The interjection as a grammatical category in John Wilkins’ philosophical language

Richard Nate
Universität Essen
Summary

Considering the fact that John Wilkins (1614–1672) constructed his artificial language as a mirror of reality, which should be based on logical principles, the incorporation of the interjection into his Natural Grammar seems surprising. It is probable that Wilkins kept the interjection as a grammatical category because it belonged to the fixed canon of the eight parts of speech in traditional Latin grammars. Moreover, interjections were conceived of as immediate, i.e., natural, expressions of feelings and were held to be universal. Wilkins’ description of interjections shows that he is aware of their pragmatic functions. His classification is based on communicative principles. In constructing his artificial writing system, however, Wilkins adheres to his rationalistic position and transforms the interjections into purely referential signs. Thus, his grammatical analysis reveals insights into the pragmatic functions of language for which there was no room in an artificial language based on logical principles.

Quick links
Full-text access is restricted to subscribers. Log in to obtain additional credentials. For subscription information see Subscription & Price. Direct PDF access to this article can be purchased through our e-platform.

References

Aarsleff, Hans
1992 [1976] “John Wilkins (1614–1672): A sketch of his life and work”. Subbiondo 1992.3–41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Amman, Johann Conrad
1873[1700] A Dissertation on Speech. London: Sampson Low, Marston, Low, & Searle. (Repr., Amsterdam: North-Holland 1965.)Google Scholar
Bacon, Francis
1858–1874 The Works of Francis Bacon. Collected and edited by James Spedding, Robert Leslie Ellis & Douglas Denon Heath. 14 vols. London: Longman. (Repr., Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt: Frommann-Holzboog 1961–1963.)Google Scholar
Bulwer, John
1648 Philocophus: Or, the Deafe and Dumbe Mans Friend. London: Humphrey Moseley.Google Scholar
1974[1644] Chirologia: Or The Natvrall Langvage of the Hand […] Whereunto is added Chironomia: Or, the Art of Manvall Rhetoricke. London: By Tho. Harper, and are to be sold by Henry Twyford. (New ed. by James W. Cleary. Carbondale & Edwardsville: Southern Illinois Univ. Press.)Google Scholar
Casaubon, Meric
1656 A Treatise Concerning Enthusiasme, As It Is an Effect of Nature. London: Printed by Roger Daniel, and are to be sold by Thomas Iohnson. (Repr., with an introduction by Paul J. Korshin, Gainesville, Fla.: Scolars’ Facsimiles and Reprints 1970.)Google Scholar
Coseriu, Eugenio
1972 Die Geschichte der Sprachphilosophie von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart: Eine Übersicht. Teil II: Von Leibniz bis Rousseau. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Edmondson, Willis & Juliane House
1981 Let’s Talk and Talk about It: A pedagogic interactional grammar of English. München-Wien-Baltimore: Urban & Schwarzenberg.Google Scholar
Frank, Thomas
1992 “Wilkins’ Natural Grammar: The verb phrase”. Subbiondo 1992.263–275. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hale, Matthew
1677 The Primitive Origination of Mankind, Considered And Examined According to The Light of Nature. London: By William Godbid, for William Shrowsbery. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harris, Roy
1980 The Language Makers. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Hildebrandt, Rudolf
1976 Cartesianische Linguistik: Eine Analyse der Sprachauffassung Noam Chomskys. Frankfurt a.M. & Bern: Lang.Google Scholar
Hüllen, Werner
1989 “Their Manner of Discourse”: Nachdenken über Sprache im Umkreis der Royal Society. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
1994 “Von Kopf bis Fuß: Das Vokabular zur Bezeichnung des menschlichen Körpers in zwei onomasiologischen Wörterbüchern des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts”. The World in a List of Words ed. by Werner Hüllen, 105–122. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jakobson, Roman
1960 “Linguistics and Poetics”. Style in Language ed. by Thomas A. Sebeok, 350–377. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lancelot, Claude & Antoine Arnauld
1975[1660] The Port-Royal Grammar. English transl, ed. by Jacques Rieux & Bernard E. Rollin. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Michael, Ian
1970 English Grammatical Categories and the Tradition to 1800. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Nate, Richard
1993a Natursprachenmodelle des 17. Jahrhunderts. (= Studium Sprachwissenschaft; Beihefte, 21.) Münster: Nodus Publikationen.Google Scholar
1993b “Paradigmen und die Geschichtsschreibung der Linguistik: Zu Problemen der historiographischen Kategorienbildung”. Beiträge zur Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft 3.1–23.Google Scholar
Padley, G[eorge] A[rthur]
1976 Grammatical Theory in Western Europe 1500–1700: The Latin tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
1985 Grammatical Theory in Western Europe 1500–1700: Trends in vernacular grammar I. Ibid.Google Scholar
Salmon, Vivian
1992[1975] “Philosophical Grammar in John Wilkins’ Essay ”. Subbiondo 1992.349–364. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schreyer, Rüdiger
1980 “The Language of Nature: Inquiries into a concept of 18th-century British linguistics”. Progress in Linguistic Historiography: Papers from the International Conference on the History of the Language Sciences ed. by Konrad Koerner, 155–173. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slaughter, Mary M.
1982 Universal Languages and Scientific Taxonomy in the Seventeenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Subbiondo, Joseph L.
ed. 1992 John Wilkins and 17th-Century British Linguistics. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vorlat, Emma
1975 The Development of English Grammatical Theory 1585–1737; with special reference to the theory of parts of speech. Leuven: Leuven Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Welte, Werner
1985 Die englische Gebrauchsgrammatik. Teil I: Geschichte und Grundannahmen. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Wilkins, John
1668 An Essay Towards a Real Character and a Philosophical Language. London: Printed for Sa: Gellibrand, and for John Martin. (Repr., Menston: Scolar Press 1968.)Google Scholar