Linguistics, History of

EF Konrad Koerner, Zentrum fr Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft (ZAS), Berlin, Germany

2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Abstract

The development of the history of linguistics as a serious scholarly activity has its own long history that can be traced in the
textbooks from mid-nineteenth to the mid-twentieth century. It is, however, only since the 1970s that the history of
linguistics/language sciences has developed into a subdiscipline of linguistics in general and a subject to which the beginning
level students of the discipline would be introduced as part and parcel of their formal education. In this article four main
approaches to writing the history of linguistics are distinguished and discussed: (1), the summing up of the history, which
presents the results of established procedures within the discipline; (2) the revolutionary history intended as propaganda for
a new paradigm; (3), the non-partisan constructive history, which emphasizes continuity and progress in the discipline; and
(4) the historiography of linguistics, a relatively new approach that seeks to treat the history of linguistics as a scholarly
endeavor in its own right which may also inform work in other linguistic subdisciplines.

A discipline comes of age when it seriously contemplates its followed largely the Chomskyan manner of misappropriating
own past. The History of Linguistics (HoL) now frequently the history of linguistics for political purposes.)
referred to as History of the Language Sciences is an attempt It is true that we could perhaps by now speak of a 200-year
to steer away from a narrow view of linguistic science. HoL as tradition of linguistic history writing, perhaps beginning with
a bona de subject of academic research (in which doctoral Franois Thurots (17681832) 1796 Tableau des progrs de la
dissertations can be written, for instance) began to develop science grammaticale (cf Andresen, 1978), although several
only during the late 1960s, although such work had previously earlier works have been cited, for instance Elias Caspar Reich-
been done in departments of Germanic, Romance, or Slavic ards (17141791) Versuch einer Historie der deutschen
where such research surveys were at times undertaken to Sprachkunst of 1747 (cf Koerner, 1978a: vi, for references to
delineate the course a particular eld had taken or the evolu- other eighteenth-century works). However, as the record
tion of a specic idea or research project. It has been customary, suggests (Koerner, 1978a: pp. 14), it is only from the late
at least since the 1880s, to add an historical introduction to 1860s onwards that a more thorough type of treatment of HoL
textbooks in linguistics, but usually the intent has been to show emerges of which Theodor Benfeys (180981) monumental
the signicance of recent advances in the eld compared with Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft of 1869 may be regarded as the
previous endeavors. During the 1960s, following various most outstanding example. It had been preceded by Heymann
claims made by Noam Chomsky that his own theories had Steinthals (182399) work of 1863, which sought to super-
little to do with the pursuits of his immediate predecessors and sede Laurenz Lerschs (181149) three-volume Die Sprachphi-
contemporaries, but instead followed quite different traditions losophie der Alten (183841), but which dealt only with the
such as those of the Port Royal Grammar and of Wilhelm von contributions of Greece and Rome to linguistic thought. Ben-
Humboldt, the bulk of the dissertations written in HoL were feys history of linguistics was followed by other inuential
devoted to just these areas of interest, at times seriously dis- works such as Raumer (1870), Delbrck (1882[1880]), Bursian
torting the true intent and purpose of these earlier authors. (1883), which, however, were more limited in scope. The same
Only from the 1970s onwards, following the creation of the could be said of books by scholars such as Thomsen (1902;
rst journal for this particular eld of interest in 1973, Histor- German transl., 1927), Delbrck (1904), Trabalza (1908),
iographia Linguistica, and the associated monograph series Jellinek (1913), Pedersen (1916; English transl, 1983),
united under the umbrella titled Amsterdam Studies in the Pedersen (1924; English transl., 1931), Drganu (1945; Italian
Theory and History of Linguistic Science, did serious work transl., 1970), or Robins (1951) from the rst half of the
begin to emerge that challenged this pro-domo type of history twentieth century. (For detailed descriptions of these books, see
writing. These and other organized activities (which we discuss Koerner, 1978a.)
in the subsequent sections) led to much more recent eld New endeavors and, at times, more insightful studies in
of study, now generally referred to as Historiography of HoL appeared in the 1960s, perhaps beginning with Paul
Linguistics (see Koerner, 2006 for an extended discussion) or Diderichsens (190564) work on his compatriot Raskof 1960
Linguistic Historiography for short, an approach to HoL which (German transl., 1976). It was followed by works such as Ivic
is conscious of methodological and epistemological require- (1963; English transl., 1965), Leroy (1963; English transl.,
ments in adequate history writing in linguistics as in any 1967), Tagliavini (1963), Malmberg (1964; French transl.,
science. (Most of the contributions to the two-volume Histori- 1959), Lepschy (1965; English transl., 1970), Mounin
ography of Linguistics published in 1975 under the main (1967), Robins (1967), Coseriu (1969, 1972 see now
editorship of Thomas A. Sebeok were little else but surveys of Coseriu, 2003), Helbig (1970), Szemernyi (1971), and other
previous scholarship; historiography there being used in the thematically restricted books (cf Koerner 1978a for details,
old sense of the term; the volume edited by Parret in 1976 Jankowsky (1972), and others (see Koerner, 1978a for a full

International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edition, Volume 14 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.03038-5 215
216 Linguistics, History of

list). Yet most of them relied uncritically on earlier accounts work accomplished in the various branches of Indo-European
and rarely ventured into questions of historiographical philology by that time than a regular HoL (cf Koerner,
method or touched upon matters concerning the philosophy 1978a: 1617, for details). Begun in 1916, the enterprise was
of science, except perhaps for a fashionable nod to Kuhns abandoned after 1936.
Structure of Scientic Revolutions of 1962. After World War II, it appears that the histories by Malmberg
Looking back on the past 140 or so years of history writing (1964), Ivic (1965), Leroy (1963), and others fullled a similar
in linguistics, it is possible to discern three distinct types, each function of summing up previous attainments in linguistic
associated with particular motives for engaging in such activity science. This time the focus of attention was the post-1916
and each occurring at specic periods in the development of period in the history of linguistics, following the success story
the discipline. A fourth type (argued for in, e.g., Koerner, 1976) of Saussures Cours, with its perceived emphasis on a non-
has begun developing only in more recent years. Detailed historical approach to language. The neogrammarian
description of each of these follows. framework of linguistic research was propounded in the
histories of Pedersen, the organizational efforts of Streitberg
1. First, there is the type of history written at a time when
from 1916 onwards, and other less inuential books and
a particular generation or an individual representing the
one may add that Pedersen, a second-generation
ideas, beliefs, and commitments of his or her generation to
Neogrammarian, reects the alleged data-orientation of that
a signicant extent is convinced that a desired goal has been
school much more emphatically than the original group of
reached and that subsequent work in the eld will mainly
scholars (note that neither Delbrcks Einleitung nor Pauls
be concerned with what Thomas S. Kuhn has referred to as
Prinzipien are even mentioned in his 300-page study of 1924).
mopping-up operations. These accounts assumed that the
Only in recent years (Jankowsky, 1972; Einhauser, 1990) have
theoretical framework had been sufciently mapped out for
the Neogrammarians received a more adequate treatment. By
the ordinary member of the scientic community to
the same token, the histories by Malmberg, Ivic, Leroy, and
conduct his or her investigations and that there was no
other similarly slanted studies of the 1960s put forward
longer any need for a revision of the methodology or the
particular post-Saussurean trends as the most signicant
approach to the subject matter under analysis; they were
achievements of the discipline to date, whether Copenhagen-
summing up histories that viewed the evolution of the eld
type, Praguean, or Bloomeldian. Their endeavor, like that of
as growing in a more or less unilinear fashion.
Benfey, Raumer, Pedersen, Streitberg, and others from an
This idea of or motive for writing such a history seems to be earlier stage in the development of linguistics, was to a large
best expressed in Benfeys voluminous Geschichte der Sprach- extent the presentation of a framework of research in which
wissenschaft und orientalischen Philologie (1869), appearing one they themselves had been brought up, and, concomitantly, an
year after Schleichers untimely death, and also by Raumers attempt to maintain the strength and impact of the
Geschichte der germanischen Philologie (1870). It is difcult today structuralist mode of thought.
to recreate the atmosphere of the late 1860s even if we limit
2. The second type of history-writing activity may be charac-
ourselves to linguistic matters abstracting from external, for
terized by the intention on the part of an individual usually
example, socio-political, currents: histories available today
in his thirties (not late forties or above, as is generally the
supply us with little, if any, information on this pre-
case with the rst type), again representing a particular
neogrammarian period. Sufce it to recall for the present
group, to launch a campaign opposing previously cherished
purpose that the works of Bopp, Rask, Grimm, and others
views and still prevailing doctrines. Thus in contrast to
had been signicantly synthesized and methodologically
Benfey (1869), for example, Berthold Delbrcks (1842
developed by the generation of Georg Curtius (182085)
1922) 1880 Einleitung served, together with Pauls Prinzi-
and, especially, August Schleicher (182368), to the extent
pien of the same year, as the mouthpiece of a new generation
that one might speak of a paradigm change having taken
of scholars eager to demonstrate that their achievements
place at that time, of which the neogrammarian tenets of
signicantly surpassed previous attainments in the eld,
historical linguistic research associated with the names of
and that their theories rightfully replaced those taught by
their former students, notably Karl Brugmann (18491919)
the preceding generation of linguists. The claim in favor of
and August Leskien (18401916), were the logical, if
discontinuity is what characterizes this type of activity, and
somewhat overstated, outcome.
Delbrcks book is a prime example of this endeavor.
A similar observation about the motives of history writing,
Typically, Schleicher was depicted by Delbrck as repre-
it would seem, could be made about Holger Pedersens (1867
senting the conclusion of the phase of comparative-
1953) 1924 history of the achievements of nineteenth-century
historical grammar inaugurated by Franz Bopp in 1816,
Indo-Europeanists, which was preceded by a similar and
and the Junggrammatiker, with whom he associated himself
somewhat shorter account of his rst published work in
early in his career (soon after he had received Schleichers
1916, the year of the completion of the second edition
chair at the University of Jena in 1873), as marking a deci-
of Brugmann and Delbrcks Grundriss, as well as the
sive new turn in the eld.
appearance of Saussures Cours de linguistique gnrale.
The feeling of the need of such a summing-up history is No comparable history of linguistics was written in the
expressed more clearly, perhaps, in Wilhelm Streitbergs 1930s and 1940s with regard to structuralism, but a look
(18651925) voluminous undertaking, entitled Geschichte der into Bloomelds Language (1933) or Grays Foundations of
indogermanischen Sprachwissenschaft seit ihrer Begrndung durch Language (1939) clearly suggests that the chapters devoted to
Franz Bopp. However, this is in fact more of a rsum of the HoL were an attempt to redress the development of the
 Linguistics, History of 217

discipline and to document the superiority of the structuralist which an attempt was made to delineate the development
approach to any other theory or method hitherto put forward. of western linguistic thought from the early discussions of
This endeavor to prove earlier views to be utterly insufcient the Greeks about the nature of language to contemporary
and inadequate has by no means been abandoned by adher- linguistic work, certainly with a view to indicating not only
ents of the prevailing modes of linguistic thinking of today. that our discipline has come a long way to gain those
On the contrary, it can easily be shown that their advocates insights we now cherish and the methods we have devel-
have been eager not only to revive an interest in the history of oped, but also that we all have built, knowingly or not, on
linguistics itself but also to rewrite it to an extent that the ideas the ndings of previous generations of linguists, and that we
of the generation immediately preceding the present one owe much more to these scholars than we might ever
appear the least worthy of attention. As a matter of fact, what become fully aware of.
C.F. Voegelin felicitously termed the eclipsing stance that
While this Type III manner of presenting the HoL might well
transformational-generative grammar had embarked on was
have been the result of a very personal choice, it appears that it
best illustrated by Noam Chomsky himself, for instance in
expressed the endeavor of a whole generation of scholars,
his 1962 lecture at the Ninth International Congress of
namely, the rebuilding of a discipline after its almost total
Linguists held in Cambridge, MA (Chomsky, 1964). Soon
destruction through a world war. Taken in this way, Pedersens
thereafter, a number of his followers ardently engaged
1931 book may well be included in the third category in that it
themselves in writing their particular view of history;
sought to reestablish a linguistic tradition which in his belief
compare the articles by Dingwall (1963), Bach (1965), or
could continue to serve as a sound basis for subsequent work in
Bierwisch (1966). More recently, Frederick Newmeyer has
the eld.
published a book that constitutes the best example to date
Undoubtedly, other, often nonlinguistic, motives played
of this pro domo, Whiggish type of history writing. It selects
a role in presenting the history of the discipline in one way or
and reinterprets past linguistic research in an attempt to
another. Thus, it should be recalled that particular socioeco-
prove his view that linguistics was made a science only in
nomic conditions, historical events, or political situations have
1955 or in 1957, and by Chomsky, and that previous work
often had a considerable inuence on the motivation of writing
was totally inadequate, barring a few minor incidental
the history of a particular discipline or the acceptance of
insights foreshadowing the revolution in the eld (cf
a seemingly new theoretical framework of research or mode of
Koerner, 1983; for a critical assessment of this kind of
thought and in this respect histories of linguistics have failed
activity). Newmeyers Linguistics in America (1980) appeared
to increase our awareness of the impact of matters or events
exactly 100 years after Delbrcks Einleitung, and the parallels
outside the eld. The works of Benfey and Raumer, for
between their authors are striking indeed: both were less
instance, were highly motivated by the rise of German
than 40 when they wrote their books; both were primarily
nationalism and the aspiration to national unity if not
interested in syntax, not phonology, and neither had done
superiority. Similarly, Malkiel (1968: 557) rightly observed
his doctorate at the respective centers of the schools whose
that the success of Saussures Cours cannot be properly
success story they depicted.
measured without some allowance for the feelings of that
While Type I history writing may appear more benign as it
time: The acceptance of the leadership of a French-Swiss
seems to represent matter-of-fact accounts (although one
genius connoted for many Westerners then opposed to
should not be too sure about this), Type II HoL can best be
Germany a strongly desired, rationalized escape from the
described as propagandistic in nature; the most successful
world of Brugmann, Leskien, Osthoff, and Paul.
example of this type is Chomskys 1966 Cartesian Linguistics.
This book presents the authors views regarding the ancestry 4. Despite the respect scholars may have for works of the third
of his own theories so brilliantly that many a young students type, in particular Arens Problemgeschichte, some have felt
of language were carried away by this new vision of history. a need for yet a fourth type of history writing (e.g., Koerner,
Today, we still nd a lot of useful information in the Type I 1976; Simone, 1975), namely the presentation of our
histories of the eld despite their biases and shortcomings linguistic past as an integral part of the discipline itself and,
(see, e.g., Hoenigswald, 1986; Koerner, 1989); Type II at the same time, as an activity founded on well-dened
histories, in contrast, although written much more recently, principles that can rival, in terms of soundness of method
are already dated. It appears that, once their propagandistic and rigor of application, those of linguistics itself. This
purpose has been satised in proselytizing for the new fourth type, now usually referred to as linguistic historiog-
ideology, the remainder rapidly loses its initial interest and raphy or, more properly, the historiography of linguistics holds
apparent informational worth. that the HoL should not merely be subservient to the
discipline, but should assume a function comparable to that
3. There is a third type of HoL which is intended neither to of the history of science for the natural scientist. In short,
advocate a particular framework or paradigm nor to while recognizing the important distinction between
attempt to provide an argument in favor of a scientic chronicle and history which Benedetto Croce is credited
revolution within the discipline. This type may occur at any with, recent contributors to HoL have gone a step further by
time in the development of a particular eld of research distinguishing between history and historiography. This is
since its ultimate intent is less partisan than in the other two partly an attempt to make clear a departure from previous
instances and often more holistic in attitude, although the endeavors in the eld, which only too often tended to be
motivation behind the work may be fairly personal. To my partisan histories, if not what Henry Buttereld termed
mind, the best example is Arens 1955 Sprachwissenschaft, in Whig-histories, and partly because previous histories did
218 Linguistics, History of

not provide a usable guide for the adequate treatment of Bibliography

past developments in the history of the language sciences,
and thus failed to provide a better understanding of where Allan, Keith, 2009[2007]. The Western Classical Tradition in Linguistics, second ed.
current theories may lead us to. Continuum, London.
Allan, Keith (Ed.), 2013. The Oxford Handbook of the History of Linguistics. Oxford
University Press, Oxford.
Another indication of the History of Linguistics having Andresen, Julie T., 1978. Franois thurot and the rst history of grammar.
become a mature eld of scholarly endeavor is its profession- Historiographia Linguistica 5, 4557.
alization. In 1978, the rst International Conference on the Arens, Hans, 1955. Sprachwissenschaft: Der Gang ihrer Entwicklung von der Antike
History of the Language Sciences (ICHoLS) was held in Ottawa, bis zur Gegenwart. K. Alber, Freiburg and Munich (second english ed., 1969).
Auroux, Sylvain, Koerner, E.F.K., Niederehe, Hans-J., Versteegh, Kees (Eds.), 2000
Canada, the same year in which the Socit dHistoire et
2006. History of the Language Sciences: An International Handbook on the
dpistmologie des Sciences du Langage (S.H.E.S.L.) was Evolution of the Study of Language from the Beginnings to the Present/Geschichte
founded in Paris. In 1984, the Henry Sweet Society for the der Sprachwissenschaften: Ein internationales Handbuch zur Entwicklung der
History of Linguistic Ideas (HSS) was established in Oxford, Sprachforschung von den Anfngen bis zur Gegenwart/Histoire des Sciences du
and several similar international and regional societies have Langage: Manuel international dhistoire des tudes linguistiques des origines
nos jours, 3 vols. Walter de Gruyter & Co, Berlin and New York.
been launched since; for instance, the North American Asso- Bach, Emmon, 1965. Structural linguistics and the philosophy of science. Diogenes
ciation for the History of the Language Sciences (NAAHoLS) 51, 111128.
which was launched late in 1987. In the meantime further Benfey, Theodor, 1869. Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft und orientalischen Phi-
ICHoLS meetings have been held in 1981 (Lille, France), 1984 lologie in Deutschland seit dem Anfange des 19. Jahrhunderts, mit einem Rck-
blick auf die frheren Zeiten. J.G. Cotta, Munich (Repr. Johnson, New York, 1965).
(Princeton, N.J.), 1987 (Trier, Germany), 1990 (Galway,
Bierwisch, Manfred, 1966. Strukturalismus: Geschichte, Probleme und Methoden.
Ireland), 1993 (Washington, D.C.), 1996 (Oxford), 1999 Kursbuch 5, 77152 (English Translation: Modern Linguistics: Its Development,
(Paris), 2001 (So Paulo, Brazil), 2004 (Urbana Champaign, Methods and Problems. Mouton, The Hague 1971.).
USA), 2008 (Potsdam, Gemany), and 2011 (St. Petersburg, Bursian, Conrad, 1883. Geschichte der classischen Philologie in Deutschland. Mun-
chen und Leipzig.
Russia), with the 13th such International Conference scheduled
Chomsky, Noam, 1964. Current Issues in Linguistic Theory. Mouton, The Hague.
to take place in 2014 (Vila Real, Portugal). In addition to Chomsky, Noam, 1966. Cartesian Linguistics. A Chapter in the History of Rationalist
Historiographia Linguistica, a second journal with much less Thought. Harper & Row, New York and London.
focused goals, entitled Histoire pistmologie Langage, Coseriu, Eugenio, 2003[1969, 1972]. Geschichte der Sprachphilosophie: Von den
was established in Paris in 1979, and more recently in 1991, Anfngen bis Rousseau. Revised and enlarged by Jrn Albrecht. A. Francke,
Tbingen and Basel.
a third journal, Beitrge zur Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft,
Delbrck, Berthold, 1880. Einleitung in das Sprachstudium: Ein Beitrag zur Methodik
was launched in Mnster, Germany. Subsequently, scholarly der vergleichenden Sprachforschung. Breitkopf & Hrtel, Leipzig (second ed.,
societies devoted to HoL were founded in a number of other 1884; third ed., 1893).
countries, notably the Sociedad Espaola de Historiographia Delbrck, Berthold, 1882. Introduction to the Study of Language: A Critical Survey of the
Linguistica of Madrid. History and Methods of Comparative Philology of Indo-European Languages (Transl.
into English by Eva Channing). Breitkopf & Hrtel, Leipzig (New ed., with a Foreword
Although a couple of scholars were courageous enough to by E.F.K. Koerner, John Benjamins, Amsterdam, 1974; 2nd printing, 1989).
attempt an account of the development of linguistics from the Delbrck, Berthold, 1904. Einleitung in das Studium der Indogermanischen Sprachen.
Ancients to modern times (Swiggers, 1997; Allan, 2009), by the Druck und Verlag von Breitkopf & Hartel, Leipzig.
mid-1990s it became obvious that the history of linguistics Dingwall, William Orr, 1963. Transformational grammar: form and theory. A contri-
bution to the history of linguistics. Lingua 12, 233275.
and not only the Western tradition could no longer be
Einhauser, Eveline, 1990. Die Junggrammatiker: Ein Problem fr die Sprachwissen-
adequately treated by individual scholars, but that schaftsgeschichtsschreibung. WVT Wissenschaftlicher Verlag, Trier.
international collaboration was required. This was recognized Forsgren, Kjell-ke, 1992. Satz, Satzarten, Satzglieder: Zur Gestaltung der deutschen
by Lepschy (199098), which treated only selected periods, traditionellen Grammatik von Karl Ferdinand Becker bis Konrad Duden. Nodus,
with the concluding volume covering nineteenth-century Mnster.
Gordon, W. Terrence, 1982. A History of Semantics. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
historical-comparative philology. Selective accounts of HoL Helbig, Gerhard, 1970. Geschichte der neueren Sprachwissenschaft: unter dem
are increasingly focused on specic linguistic subdisciplines, besonderen Aspekt der Grammatik-Theorie. VEB Bibliographisches Institut, Leipzig;
for example, semantics (Gordon, 1982; Nerlich, 1992), Max Hueber, Munich.
pragmatics (Nerlich and Clarke, 1996), and syntax (Forsgren, Hoenigswald, Henry M., 1986. Nineteenth-century linguistics on itself. In:
Bynon, Theodora, Palmer, Frank R. (Eds.), Studies in the History of Western
1992), and on specic theoretical stances (e.g., Matthews,
Linguistics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 172188.
1993, 2001). The rst more successful attempt to account for Ivic, Milka, 1965[1959]. Trends in Linguistics (Muriel Heppell, Trans.). Mouton, The
the diversity of linguistic traditions and research interests was Hague.
Koerner and Asher (1995) culminating in a three-tome Jellinek, Max Hermann, 1913. Geschichte der Neuhochdeutschen Grammatik von den
undertaking of close to 3000 pages (Auroux et al., 2000 Anfangen bis auf Adelung, Volumes I and 2. Carl Winter, Heidelberg.
Jankowsky, Kurt R., 1972. The Neogrammarians: A Re-evaluation of Their Place in the
2006). In short, if the professionalization of the subject is Development of Linguistic Science. Mouton, The Hague.
any guide, the History of Linguistics has become a widely Koerner, E[rnst] F[rideryk] K[onrad], 1973. Ferdinand de Saussure: Origin and
recognized and practiced eld of scholarly research (cf also Development of His Linguistic Thought in Western Studies of Language. A
Allan, 2013). Contribution to the History and Theory of Linguistics. Friedrich Vieweg & Sohn,
Braunschweig.
See also: Chomsky, Noam (1928); Databases and Statistical Koerner, E.F.K., 1976. Towards a Historiography of Linguistics: 19th and 20th century
Paradigms. Parret 685718.
Systems: Linguistics; Historical Linguistics: Numerical Koerner, E.F.K., 1978a. Western Histories of Linguistic Thought: An Annotated
Methods; Historical Thought and Historiography: Current Chronological Bibliography 18221976. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Trends; Logic and Linguistics; Saussure, Ferdinand de Koerner, E.F.K., 1978b. Toward a Historiography of Linguistics: Selected Essays.
(18571913). Foreword by R.H. Robins. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
 Linguistics, History of 219

Koerner, E.F.K., 1983. The chomskyan Revolution and its historiography: a few Nerlich, Brigette, Clarke, David D., 1999. Language, Action and Context. John
critical remarks. Language & Communication 3, 147169 (Rev. and extended Benjamins Publishing, Amsterdam.
version in Koerner 1989. 101146.). Newmeyer, Frederick J., 1980. Linguistics in America: The First Quarter-Century of
Koerner, E.F.K., 1989. Practicing Linguistic Historiography: Selected Essays. John Transformational-Generative Grammar. Academic Press, New York (second
Benjamins, Amsterdam and Philadelphia. revision ed., 1986).
Koerner, E.F.K., 1995. Professing Linguistic Historiography. John Benjamins, Parret, Herman (Ed.), 1976. History of Linguistic Thought and Contemporary
Amsterdam and Philadelphia. Linguistics. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin and New York.
Koerner, E.F.K., 1999. Linguistic Historiography: Projects & Prospects. John Paul, Hermann, 1880. Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte. Max Niemeyer, Halle/S. (fth
Benjamins, Amsterdam and Philadelphia. ed., 1920).
Koerner, E.F.K., 2002. Toward a History of American Linguistics. Routledge, London Pedersen, Holger, 1931[1924]. Linguistic Science in the Nineteenth Century.
and New York. Translation into English by John Webster Spargo. Harvard University Press,
Koerner, E.F.K., 2004. Essays in the History of Linguistics. John Benjamins, Cambridge, MA.
Amsterdam and Philadelphia. Pedersen, Holger, 1983[1916]. A Glance at the History of Linguistics, with Particular
Koerner, E.F.K., 2006. Historiography of linguistics. In: Brown, Keith (Ed.), Encyclo- Regard to the Historical Study of Phonology. Transl. from the Danish by Caroline C.
pedia of Language and Linguistics, second ed. Elsevier, Oxford, pp. 332334. Henriksen, ed. with an introd. by Konrad Koerner. John Benjamins, Amsterdam and
Koerner, E.F.K., Asher, R.E. (Eds.), 1995. Concise History of the Language Sciences: Philadelphia.
From the Sumerians to the Cognitivists. Pergamon Press, Oxford and New York. Raumer, Rudolf von, 1870. Geschichte der germanischen Philologie. J.G. Cotta,
Kuhn, Thomas S., 1962. The Structure of Scientic Revolutions. University of Chicago Munich (Repr., New York: Johnson, 1965.).
Press, Chicago (second corrected and extended ed., 1970). Robins, Robert Henry, 1967. A Short History of Linguistics. Longmans, London. Indiana
Lepschy, Giulio C., 1965. Problems of semantics. Linguistics 3 (15), 4065. University Press, Bloomington, 1968, (fourth ed., 1996).
Lepschy, Giulio (Ed.), 19941998. History of Linguistics, 4 vols. Longman, London and Sebeok, Thomas A. (Ed.) 1975. Current Issues in Linguistics. Vol. XIII: Historiography of
New York. Linguistics, 2 vols. Mouton, The Hague.
Leroy, Maurice, 1963. Les grands courants de la linguistique moderne. Presses Simone, Raffaele, 1975. Thorie et histoire de la linguistique. Historiographia
Universitaires de Bruxelles, Brussels (second english ed., 1971). Linguistica 2, 353378.
Malkiel, Yakov, 1968. History and histories of linguistics. Romance Philology 22, Streitberg, Wilhelm (Ed.), 191636. Geschichte der indogermanischen
530566. Sprachwissenschaft seit ihrer Begrndung durch Franz Bopp, 6 vols. Karl J.
Malmberg, Bertil, 1964[1959]. New Trends in Linguistics: An Orientation. Trbner, Strassburg (later on Walter de Gruyter, Berlin).
Naturmetodens Sprkinstitut, Stockholm and Lund. Swiggers, Pierre, 1997. Histoire de la pense linguistique: analyse du langage et
Malmberg, Bertil, 1990. Histoire de la linguistique: Sumer Saussure. Presses rexion linguistique dans la culture occidentale, de lAntiquit au XIXe sicle.
Universitaires de France, Paris. Presses Universitaires de France, Paris.
Matthews, Peter H., 1993. Grammatical Theory in the United States from Bloomeld to Szemernyi, John, Louis, 1971. Richtungen der modernen Sprachwissenschaft. Carl
Chomsky. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Winter, Heidelberg.
Matthews, Peter H., 2001. A Short History of Structural Linguistics. Cambridge Tagliavini, Carlo, 1963. Panorama di storia delia linguistica. Ptron, Bologna.
University Press, Cambridge. Thomsen, Vilhelm Ludvig Peter, 1902. Sprogvidenskabens historie. G.E.C. Gad,
Nerlich, Brigitte, 1992. Semantic Theories in Europe, 18301930: From Etymology to Copenhagen.
Contextuality. John Benjamins, Amsterdam and Philadelphia. Trabalza, Ciro, 1908. Storia della Grammatica Italiana. Ulrico Hoepli, Milano.