Nur Fitriyah

20207479026 (2A Regular Friday)

Adv.Linguistics
Dr.Oom Rohmah Syamsudin

A Modern Linguistics And Structuralism by

The Expert Field Of Linguist
As human beings, we all learn to speak at least one language. The language which we
hear as we grow up-unless we are abnormal. Because this common ability, we tend to takes
this precious possession of language very much granted. If we ask the man in the street what
language is, he might say “Oh it is what we use in communication” or “its is made up sounds
when we speak” or “ its refer to things” or “ Its statements contains a part of a truth. But as an
English teachers, our curiosity about language about language, the subject we teach, cannot
be satisfied by such vague general statements or bits of unrelated information. That all,
explation has describe the language is used for communication. Languange it’s a system,
language it’s a phenomenon. Its means of communication between individuals also brings
them into relationship with their envirovment. 1 (Kiat Boey Lim, 2009)

What Its Linguistics ?

According (Eliason et al., 1965)Linguistics is ussualy defined as ‘the scientific study of
languange’ such statement. How ever, this raises twi furtur questions : what do we mean by ‘
scientific’? When we say that a linguist aims to be scientific, we mean that attemts to study
language in much the same way as scientist studies physics or chemistry, that is
systematically and as far as possible without prejudice. 2
linguists are engaged in the scientific study of language, they approach language, as was
noted earlier, “dispassionately,” preferring to describe it in an unbiased and objective manner.
However, linguists have their biases too, and the next section explores the ideological basis of
language: the idea that all views of language are grounded in beliefs about how language
should be valued. The final section describes two competing theories of language – Noam
Chomsky’s theory of generative gram- mar and Michael A. K. Halliday’s theory of functional

1
Boey Kiat Lim. An Introduction To Linguistics For The Languange Teacher. 1975, p. 1-3
2
Tod Loret. An Introduction To Linguistics. 1987 p. 1-2

1
grammar – and how these theories have influenced the view of language presented in this
book. 3 (Eliason et al., 1965)

Theorizing about language

Linguists differ ideologically not only with the general public but among themselves
too. As a result, linguists have developed a variety of different theories about language, each
having a different emphasis. Since the advent of generative grammar in the 1950s, many
linguists have been primarily concerned with developing theories that are competence-based,
i.e. centered on the belief that language is mainly a property of the mind.

Noam Chomsky is the principal proponent of competence based theories of language.

Chomsky revolutionized linguistics (as well as philosophy and psychology) in the 1950s by
publishing a book, Syntactic Structures (1957), outlining his theory of generative grammar,
and by writing a highly influential critique of B. F. Skinner’s Verbal Learning and Verbal
Behavior (1959). Chomsky developed his theory of language during a period when
behaviorist psychology dominated thinking about language. Because behaviorists viewed
language as a product of experience, they believed that children entered life with a tabula
rasa (blank slate), and learned lan- guage only after being exposed to it. Chomsky countered
that this view had to be wrong because children were able to produce linguistic structures that
they could not possibly have encountered through everyday experience (the notion of poverty
of stimulus). Chomsky therefore concluded that all human beings were born with an innate
capacity for language, and that it was therefore more important to study what languages had
in common rather than how they differed. To reflect this emphasis, he postulated the notion
of universal grammar: the idea that every individual, regardless of the language they
ultimately spoke, had within their linguistic competence a language acquisition device
containing a set of universal principles.

These universal principles formed the basis of Chomsky’s theory of generative

grammar. In this theory, which has undergone numerous modifications since its inception in
the 1950s, Chomsky developed a formal notation, grounded in mathematics, that explicitly
described the knowledge of language that is part of any speaker’s linguistic competence. A
key tenet of this theory is the notion of creativity: the idea that from a finite set of rules
within a speaker’s competence, an infinite set of sentences could be generated. The notion of
3
Meyer Charles, F Chambridge Univeristy, Introducing English Linguistics. 2002. p. 3

2
creativity became a defining characteristic of human language – something that distinguished
it from all other systems of communication. Chomsky’s notions about human language were
so revolutionary and influential that they completely changed the field of linguistics, and
ushered in what is now referred to as the modern era of linguistics. 4

Modern Linguistics Structuralism

“Modern linguistics” is the chosen title for an emerging field of studies that has
potential for radically affecting many long-held principles of biblical interpretation. Though it
so recent that it does not yet have widespread-agreed-upon terminology, the discipline has
adopted some terms that may not be familiar to most. “Phonology” refers to the elementary
sounds of language (phonemes), “morphology” to the smallest meaningful units of language
(morphemes), “syntax” to the formation of phrases and sentences from these smaller units,
and “semantics” to the meanings of morphemes and words and various ways to construct
larger units. “Discourse” is a structural portion of language longer than a sentence. Modern
linguists look upon their approach to language as indispensable to an interpretation of
Scripture. They profess to trace a thought as it begins in the human mind to physiological
abilities in making sounds to how these sounds become words, then sentences, paragraphs,
and discourse. Following this sequence leads them to be strongly critical of what have been
viewed as standard lexical works for NT study because of those works’ neglect of disco urse,
sentences, and paragraphs. At the present stage in the development of modern linguistics,
much uncertainty prevails among its adherents regard ing definitions and procedures.5

The modern field of linguistics dates from the beginning of the 19th century. While ancient
India and Greece had a remarkable grammatical tradition, throughout most of history
linguistics had been the province of philosophy, rhetoric, and literary analysis to try to figure
out how human language works. But in 1786, an amazing discovery was made: There are
regular sound correspondences among many of the languages spoken in Europe, India, and
Persia. For example, the English 'f' sound often corresponds to a 'p' sound in, among others,
Latin and Sanskrit, an important ancient language of India:

4
Meyer Charles, F Chambridge Univeristy, Introducing English Linguistics. 2002. p. 15-16
5
MODERN LINGUISTICS VERSUS TRADITIONAL HERMENEUTICS*Robert L. Thomas, Evangelical Hermeneutics 196-208.

3
ENGLISH LATIN SANSKRIT
Father Pater Pitar
Full Plenus Pumas
For Per Parl

Modern linguistics began with historical linguistics, the study of language is called a
comparative historical approach. Based on antropology , the study of languange in terms as a
parts of human developments. With works enterly centering around hindu European studies,
modern linguistics are develop in the 18th century, It leading with a highly elaborate and
consistent recontraction of the proto-indo-european. 6
Because language is a system of communication, it is useful to compare it with other
systems of communication. For instance, humans communicate not just through language but
through such means as gesture, art, dress, and music. Although some argue that higher
primates such as chimpanzees possess the equivalent of human language, most animals have
their own systems of communication: dogs exhibit submission by lowering their heads and
tails; bees, in contrast, dance. Before Chompsky, the study of communication systems has its
origins in semiotics, a field of inquiry that originated in the work of Ferdinand de Saussure
a Swis Linguist on the forst half of 20th century, in a series of lectures published in A Course
in General Linguistics (1916). According to Saussure, meaning in semiotic systems is
expressed by signs, which have a particular form, called a signifier, and some meaning that
the signifier conveys, called the signified. Thus, in English, the word table would have two
different signifiers. 7

The Principle of Modern Linguistics :

8
Acording to Sussure Structuralism can be like defined theoretical approach to
analysis of language that describe the linguistics items in terms of structure. Structuralism,
in linguistics, any one of several schools of 20th-century linguistics committed to the
structuralist principle that a languageis a self-contained relational structure, the elements of
which derive their existence and their value from their distribution and oppositions in texts or
discourse. This principle was first stated clearly, for linguistics, by the Swiss
scholar Ferdinand de Saussure (1857–1913). Saussurean structuralism was further developed

6
https://www.linguisticsociety.org/resource/history-modern-linguistics
7
Meyer Charles, F Chambridge Univeristy, Introducing English Linguistics. 2002. p. 3
8
https://www.britannica.com/science/structuralism-linguistics

4
in somewhat different directions by the Prague school, glossematics, and other European
movements.
Saussure is one of the most influence figures in linguistics. His view of linguistics

considered as ‘new’ because of its difference with traditional linguistics i.e. historical

linguistics. It is consisted of the study of phonology principal, structural and historical

linguistics, etc. After his appearance with those influential ideas, many linguists also appear

and use his ideas as the approach in linguistics, such as Leonard Bloomfield, Charles Francis

Hocke, Andre Martinet, Ed- ward Sapir, and many more. These people are as many as who

oppose him in linguistics. Even so, structural linguistics is still most influence view of

linguistics in this era, and the Course in General Linguistics of Saussure has a huge role in it.

As many people know that Ferdinand de Saussure is the founder of structuralism, and he

has big role in modern linguistic. 9 Structuralism was born from the development of many
fields. There are many changes from social structure to linguistic structure. Social scientists
focus has moved from the social to language. Structuralism has become more interesting
because of its study about speaking of signs practices where the meaning is the product of
structure which available at the outside of human agents 10

If traditional linguistic depends on the patern of Greek and Latin grammar in

describing some language, the modern linguistic is trying to describe some language
according to characteristic of language itself. This view is the result of new concepts and
views of language which presented by Ferdinand de Saussure as the writer say above.
Structuralism in linguistics is ‘a descriptive approach to a synchronic or diachronic analysis
of language’. But ‘diachronic’ analysis is precisely one that deals with ‘historical’ and, where
they are a source for our knowledge of a history. This analysis is ‘the basis of its structure as
reflected by irreducible units of phonological, morphological, and semantic features’. This

9
Mudjia Rahardja, Ferdinand de Saussure: Bapak Linguistik Modern dan Pelopor Strukturalisme, Lingua,
Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa dan Sastra, Fakultas Huma- niora dan Budaya, Universitas Islam Negeri (UIN) Malang,
Volume 1, Nomor 1, September 2003, p. 1

10
Hadi, Strukturalisme ala Ferdinand de Saussure, filsafat.kompsiana. com/2010/05/02/strukturalisme-ala-
ferdinand-de-saussure, May 2nd 2010

5
seems to imply that the units that structural linguists establish are necessarily of these three

kinds.11

Ferdinand de Saussure is the first person who formulates the way to analyze the language
systematically which also can be used to analyze signs system. He said that language is a sys-
tem of signs to express the idea then can be compared with the writen record, symbolic
ceremony, manner, etc. Structuralism analyzes how a person thinks from the concept until the
ap- pearance of signs and makes the form a language system. 12

Ferdinand Saussure ideas on structuralism.

We can say that basic claim of structuralism is a language structured system. Also, Saussure
on the book he was presented, he argued that each element in languange is defined by how it
is related to other elements. Here’s several structuralism on Modern Linguistics by Ferdinand
Saussure

 The first element in structuralism is descriptive, not prescriptive.

Prescriptivism is used within traditional linguistics for descriptivism, which
means linguists describe the rules and facts of language as they making any
judgments. Linguists try to impose norms of correctness as those prescriptive
linguists do before not try to change the actual usage of the native speaker
language. This idea contras with the previous view of traditional grammar like
strongly prescriptive the principle of descriptiveness reflect the present day
view about language change. Before structuralism was held, linguistics
change involves corruption is forbidden. After that modern linguistics states
that language transformation it’s a natural process.
 The next its, spoken language. Spoken language is more basic than written
language, in the text we have great both variations between vocabulary and

11
Peter Mathews, A Short History of Structural Linguistics (University of Cambridge, Cambridge, 2003), p.

12
Hadi, Strukturalisme ala Ferdinand de Saussure, filsafat.kompsiana.com /2010/05/02/strukturalisme-ala-
ferdinand-de-saussure, May 2nd 2010

6
 grammar choices. The written language does not reflect an understanding of
language, because we have to analyze both spoken and written language.
 The third is about synchronic and diachronic, the description of this is they
are considered like two basic principles that can be applied to the student of
language. Synchronic linguistics studies languages at a certain point of time at
a single point of time. At a single point of the time it may be the present-day
situation or like any given period in history language development. For
diachronic linguistics, it can be defined as the studies of language
development. From the viewpoint of their historical development, we can see
the difference between diachronic and synchronic linguistics, one is the study
of language at a certain point of time and one is the view of language within
its historical development we move on like we have another principle which
is all languages
 The fourth is about equality in language, which means that for a linguist all
languages serve as the data for objective study which eliminates subjectivity
like it was common earlier to call certain languages primitive that those
languages are considered. The best language is what the term primitive
determined within modern linguistics, every existing natural language is a
highly developed system, and also structure does not directly correlate with
the stage of social development of that speech community
 The last principle it’s the paradigmatic and the centigramatic this relation of
linguistic units enters into relations of two different types or two different
kinds. This identity like it within the language system first enters into
paradigmatic relations with all the other elements of the same level. The same
level can also be used in the same context, for example, we have a cup of milk
the word cup it can be replaced by a glass or a mug or a bottle so these
elements mentioning its stand on paradigmatic relationships. 13

Noam Chomsky's ideas on structuralism.

Noam Chomsky is a linguistic figure who initiated the transformative generative
theory which is also known as cognitive generative theory. Chomsky discusses aspects of
language and psychology and then combines them into one part with cognitive language
forms. The generative transformative theory proposed by Chomsky states that language is the
13
Parera, Jos Daniel. 1983. Pengantar Linguistik Umum Kisah Zaman. Ende Flores : Nusa Inda

7
key to knowing human reason and mind. Chomsky distinguishes the problem of internal
structure and external structure, namely between language skills (competence) and language
actions (performance), as well as creations in language based on nature and universal.
Language knowledge competence is the knowledge of speakers of a language about the
language. The competencies stored in the human brain provide the possibility to carry out the
language process. While performance is the act/implementation of language based on
competence in the form of speaking or understanding speech. Performance can be defined as
a person's skill in using language.14

Differences in Linguistic Theory of Ferdinand De Saussure and Noam Chomsky

Based on the description of the two linguistic theories that have been put forward, it is clear
that there are differences of opinion regarding language.
1. Ferdinand De Saussure views linguistics as a speech behavior and
conventional language as a result of habits that have become conventions in
society.
2. Chomsky views linguistics as an ability or competence that humans are born
with and consists of structures that are universal.
Modern linguists look upon their approach to language as indispensable to an interpretation
of Scripture. They profess to trace a thought as it begins in the human mind to physiological
abilities in making sounds to how these sounds become words, then sentences, paragraphs,
and discourse. Following this sequence leads them to be strongly critical of what have been
viewed as standard lexical works for NT study because of those works’ neglect of disco urse,
sentences, and paragraphs. At the present stage in the development of modern linguistics,
much uncertainty prevails among its adherents regard ing definitions and procedures. In
certain respects this relatively new field agrees partially with traditional principles of biblical
interpretation, usually called grammatical-historical hermeneutics. The areas of agreement
include matters like divine inspiration, the importance of literary context, the need for careful
study of words in their developing usage, and thorough understanding of grammatical
relationships and historical-cultural backgrounds. Proponents of modern linguistics recognize
the overlap of their studies with traditional exegesis, but feel that their new discipline has
additional contributions to make to biblical understanding. With these brief facts in mind, the

14
Hasibuan, Abdulah E-Journal “PERBEDAAN TEORI LINGUISTIK FERDINAND DE SAUSSURE DAN
NOAM CHOMSKY “ Parera, Jos Daniel. 1983. Pengantar Linguistik Umum Kisah Zaman. Ende Flores :
Nusa Inda

8
remainder of this essay will deal with principles that differentiate modern linguistics from
traditional grammatical historical hermeneutics.15
While linguists may share a number of assumptions about language, they approach
the study of language from different theoretical perspectives. Because linguists influenced by
Noam Chomsky’s views on lan- guage believe that language is primarily a product of the
mind, they are more concerned with studying linguistic competence: the uncon- scious
knowledge of rules that every human possesses. Other linguists take a more expansive view
of language, believing that it is just as valu- able to study language in social contexts and to
consider the structure of texts as well as the structure of sentences occurring in texts. This
book takes this second approach to the study of the English language. After a discussion in
the next chapter of the history of English and the basic concepts that explain language
change, the subsequent chapters focus on the social basis of the English language, the various
principles affecting the structure of texts, and grammatical rules describing the form of the
smaller components of language found in texts, from the sentence down to the individual
speech sound. 16

15
Robert L. Thomas, Evangelical Hermeneutics 196-208. 23
16
Meyer Charles, F Chambridge Univeristy, Introducing English Linguistics. 2002. p. 15

9
10