• Forthcoming titles
      • New in paperback
      • New titles by subject
      • May 2022
      • April 2022
      • March 2022
      • February 2022
      • New serials
      • Latest issues
      • Currently in production
      • Active series
      • Other series
      • Open-access books
      • Text books & Course books
      • Dictionaries & Reference
      • By JB editor
      • Active serials
      • Other
      • By JB editor
      • Printed catalogs
      • E-book collections
      • Amsterdam (Main office)
      • Philadelphia (North American office)
      • General
      • US, Canada & Mexico
      • E-books
      • Examination & Desk Copies
      • General information
      • Access to the electronic edition
      • Special offers
      • Terms of Use
      • E-newsletter
      • Book Gazette
Article published in:
History of Linguistics 2005: Selected papers from the Tenth International Conference on the History of the Language Sciences (ICHOLS X), 1–5 September 2005, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois
Edited by Douglas A. Kibbee
[Studies in the History of the Language Sciences 112] 2007
► pp. 274–287

Privileged languages and others in the history of historical-comparative linguistics

Hans Henrich Hock | University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
In historical-comparative linguistics some languages commonly hold a special, privileged position. I consider several cases of this type and the effects of such privileging on historical-comparative linguistics. The best documented case is that of Sanskrit, whose “deprivileging” in the late 19th century led to an improved understanding of PIE phonology. My major focus is on Dravidian, whose southern literary languages are commonly considered closest to the proto-language. Steever (1988) has shown that certain syntactic constructions are preserved better in the northern, “tribal” languages. I have adduced further examples of syntactic innovations in the southern languages (Hock 2001). The privileging of southern Dravidian thus turns out to be a similar mistake as the earlier privileging of Sanskrit in Indo-European linguistics. I conclude by noting that similar problems characterize much of synchronic linguistics, where standard languages and, sometimes, certain regional dialects take precedence over the majority of regional and social dialects.
Published online: 28 November 2007
https://doi.org/10.1075/sihols.112.22hoc
Share via FacebookShare via TwitterShare via LinkedInShare via WhatsApp
About us | Disclaimer | Privacy policy | | | | Antiquariathttps://benjamins.com