Cover not available
Squib published In:
Diachronica
Vol. 40:3 (2023) ► pp.433–437
Notes / Notizen – Discussion / Diskussion

A terminological problem

Humboldt’s Universal

ORCID logo | Victoria University of Wellington

The term “Humboldt’s Universal”, introduced to linguistics in the 1970s, appears to be synonymous with a number of other expressions, some of which are also used to denote different phenomena (e.g. isomorphism). In this paper, the extent of the terminological problem is highlighted, and a plea is made for explanation of how the term is to be understood in the work of individual authors.

L’expression « universel de Humboldt », introduite en linguistique dans les années 1970, semble être synonyme de nombreuses autres formulations, dont certaines sont également utilisées pour désigner d’autres phénomènes. Dans cet article, l’étendue du problème terminologique est soulignée et un plaidoyer est mené pour que soient expliqués les termes en question dans le travail de chaque auteur.

Der in den 1970er-Jahren in die Linguistik eingeführte Begriff „Humboldts Universale“ wird gerne mit einer Reihe anderer Ausdrücke synonym verwendet, die aber teilweise auch andere Phänomene bezeichnen. In diesem Beitrag wird das Ausmaß des terminologischen Problems aufgezeigt, indem die Verwendungsweisen des Terminus im Werk der einzelnen Autoren erklärt wird.

Keywords: biuniqueness, Humboldt’s Universal, isomorphism, one form – one meaning, uniformity
Published online: 5 May 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.22010.bau
References
Anderson, John M. & Colin J. Ewen
1987 Principles of dependency phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anttila, Raimo
1989 Historical and comparative linguistics. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Laurie
2016 Classical morphemics. In Andrew Hippisley & Gregory Stump (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of morphology, 331–355. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2020 Arbitrariness, motivation and idioms. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 18(1). 162–179. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Lyle
2013 Historical linguistics: An introduction. Third edn. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Chao, Yuen-Ren
1934/1958 The non-uniqueness of phonemic solutions of phonetic systems. Reprinted in Martin Joos (ed.), Readings in linguistics, 38–54. Second edn. New York: American Council of Learned Societies.Google Scholar
Dressler, Wolfgang U.
2005 Word-formation in natural morphology. In Pavol Štekauer & Rochelle Lieber (eds.), Handbook of word-formation, 267–284. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gaeta, Livio
2010 Analogical change. In Silvia Luraghi & Vit Bubeník (eds.), Continuum companion to historical linguistics, 147–160. London: New York Continuum. (Also published as the Bloomsbury companion to historical linguistics. London: Bloomsbury).Google Scholar
Hock, Hans Heinrich
2006 Analogy. In Brian D. Joseph & Richard D. Janda (eds.), The handbook of historical linguistics, 441–460. Malden MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hockett, Charles F.
1987 Refurbishing our foundations. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Humboldt, Wilhelm von
1971 Linguistic variability and intellectual development. Tr. George C. Buck & Frijthof A. Raven from Über die Verschiedenheit des menschlichen Sprachbaues und ihren Einfluss auf die geistige Entwicklung des Menschengeschlechts (Berlin 1836) Miami FL: University of Miami Press.Google Scholar
Karlsson, Fred
2014 Complexity in linguistic theorizing. In Juhani Järvikivi, Pirita Pyykkönen-Klauck & Matti Laine (eds.), Words and constructions: Language complexity in linguistics and psychology. [ The Mental Lexicon 9(2)]. 144–169. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul
1992 Analogy. In William Bright (ed.), International encyclopedia of linguistics Vol 11, 56–61. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lass, Roger
1984 Phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1997 Historical linguistics and language change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mayerthaler, Willi
1981 Morphologische Natürlichkeit. Wiesbaden: Athenaion.Google Scholar
McMahon, April M. S.
1994 Understanding language change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nathan, Geoffrey S.
2008 Phonology: A cognitive grammar introduction. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trask, R. L.
2000 The dictionary of historical and comparative linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vennemann, Theo
1972 Phonetic analogy and conceptual analogy. In Theo Vennemann & T. H. Wilbur (eds.), Schuchardt, the Neogrammarians, and the transformational theory of phonological change: Four essays, 181–204. Frankfurt: Athenaeum. Also reprinted in Philip Baldi & Ronald N. Werth (eds.) 1978 Readings in historical phonology, 258–274. University Park PA and London: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Wheeler, Max
1993 On the hierarchy of naturalness principles in inflectional morphology. Journal of Linguistics 291. 95–111. DOI logoGoogle Scholar