Cover not available
Part of
Normativity in Language and Linguistics
Edited by Aleksi Mäkilähde, Ville Leppänen and Esa Itkonen
[Studies in Language Companion Series 209] 2019
► pp. 213–234

Intuition and beyond

A hierarchy of descriptive methods

From the methodological point of view, linguistics is not a monolith. Nor is it an arbitrary conglomerate of unrelated methods. Rather, the methods most commonly used in linguistic description constitute a definite hierarchy that is motivated both logically and temporally, namely: intuition-based research > corpus research > experimentation. The last stage is in turn divided into loose (i.e. questionnaire method) and strict (e.g. eye movement research). It is the purpose of the present article to justify this thesis in some detail.

Keywords: hierarchy of linguistic methods, intuition-based research, corpus research, experimentation, norms, normativity
Article outline
  • 1.Preliminary remarks
  • 2.The primacy of intuition
    • 2.1Intuition-based linguistics
    • 2.2Normative filters involved in corpus linguistics
  • 3.Beyond intuition
    • 3.1Recourse to corpus
    • 3.2Recourse to questionnaire (plus corpus)
      • 3.2.1Knowledge of semantic networks
      • 3.2.2Knowledge of derivations
      • 3.2.3Knowledge of rare words
  • 4.Strict experimentation
    • 4.1An example
    • 4.2The hierarchy of the methods involved in experimentation
  • Note
  • References
Published online: 4 December 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.209.08paj
References
Aronoff, Mark & Lindsay, Mark
2014 Productivity, blocking, and lexicalization. In The Oxford Handbook of Derivational Morphology, Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer (eds), 67–83. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Bach, Emmon
1974 Syntactic Theory. New York NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam
1957 Syntactic Structures. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
1975 [1955] The Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory. New York NY: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Coppieters, René
1987 Competence differences between native and near-native speakers. Language 63: 544–573. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dąbrowska, Eva
2012 Different speakers, different grammars: Individual differences in native language attainment. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 2(3): 219–253. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Droste, Flip G. & Joseph, John E.
(eds) 1991 Linguistic Theory and Grammatical Description [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 75]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gonzalez-Marquez, Monica, Mittelberg, Irene, Coulson, Seana & Spivey, Michael J.
(eds) 2007 Methods in Cognitive Linguistics [Human Cognitive Processing 18]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haiman, John
1985 Natural Syntax. Iconicity and Erosion. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hakulinen, Auli & Karlsson, Fred
1979 Nykysuomen lauseoppia (Modern Finnish Syntax). Helsinki: SKS.Google Scholar
Itkonen, Esa
1980 Qualitative vs. quantitative analysis in linguistics. In Evidence and Argumentation in Linguistics, Thomas A. Perry (ed.), 334–366. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1991 Universal History of Linguistics. India, China, Arabia, Europe [Studies in the History of the Language Sciences 65]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2000  Tolkaappiyam: The basic work of the ancient Tamil language and culture. SKY Journal of Linguistics 10: 75–99.Google Scholar
2001 The relation of non-Western approaches to linguistic typology. In Language Typology and Language Universals, Vol. 1, Martin Haspelmath, Ekkehard König, Wulf Oesterreicher & Wolfgang Raible (eds), 275–279. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2003 What is Language? A Study in the Philosophy of Linguistics. Turku: University of Turku.Google Scholar
Itkonen, Esa & Pajunen, Anneli
2010 Empiirisen kielitieteen metodologia (Methodology of Empirical Linguistics). Helsinki: SKS.Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto
1922 Language. Its Nature, Origin, and Development. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Keuleers, Emmanuel, Stevens, Michaël, Mandera, Paweł & Brysbaert, Marc
2015 Word knowledge in the crowd: Measuring vocabulary size and word prevalence in a massive online experiment. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 68(8): 1665–1692. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koivisto, Vesa
2013 Suomen sanojen rakenne (The Structure of Finnish Words). Helsinki: SKS.Google Scholar
Koskenniemi, Kimmo
1995–2017 FinTwol: Finnish Morphological Analyser. Helsinki: Lingsoft.Google Scholar
Labov, William
1972 Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Pajunen, Anneli
2001 Argumenttirakenne (Argument structure of Finnish Verbs). Helsinki: SKS.Google Scholar
2002 HS2000, Helsingin Sanomat 2000–2001. A newspaper corpus with 31 million word forms, analyzed with Functional Dependency Grammar-analyser (Voutilainen 1995, Connexor). Copyright © Sanoma Oy.Google Scholar
2006 Verbisanaston uudistuminen (The renewal of the verb lexicon). Puhe ja kieli 26(4): 205–219.Google Scholar
Pajunen, Anneli, Itkonen, Esa & Vainio, Seppo
2015 Sanamerkityksen hallinta nuorilla aikuisilla (Variation in lexical-semantic network knowledge: Young Finnish Adults). Virittäjä 119(2): 160–187.Google Scholar
Ravid, D. & Avidor, A.
1998 Acquisition of derived nominals in Hebrew: Developmental and linguistic principles. Journal of Child Language 25: 229–236. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schoonen, R. & Verhallen, M.
2008 The assessment of deep word knowledge in young first and second language learners. Language Testing 25(2): 211–236. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, Norbert, Wun Ching Ng, Janice & Garras, John
2011 The word association format: Validation evidence. Language Testing 28(1): 105–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vainio, Seppo, Hyönä, Jukka & Pajunen, Anneli
2003 A facilitatory and inhibitory effects of grammatical agreement: Evidence from readers’ eye fixation patterns. Brain and language 85: 197–202. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 Processing modifier-head agreement in reading: Evidence for a delayed effect of agreement. Memory & Cognition 36: 329–340. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vainio, Seppo, Pajunen, Anneli & Häikiö, Tuomo
2019 Acquisition of Finnish derivational morphology: School-age children and young adults. First Language 39(2): 139–157. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Virtanen, Patrik & Pajunen, Anneli
2002 ContextMill: The Easy to Use Concordancer. Turku: Aurit Software.Google Scholar
Voutilainen, Atro
1995 Functional Dependency Grammar: Morphological Description. Helsinki: Connexor.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Foolen, Ad
2023. Linguistic Feeling in Real Life and in Linguistics. In Emotions, Metacognition, and the Intuition of Language Normativity, ► pp. 267 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 march 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.