Anthropological Linguistics

The study of language within the context of anthropology and the inevitable overlap between the studies of language and culture has been long recognized by the fathers of the discipline of anthropology, which has been known as Ethnolinguistics. Sir Edward Taylor, Marett, and Malinowski works began with the conviction that language and culture need an integral study, particularly in case of the simple societies of the world.

     Anthropological linguist refer to a four field study of human beings that contains the fallowing fields: Physical Anthropology, Archeology, Socio Cultural Anthropology and Linguistic Anthropology.

     First fieldworks were done in linguistically oriented case studies and on the investigation of single languages concerning their association to culture or cultural modes of thought.

     There are different approaches within anthropological linguistics, Malinowski’s investigation of planting activities that combine language with physical activities led him to conclude that language is one of the main cultural forces – an adjunct of physical activities and by this an equivalent of gestures and movement. Malinowski furthermore concluded that:

-          Verbal acts are part of human behavior

-          Language is an autonomous cultural aspect with unique, unreplaceable function

-          A single language is determined by its users’ needs and interests

-          Language is part of planned behavior

     However, the single most outstanding contribution to the study of linguistic anthropology came from Franz Boas during the first quarter of the 20^th century. Boas, Sapir, Bloomfield and many others continued their interest in the study of language as an anthropological exercise with the rejection of mentalism and reinforcing the descriptive method.

     In 1911 Franz Boas published his Handbook of American Indian Language. Part 1, and set a direction for American linguistics. In this book Boas demonstrates the relationship between linguistics and anthropology. He discussed this in terms of two interrelated issues. One is the practical need for an anthropologist to learn the language of the indigenous people where (s) he intends  to work, because there are topics like poetry, prayers, oratory and personal and local names, which could be most effectively approaches through learning the local language. The second one is more theoretical, as there are a whole lot of ‘unconscious phenomena’ – such as the classification of ideas and expressed by same or related terms, metaphors and their uses etc.— which can only be best understood by learning the indigenous language.

     Boas empirically looked for the cultural root. The abstract linguistic theorizing, for him and others descriptivist, was a means to an end of practical description of particular language, rather than thinking of individual languages as sources of data for the construction of a general theory of language.

     Boas aptly remarked, “Whatever our literary and artistic or our philosophical and religious grasp of human ways, the scientific understanding of man will in all likelihood grow from our understanding of language…”

     Sapir and Whorf and the emergence of cognitive anthropology during the middle of 20^th century, connecting language with cultural analysis, consolidated into new areas of ethnolinguistics. Studies of the native perception of color, diseases, kinship etc. opened up a new dimension to understanding of culture with the help of language.

     Edward Sapir ranged widely through and around his subject, finding out its relations with literature, music, anthropology, and psychology, thus the influence of language on every department of human life. His Selected Writings in Mandelbaum’ Language, Culture and Personality shows the width of his scholarship. Descriptivism in general had a shortcoming in that one of its key principles was that a general theory of human language was unimportant and hence, less emphasis on theorization and more on the analytic practice.

     Between the main Sapir’s contributions are: Classification of Native American languages, Linguistic theory, Anthropological thought and Breadth of languages studied.ACTIVITY