Cover not available
Article published In:
Historiographia Linguistica
Vol. 46:3 (2019) ► pp.73–130

Martin Joos’s Readings in Linguistics

A publication history

| University of Washington
The book Readings in Linguistics edited by Martin Joos is one of the best known collections of papers ever published in the field of linguistics. In this article I trace its publication history, from Bernard Bloch’s idea in 1946 for an anthology of important work in descriptive linguists, to the several editions of Joos’s reader between 1957 and 1995, to the present day, where citations to the book are still quite frequent. Making extensive use of unpublished material in various archives in the United States, I outline in detail the exchanges between Joos and other linguists around its publication, as well as the critical reviews that were published of the book. I attempt to explain why a collection of papers, the majority of which were published in the 1940s, is still of great interest. I offer two reasons. The first derives from the material in Joos’s prefaces to the various editions and from Joos’s editorial comments on the included articles. Practitioners of every current approach to linguistics have cited some of this material either as an opening wedge against opposing approaches or to express smug satisfaction that we know more about how science works now than we did more than a half-century ago. The second is that it provides a fascinating historical record of how linguistics used to be done — not so long ago that the approach documented is a mere historiographical curiosity, but also not so recently as to be no more than a quaint version of current theory
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background to Joos’s Readings in Linguistics
    • 2.1Bernard Bloch’s idea for a collection
    • 2.2American linguistics in the early 1950s
    • 2.3The American council of learned societies
    • 2.4Martin Joos
    • 2.5Why Joos was chosen as editor of the Readings
  • 3.Joos takes on the editor’s role
    • 3.1Joos’s letter of 12 September 1955
    • 3.2Reactions to Joos’s letter
  • 4.The first edition of Joos’s Readings in Linguistics
    • 4.1The contents of the first edition
    • 4.2Joos’s editorial commentary in the first edition
  • 5.The later editions of the Readings
    • 5.1The second and third editions (1958 and 1963)
    • 5.2The fourth edition (1966)
    • 5.3The first four editions: A summary comment
    • 5.4The abridged edition (1995)
  • 6.A visual display of the progression of the book of readings
  • 7.The reviews of Joos’s Readings in Linguistics
    • 7.1The ‘non-reviews’ in Language and Word
    • 7.2The Voegelin review in IJAL
    • 7.3The Hymes review in American Anthropologist
    • 7.4The Uhlenbeck review in Lingua
    • 7.5The MacQueen review in Quarterly Journal of Speech
    • 7.6The Trager review in Studies in Linguistics
    • 7.7The Pei review in Modern Language Journal
    • 7.8The Lightner review in General Linguistics
    • 7.9The reviews: A summary
  • 8.Further remarks on the Readings
    • 8.1The Readings in the classroom
    • 8.2On the ‘staying power’ of Joos’s Readings
  • 9.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 17 March 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/hl.00052.new
References (148)
References
Anderson, Stephen R. 1985. Phonology in the Twentieth Century. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Aronoff, Mark, and Carol Padden. 2011. “Sign Language Verb Agreement and the Ontology of Morphosyntactic Categories”. Theoretical Linguistics 371.143–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aurora, Simone. 2017. “From Structure to Machine: Deleuze and Guattari’s Philosophy of Linguistics”. Deleuze Studies 111.405–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bach, Emmon. 1996. “The Politics of Universal Grammar”. LSA Presidential Address held on January 6th, 1996.Google Scholar
Benítez-Burraco, Antonio & Victor Longa. 2010. “Evo-Devo — of Course, but Which One? Some Comments on Chomsky’s Analogies between the Biolinguistic Approach and Evo-Devo”. Biolinguistics 41.308–23.Google Scholar
Berreby, David. 1994. “The Linguistics Wars”. The Sciences 341.44–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biberauer, Theresa, ed. 2008. The Limits of Syntactic Variation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bloch, Bernard. 1946. “Notes”. Language 221.267.Google Scholar
Boas, Franz. 1911/1963. Introduction to the Handbook of American Indian Languages. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan. 2015. “Suppletion: Some Theoretical Implications”. Annual Review of Linguistics 11.1–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Borsley, Robert D. 1991. Syntacic Theory: A Unified Approach. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Botha, Rudolf. 1992. Challenging Chomsky: The Generative Garden Game. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. 2009. “Language Universals and Usage-Based Theory”. Language Universals ed. by M. H. Christiansen, C. Collins & S. Edelman, 17–39. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carlson, Gregory, Brian Joseph, and Sarah G. Thomason. 2012. “Introduction: The best of Language ”. [URL]
Carroll, John B. 1953. The Study of Language. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chao, Yuen-Ren. 1934. “The Nonuniqueness of Phonemic Solutions of Phonetic Systems”. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica 41, part 41.363–97. (Repr. in Readings in Linguistics ed. by M. Joos, 38–54. New York: American Council of Learned Societies, 1957.)Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1957. Syntactic Structures. The Hague: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1962a. “Explanatory Models in Linguistics”. Logic, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science ed. by E. Nagel, P. Suppes & A. Tarski, 528–50. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
. 1962b. “A Transformational Approach to Syntax”. Proceedings of the Third Texas Conference on Problems of Linguistic Analysis in English ed. by A. Hill, 124–58. Austin: University of Texas Press. (Repr. in The Structure of Language: Readings in the Philosophy of Language ed. by J. A. Fodor & J. J. Katz, 211–243. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1964.)Google Scholar
. 1964. “The Logical Basis of Linguistic Theory”. Proceedings of the Ninth International Congress of Linguists, ed. by H. G. Lunt, 914–77. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
. 1986. Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin, and Use. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
. 2007a. “Biolinguistic Explorations”. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 151.1–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007b. “Of Minds and Language”. Biolinguistics 11.9–27.Google Scholar
. 2008. “On Phases”. Foundational Issues in Linguistic Theory: Essays in Honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud ed. by R. Freidin, C. P. Otero & M.-L. Zubizarreta, 133–66. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. “Minimal Recursion: Exploring the Prospects”. Recursion: Complexity in Cognition ed. by T. Roeper & M. Speas, 1–15. Basel: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam & Morris Halle. 1965. “Some Controversial Questions in Phonological Theory”. Journal of Linguistics 11.97–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1968. The Sound Pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo & Luigi Rizzi. 2010. “The Cartography of Syntactic Structures”. The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis ed. by B. Heine & H. Narrog, 51–65. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cole, Peter & Gabi Hermon. 2015. “Grammar of Binding in the Languages of the World: Innate or Learned?”. Cognition 1411.138–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 2001. “Theories of Universal Grammar in the Late 20th Century”. History of the Language Sciences: An International Handbook on the Evolution of the Study of Language from the Beginnings to the Present, Vol. 2 ed. by S. Auroux, E. F. K. Koerner, H.-J. Niederehe & K. Versteegh, 1461–1467. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Cook, Vivian J. 2011. “Linguistic Relativity and Language Teaching”. Language and Bilingual Cognition ed. by V. J. Cook & B. Bassetti. Abingdon: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, William. 2000. “Parts of Speech as Language Universals and as Language-Particular Categories”. Approaches to the Typology of Word Classes ed. by P. M. Vogel & B. Comrie, 65–102. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2003. Typology and Universals: Second Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 2017. “Typology and Universals”. The Blackwell Handbook of Linguistics, 2nd Edition ed. by M. Aronoff & J. Rees-Miller, 39–55. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Diller, Karl. 1971. Generative Grammar, Structural Linguistics, and Language Teaching. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.Google Scholar
. 1978. The Language Teaching Controversy. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Falk, Julia S. 2004. “Saussure and American Linguistics”. The Cambridge Companion to Saussure ed. by C. Sanders, 107–23. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ferguson, Charles A. 1978. “Historical Background of Universals Research”. Universals of Human Language. Vol. 1: Method and Theory ed. by J. H. Greenberg, 7–32. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Gass, Susan & Josh Ard. 1980. “L2 Data: Their Relevance for Language Universals”. TESOL Quarterly 141.443–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gleason, Henry A. 1988. Theories in Conflict: North American Linguistics in the Fifties and Sixties. Unpublished ms, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Godel, Robert, ed. 1969. A Geneva School Reader in Linguistics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Graves, Mortimer. 1950. A Neglected Facet of the National Security Problem. Washington: American Council of Learned Societies.Google Scholar
. 1951. “Comments in the Session Entitled ‘Meeting the Government’s Need in Languages’”. Report on the Second Annual Round Table Meeting on Linguistics and Language Teaching ed. by J. De Francis, 11. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1975. “Research on Language Universals”. Annual Review of Anthropology 41.75–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hakuta, Kenji. 1986. Mirror of Language: The Debate on Bilingualism. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Hall, Robert A. 1951–1952. “American Linguistics, 1925–1950”. Archivum Linguisticum 3–4.101–25, 1–16.Google Scholar
1987. “Review of C. Hockett, The State of the Art ”. Linguistics and Pseudo-Linguistics ed. by R. A. Hall, 58–79. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1990. “A Further Note on the Joos Notes”. Historiographia Linguistica 171.231–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1991. “165 Broadway”. Historiographia Linguistica 181.153–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halle, Morris. 1959. The Sound Pattern of Russian. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Hamp, Eric. 1961. “General Linguistics — the United States in the Fifties”. Trends in European and American Linguistics, 1930–1960 ed. by C. Mohrmann, A. Sommerfelt & J. Whatmough, 165–95. Utrecht: Spectrum.Google Scholar
. 1966. “Preface”. Readings in Linguistics II ed. by E. Hamp, F. W. Householder & R. Austerlitz, v–vii. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
. 1995a. “Foreword”. Readings in Linguistics I and II: Abridged Edition ed. by E. Hamp, F. W. Householder & R. Austerlitz, v–viii. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
. 1995b. “Preface to Volume 2 of Readings in Linguistics ”. Readings in Linguistics I and II: Abridged Edition ed. by E. Hamp, F. W. Householder & R. Austerlitz, xi–xii. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hamp, Eric, Fred W. Householder & Robert Austerlitz, eds. 1966. Readings in Linguistics II. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
, eds. 1995. Readings in Linguistics I and II: Abridged Edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Harris, Randy A. 1993. The Linguistics Wars. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Harris, Zellig S. 1951. Methods in Structural Linguistics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
1957. “Co-occurrence and Transformation in Linguistic Structure”. Language 331.283–340. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haugen, Einar. 1951. “Directions in Modern Linguistics”. Language 271.211–22. (Repr. in Readings in Lingistics ed. by M. Joos, 357–63. New York: American Council of Learned Societies, 1957.)Google Scholar
Hill, Archibald A., ed. 1962. Proceedings of the Second Texas Conference on Problems of Linguistic Analysis in English. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
1964. “History of the Linguistic Institute”. ACLS Newsletter 151.1–12.Google Scholar
1979. “Obituary: Martin Joos”. Language 551.665–69.Google Scholar
1991. “The Linguistic Society of America and North American Linguistics, 1950–1968”. Historiographia Linguistica 181.49–152. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hockett, Charles F. 1943. “A System of Descriptive Phonology”. Language 181.3–21. (Repr. in Readings in Linguistics ed. by M. Joos, 97–108. New York: American Council of Learned Societies, 1957.)Google Scholar
1980. “Preserving the Heritage”. First Person Singular: Papers from the Conference on an Oral Archive for the History of American Linguistics ed. by B. Davis & R. O’cain, 99–107. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hymes, Dell. 1958. “Review of M. Joos (ed.), Readings in Linguistics ”. American Anthropologist 601.416–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, ed. 1964. Language in Culture and Society: A Reader in Linguistics and Anthropology. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Hymes, Dell & John Fought. 1975. “American Structuralism”. Current Trends in Linguistics, Vol. 13: Historiography of Linguistics ed. by T. A. Sebeok, 903–1176. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
. 1981. American Structuralism. The Hague: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1925. Mankind, Nation and Individual from a Linguistic Point of View. Oslo: H Aschehoug.Google Scholar
Joos, Martin. 1948. Acoustic Phonetics [= Language Monograph 23, Supplement to Language 24: 2]. Baltimore: Waverly Press.Google Scholar
. 1950. “Description of Language Design”. Journal of the Acoustic Society of America 221.701–08. (Repr. in Readings in Linguistics ed. by M. Joos, 349–356. New York: American Council of Learned Societies, 1957.)Google Scholar
. 1957a. “Preface”. Readings in Linguistics: The Development of Descriptive Linguistics in America since 1925 ed. by M. Joos, v–vii. New York: American Council of Learned Societies.Google Scholar
. ed. 1957b. Readings in Linguistics: The Development of Descriptive Linguistics in America since 1925. New York: American Council of Learned Societies.Google Scholar
. 1958. “Preface”. Readings in Linguistics, Second Edition ed. by M. Joos, v–vii. New York: American Council of Learned Societies.Google Scholar
. 1961. “Linguistic Prospects in the United States”. Trends in European and American Linguistics, 1930–1960 ed. by C. Mohrmann, A. Sommerfelt & J. Whatmough, 11–20. Utrecht: Spectrum.Google Scholar
. 1962. The Five Clocks. Bloomington: Indiana University Research Center in Anthropology.Google Scholar
. 1964. The English Verb: Form and meanings. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
. 1966a. “Preface”. Readings in Linguistics I: The Development of Descriptive Linguistics in America 1925–1956 ed. by M. Joos, v–viii. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
, ed. 1966b. Readings in Linguistics I: The Development of Descriptive Linguistics in America 1925–56, Fourth Edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
. 1972. “Semantic Axiom Number One”. Language 481.257–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1986. Notes on the Development of the Linguistic Society of America 1924 to 1950. Ithaca: Privately printed by J. M. Cowan and C. Hockett.Google Scholar
Joos, Martin & F. R. Whitesell. 1951. Middle High German Courtly Reader. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Katz, Jerrold J. 1981. Language and Other Abstract Objects. Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Koerner, Ernst F. K. 2002. “American Structuralist Linguistics and the ‘Problem of Meaning’”. Toward a History of American Linguistics ed. by E. F. K. Koerner, 75–104. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ladd, D. Robert. In press. “Mid-Century American Phonology: The Post-Bloomfieldians”. Oxford Handbook of the History of Phonology ed. by B. E. Dresher & H. Van Der Hulst. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lehmann, Christian. 2004. “Documentation of Grammar”. Lectures on Endangered Languages 41.61–74.Google Scholar
. 2010. “Roots, Stems and Word Classes”. Parts of Speech: Empirical and Theoretical Advances ed. by U. Ansaldo, J. Don & R. Pfau, 43–64. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lightner, Theodore. 1968. “Review of M. Joos (ed.), Readings in Linguistics, 4th Edition”. General Linguistics 81.44–61.Google Scholar
Lindblom, Bjorn. 1990. “Models of Phonetic Variation and Selection”. Phonetic Experimental Research, Institute of Linguistics, University of Stockholm 111.65–100.Google Scholar
MacQueen, John. 1957. “Review of M. Joos (Ed.), Readings in Linguistics ”. Quarterly Journal of Speech 431.324.Google Scholar
Matthews, Peter H. 1993. Grammatical Theory in the United States from Bloomfield to Chomsky. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McCawley, James D. 1974. “Interview Conducted by Herman Parret”. Discussing Language: Dialogues with Wallace L. Chafe, Noam Chomsky, Algirdas J. Greimas [and Others] ed. by H. Parret, 249–77. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
McQuown, Norman A. 1952. “Review of Z. Harris, Methods in Structural Linguistics ”. Language 281.495–504. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mencken, Henry L. 1948. The American Language: An Inquiry into the Development of English in the United States; Supplement II. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Moore, Terence & Christine Carling. 1982. Language Understanding: Towards a Post-Chomskyan Linguistics. New York: St. Martin’s Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moulton, William G. 1961. “Linguistics and Language Teaching in the United States 1940–1960”. Trends in European and American Linguistics, 1930–1960 ed. by C. Mohrmann, A. Sommerfelt & J. Whatmough, 82–109. Utrecht: Spectrum.Google Scholar
Murray, Stephen O. 1980. “Gatekeepers and the ‘Chomskyan Revolution’”. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences 161.73–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1983. Group Formation in Social Science. Edmonton: Linguistic Research, Inc.Google Scholar
1994. Theory Groups and the Study of Language in North America: A Social History. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Newmeyer, Frederick J. 1980. Linguistic Theory in America. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1986. “Has There Been a ‘Chomskyan Revolution’ in Linguistics?”. Language 621.1–19. (Repr. in Generative Linguistics: A historical perspective, 23–38. London: Routledge, 1996.)Google Scholar
2005. Possible and Probable Languages: A Generative Perspective on Linguistic Typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
In preparation. “Crisis in the LSA: The Contested Presidential Election of 1970”.
Parker, William R. 1954. The National Interest and Foreign Languages. Washington: United States Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Partee, Barbara. 1971. “On the Requirement That Transformations Preserve Meaning”. Studies in Linguistic Semantics ed. by C. J. Fillmore & D. T. Langendoen, 1–21. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Pei, Mario. 1967. “Review of M. Joos, Readings in Linguistics, Volume I (4th edition) and Eric Hamp, Fred Householder & Robrt Austerlitz, Readings in Linguistics, Volume II ”. Modern Language Journal 511.312–314. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pike, Kenneth L. 1947a. “Grammatical Prerequisites to phonemic analysis”. Word 31.155–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1947b. Phonemics: A technique for reducing Languages to Writing. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
1958. “Discussion”. Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Linguists. Oslo: Oslo University Press.Google Scholar
Pinker, Steven. 1994. The Language Instinct: How the mind creates language. New York: Morrow. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pullum, Geoffrey K. 2017. “Theory, Data, and the Epistemology of Syntax”. Grammatische Variation: Empirische Zugänge und theoretische Modellierung ed. by M. Konopka & A. Wöllstein, 283–298. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Read, Allen W. 1991. “A Personal Journey through Linguistics”. First Person Singular II ed. by E. F. K. Koerner, 273–88. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reibel, David & Sanford Schane, eds. 1969. Modern Studies in English. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Ritchie, William C. & Tej K. Bhatia, eds. 1996. Handbook of Second Language Acquisition. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Rusiecki, Jan. 1976. “The Development of Contrastive Linguistics”. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin 11.12–44.Google Scholar
Samarin, William J. 1998. “C’est passionant d’être passionné”. First Person Singular III: Autobiographies by North American Scholars in the Language Sciences ed. by E. F. K. Koerner, 187–226. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sampson, Geoffrey. 1975. The Form of Language. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.Google Scholar
. 1979. “A Non-Nativist Account of Language Universals”. Linguistics and Philosophy 31.99–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1980. Schools of Linguistics. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
. 1997. Educating Eve: The language instinct debate. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward. 1925. “Sound Patterns in Language”. Language 11.37–51. (Repr. in Readings in Linguistics ed. by Martin Joos, 19–25. New York: American Council of Learned Societies, 1957.)Google Scholar
. 1926. “Review of O. Jespersen, Mankind, Nation and Individual from a Linguistic Point of View ”. American Review of Sociology 321.488–99. (Repr. in The Collected Works of Edward Sapir I, 2031. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2008.)Google Scholar
Smith, Neil. 1989. The Twitter Machine: Reflections on Language. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
. 1999. Chomsky: Ideas and Ideals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stankiewicz, Edward. 1966. “Slavic Morphophonemics in Its Typological and Diachronic Aspect”. Current Trends in Linguistics, Vol.3: Theoretical Foundations ed. by T. A. Sebeok, 495–520. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Teeter, Karl V. 1963. “Lexicostatistics and Genetic Relationship”. Language 391.638–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1964. “Descriptive Linguistics in America: Triviality vs. Irrelevance”. Word 201.197–206. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thomas, Margaret. 2002. “Roger Bacon and Martin Joos: Generative Linguistics’ Reading of the Past”. Historiographia Linguistica 291.339–378. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trager, George L. 1946. “Changes of Emphasis in Linguistics: A Comment”. Studies in Philology 481.461–64.Google Scholar
1950. “Review of K. Pike, Phonemics: A technique for reducing languages to writing ”. Language 261.152–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1958. “Review of M. Joos (ed.), Readings in Linguistics ”. Studies in Linguistics 131.34–36.Google Scholar
Trager, George L. & Henry Lee Smith. 1951. An Outline of English Structure. Norman, Oklahoma: Battenburg Press.Google Scholar
Uhlenbeck, Eugenius M. 1959. “Review of M. Joos (ed.), Readings in Linguistics ”. Lingua 81.327–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1963. “An Appraisal of Transformation Theory”. Lingua 121.1–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1979. “Linguistics in America 1924–1974: A detached view”. The European Background of American Linguistics: Papers of the Third Golden Anniversary Symposium of the Linguistic Society of America ed. by Henry M. Hoenigswald, 121–145. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vachek, Josef, ed. 1964. A Prague School Reader in Linguistics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Van Valin, Robert D. 2007. “Some Thoughts on the Reason for the Lesser Status of Typology in the USA as Opposed to Europe”. Linguistic Typology 111.253–57.Google Scholar
Voegelin, Charles F. 1954. “The ACLS Language Program”. International Journal of American Linguistics 201.70–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1958. “Review of M. Joos (ed.), Readings in Linguistics ”. International Journal of American Linguistics 241.86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Voegelin, Charles F. & Florence M. Voegelin. 1963. “On the History of Structuralizing in 20th Century America”. Anthropological Linguistics 51.12–35.Google Scholar
Wardhaugh, Ronald. 1970. “The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis”. TESOL Quarterly 41.123–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Whitehall, Harold. 1951. Structural Essentials of English. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co.Google Scholar
Whorf, Benjamin L. 1952. Collected Papers on Metalinguistics. Washington: Foreign Service Institute.Google Scholar
1956. Language, Thought and Reality: Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Wierzbicka, Anna. 2012. “Understanding Others Requires Shared Concepts”. Pragmatics and Cognition 201.356–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yallop, Colin L. 1978. “The Problem of Linguistic Universals”. Philosophia Reformata 431.61–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Newmeyer, Frederick
2021. A post-Bloomfieldian’s last stand: Charles Hockett’s attempt to resign from the LSA in 1982. Language & History 64:1 ► pp. 44 ff. DOI logo
Newmeyer, Frederick J.
2020. Crisis in the Linguistic Society of America. Historiographia Linguistica 47:1 ► pp. 79 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 3 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.