《Contributions to the Science of Text and Language - Word Length Studies and Related Issues 2007》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《Contributions to the Science of Text and Language - Word Length Studies and Related Issues 2007（354页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、 Contributions to the Science of Text and Language Text, Speech and Language Technology VOLUME 31 Series Editors Editorial Board Jean Vronis, Universit de Provence and CNRS, France Kenneth W. Church, AT second, to raise possible critical points as to the envisioned methodology, and to discuss forese
2、eable problems which might arise during the project; and third, to discuss, at the very beginning, options to prepare data, and analytical procedures, in such a way that they might be publicly useful and available not only during the project, but afterwards, as well. Since, with the exception of the
3、 introductory essay, the articles appear in alphabetical order, they shall be briefl y commented upon here in relation to their thematic relevance. TheintroductorycontributionbyPeterGrzybekontheHistoryandMethod- ology of Word Length Studies attempts to offer a general starting point and, in fact, pr
4、ovides an extensive survey on the state of the art. This contribution con- the present, and it offers an extensive overview not only of the development of word length studies, but of contemporary approaches, as well. The contributions by Gejza Wimmer from Slovakia and Gabriel Altmann from Germany, a
5、s well as the one by Victor Kromer from Russia, follow this line of research, in so far as they are predominantly theory-oriented. Whereas WimmerandAltmanntrytoachieveanall-encompassingUnifi edDerivationof Some Linguistic Laws, Kromers contribution About Word Length Distribution is more specifi c, c
6、oncentrating on a particular model of word length frequency distribution. As compared to such theory-oriented studies, a number of contributions are located at the other end of the research spectrum: concentrating less on mere theoretical aspects of word length, they are related to the authors work
7、on text corpora. Whereas Reinhard K ohler from Germany, understanding a Text CorpusasanAbstractDataStructure,triestogenerallyoutlineTheArchitecture of a Universal Corpus Interface, the contributions by Primo z Jakopin from Slovenia, Marko Tadi c from Croatia, and Du sko Vitas, Gordana Pavlovi c- La
8、zeti c, onthebasisoftheirstudy,theauthorsarriveatthe conclusion that sometimes, in describing linguistic phenomena, less complex models are suffi cient, as long as the principle of data homogeneity is obeyed. The volume thus offering a broad spectrum of word length studies, should be of interest not
9、 only to experts in general linguistics and text scholarship, but in related fi elds as well. Only a closer co-operation between experts from the above-mentioned fi elds will provide an adequate basis for further insight into what is actually going on in language(s) and text(s), and it is the hope o
10、f this volume to make a signifi cant contribution to these efforts. Thisvolumewouldnothaveseenthelightofdaywithouttheinvaluablehelp and support of many individuals and institutions. First and foremost, my thanks goes to Gabriel Altmann, who has accompanied the whole project from its very beginnings,
11、 and who has nurtured it with his competence and enthusiasm Preface Lower Sorbian in this case. Gordana Antic, Emmerich Kelih, any remaining fl aws are my responsibility. Peter Grzybek Prefacexii INTRODUCTORY REMARKS: ON THE SCIENCE OF LANGUAGE IN LIGHT OF THE LANGUAGE OF SCIENCE Peter Grzybek The s
12、eemingly innocent formulation as to a science of language in light of the language of science is more than a mere play on words: rather, this for- mulation may turn out to be relatively demanding, depending on the concrete understanding of the terms involved particularly, placing the term science in
13、to a framework of a general theory of science. No doubt, there is more than one theory of science, and it is not the place here to discuss the philosophical implications of this fi eld in detail. Furthermore, it has become commonplace to refuse the concept of a unique theory of science, and to disti
14、nguish between a general theory of science and specifi c theories of science, relevant for indi- vidual sciences (or branches of science). This tendency is particularly strong in the humanities, where 19th century ideas as to the irreconcilable antagony of human and natural, of weak and hard science
15、s, etc., are perpetuated, though sophisticatedly updated in one way or another. quently, the far-reaching implications of the understanding of the term) is not the same all across the disciplines. As far as linguistics, which is at stake here, is concerned, the self-evaluation of this discipline cle
16、arly is that it fulfi lls the requirements of being a science, as Smith (1989: 26) correctly puts it: Linguistics likes to think of itself as a science in the sense that it makes testable, i.e. potentially falsifi able, statements or predictions. The relevant question is not, however, to which extent linguistics considers itself to be a science; rather, the question must be, to which extent does lin- guistics satisfy the needs of a general theory of science. And the same holds tru
