certainlanguagesandliteraturesare not to be classedas such; for, as Pedersen points out,much more than C is included in the study of literature. Work of this

type finds its home in the organizationsmentioned under B, of whichit forms, indeed,the core. Fortunately,however, he activity of C as a

8 LANGUAGE 1. 41 (1925).' Cf. Birt, 'Kritik u. Hermeneutik', MuellersHdb. d. klass. Altertumswiss.1.33.4:

'Der Philologe behandelt das Gewesene, der Historiker das Geschehene'. AlsoMaurice Bloomfield, 'Philology', Johns Hopkins Alumni Mag. (an unfortunatelyout-of-the-way place) 14. 5 (1925): 'History draws this picture in outline that maybe compared to a pen and ink drawing, philology lays on the colors. Historyis engaged with what may be called the more external, pragmatic, secular aspectsof the human

past; philologydeals more with its

inner, spiritual aspects.'The

quotation in the text is from the same page.8 'Methodik', Einl. in d. Altertumswiss. 12. 35. The whole section 'Die Einheit

der philologisch-historischen Methode' will repay close reading.



30 GEORGEMELVILLEBOLLING

stimulusis not in question,since both Sturtevant-Kentand Pedersenreactto it.

We have then the threestimuliA, B,C all present n ourenvironment;the questionis what verbalresponses o themareto be regardedas themost adequate. The answer s conditioned, f course,by ourpast. We

began with a British heritage:that means calling A 'philology',and

respondingo B and Conlywithphrases,9ot withseparatewords. But,when the influence of Germany began to affect our University life, there

came in the continental terminology: 'linguistics' for A, 'philology' for

B, and 'philology' n a restrictedsense (philologyparexcellence) or C.The usage,particularly f 'philology'as a response o B, wasconfined o

certainnarrowcirclesof professed and,I think, chieflyclassical)philo-logians,and was there perfectlyfamiliar. To documentthis wouldbetedious rather than difficult;I may refer to the article by Maurice

Bloomfield,alreadycited, and may quote also Gildersleeve,OscillationsandNutationsofPhilological tudies13: 'I wouldreiterate he confessionof my faith in the formulaeof my youth, my beliefin the widerconcep-tion of philologicalwork, in the necessity of bringingall our specialinvestigationsinto relationwith the whole body of philological ruth,the life of the

world,the life of

humanity.'I

mightalso alludeto the

fact that the AmericanPhilologicalAssociation elt noneed to change tsname with its shift of interests; philological'n its title merelytook oninsteadthe newmeaning. Or,togiveonemoreexample:whenaperiodi-cal 'devoted to research in the Languages,Literatures,History, andLife of ClassicalAntiquity'was founded, ts editorsnamed it Classical

Philology. The use remained, however, esoteric, the mark of a pro-fessional dialect; not even the officialterminology of our Universities was

affected by it. The most surprising thing to me in the whole discussion

is the wayin whichthe fact that 'philology'hasbeenusedasaresponse oB both in continental Europeand in this country, is ignoredboth byPedersenandby Sturtevant-Kent.

The inconveniences attendant upon the habit of calling A 'philology'are familiar and need not be rehearsed; but a recent illustration given byPedersen will bear repetition. The organizers of the 'premier congrbsinternationalde linguistes'wishedto issuetheirfirst circular n English.BritishEnglishofferednothingbut the manifestly mpossible Congressof Philologists',andso the choicewaslimited to French,German,or the

9 The practical difficulty of forming derivatives from such phrases is properlystressed by Pedersen.



LINGUISTICSAND PHILOLOGY 31

good American First InternationalCongressof Linguists',whichwas

actually chosen. As anotherI may addfroma different ourcea story

now going the rounds. A famous British press (it need not here benamed)undertook o publisha translationof Pedersen'sSprogvidenska-ben;but, most regrettably, he undertaking ameto naught. The rockon whichit shattered was the insistenceof the press that A be called

'philology',even whereit was being explained hat it wasnotphilology.Se non fossevero,sarebbebentrovato.

A recent consequencehas been a tendency in this country to insistthat the better responseto A is 'linguistics'. The usage has gainedground rapidly; though, as Pedersenshows, even the contributors o

LANGUAGEhave not followed t withperfectconsistency. The nconsist-ency, however,is only half as great as Pedersenbelieves;for he hadmissedthe finepoints very neatlymadeby Sapir 1.452)andCollitz 2.10)in using philologistnot linguist."1 The usage seems likely to become

established,"1nd we are all agreedthat there is every reason to wishfor that outcome. Pedersen seems to think that we have been over-cautiousin our use, not so much of 'linguistics' tself but of 'linguist'and 'linguistic',especially n the morepopularof ourwritings. He hasthus indicateda way in which we can help on the desiredresult: usagealonecan establishusage. It will help also, I may add, if continental

linguistsin writingEnglishwill (they do not alwaysas yet) avoid thisBriticism.

The rest of the problem s moredifficult. The trouble s not that oneformis servingas a response o twostimuli;such a situation s mostnor-

mal,andof itself need causenoembarrassment. Ratherthe difficulty sthat there seemsto be no prospectof 'philology'as a response o B gain-ing a firmer oothold. Afterfifty yearsthere are no signsof it. Onthe

contraryeven those closest to philology (C) avoid the usage: the Ar-chaeologicalInstitute, for instance,did not nameits schools SchoolsofClassicalor OrientalPhilology, nor have we an AmericanCouncilof

PhilologicalSocieties. One feels at once that there was no likelihoodof such titles beingchosen. Not that therewas riskof philologybeingconfoundedwith linguistics:that contributedno doubt, but the im-

portant factor was that the specializedmeaningof philology (C) was

10 The other passages are Esper, MONOGR.. 5; Espinosa 3. 201.11 Official dialects

change slowly.If that of our Universities comes to

preservea fossilized meaning of 'philology', the fact may be added to our collections ofsimilar curios.



32 GEORGEMELVILLEBOLLING

prominentenoughto render ts use in the broadersense unattractive.

That againis a normal inguisticprocess,and it is what seemslikely to

happen n this case. Pedersen'sattitudemay indicatethat it is takingplace alreadyon the continent;Sturtevantand Kent aremovingin the

samedirection.But then we areleft withouta response o B, and that meansthe risk

of becoming rresponsiveo that stimulus,of losingour broadestoutlook

uponthe purposeof our studies. It is a risknot to be incurredightly,and yet thereseemsto be no alternative; orno substitutefor philologyin this sense seems available. Historyis likewiseover-specializedor

the purpose,Anthropologyoo is preempted;HumanistandHumanities

aretoo richin theirconnotations,and the latter besides s handicapped

by its ending. Perhapssomeone may hit uponthe right term. Until

he does we must steer our courseas best we can between Scylla and

Charybdis.

Documents

Philology and Linguistics