Abstract
The neo-grammarian school (1870-1900) established a conception of linguistics as a science based on detailed observation of language and accurate formulation of observed processes. This has led to a shift of attention from historical studies to the investigation of living language, which is better able to meet the requirements of this conception. The validity of traditional historical methods of reconstruction and explanation has appeared increasingly suspect. The insight of descriptive structural linguistics may help to refine the formulation of historical systems and processes, but cannot establish their validity, nor provide more than a most restricted dynamic of language change. This must spring from the establishment of the dimensions of variation within a language community, the conditions of usage and balance of apparently competing forms (linguistic ecology), and the observation of the action of selection pressures upon their distribution.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.