Cover not available

Article published In: Historiographia Linguistica
Vol. 16:3 (1989) ► pp.327–350

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Hugo Schuchardts Beitrag Zur Allgemeinen Sprachwissenschaft

 | Université de la Réunion & C.N.R.S., Paris

Article language: German

Published online: 1 January 1989
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/hl.16.3.06bag
Summary
This article attempts to rehabilitate Hugo Schuchardt (1842–1927) as a general linguist. It tries to show that the many polemics of his take all their source in a rejection of a reifying vision of language, be it his critique of the ‘organicist conception of language’ (largely associated with the work of August Schleicher), of the ‘blind action of phonetic laws concerning any given dialect’ (a position held by the Neogrammarians), or of the Saussurean dichotomies. Instead, Schuchardt prefers a conception of language as a dynamic activity in which the individual and society as well as the mixture of languages play a central part. As a result, Schuchardt’s interest in and focus on (what appeared to many of his contemporaries as) marginal phenomena (creoles, pidgins, language contacts, universal language) is not a matter of accident, but directly related to his permanent and rigorous questioning of the dominant tenets in the field, a position he thought to be essential to any progress in linguistic science.
Résumé
On s’est attaché à rectifier l’image d’un grand linguiste pour qui la postérité s’est montré injuste en lui déniant toute perspective de linguistique générale. Nous cherchons au contraire à prouver que chez Hugo Schuchardt (1842–1927) ses différentes polémiques menées successivement contre la ‘conception organiciste de la langue (Schleicher), la soi-disant ‘action aveugle des lois phonétiques dans le cadre d’un dialecte déterminé’ (néogrammairiens), les dichotomies saussuriennes trouvent leur source dans le refus d’une vision réïfiante de la langue au profit d’une vision dynamique du langage conçu comme activité où l’individu et le mélange des langues occupe une place centrale. Dès lors, l’intérêt de Schuchardt pour les phénomènes marginaux (créoles, pidgins, contacts de langues, langue universelle …) n’est pas fortuit; il vient à l’appui de sa linguistique générale et vient nourrir un débat permanent contre les linguistiques dominantes, débat exigeant qu’il estime être la condition essentielle du progrès scientifique.
References (55)
Literaturangaben
Adam, Luden. 1883. Les idiomes négro-aryens: Essai d’hybridologie linguistique. Paris: Maisonneuve & Cie., 76 S.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ascoli, Graziado Isaia. 1886–88. “Due lettere glottologiche”. AGI 101.1–10. (Deutsche Übersetzung in Sprachwissenschaftliche Briefe, besorgt von Bruno Güterbock, Leipzig: S. Hirzel, 1887.)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
BSLP = Bulletin de la Société Linguistique de Paris. Paris, 1868-.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baggioni, Daniel. 1983. “Schuchardt l’incompris ou du bon usage de la mixité des langues”. Etudes Créoles (Montréal) 6:2.115–128.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1985. “Géographie linguistique et dialectologie ramane dans le débat autour des lois phonétiques”. Linguistique comparée et typologie des langues romanes (Actes du XVIIème Congrès International de Linguistique et Philologie Romanes, Aix-en-Provence, 1983, vol. II1), 203–212.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1986. Langue et langage dans la linguistique européenne (1876–1933). Thèse Lettres Aix-en-Provence, I-II1, 526 S.; III1, 13 S.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1989a. “La polémique Meillet-Schuchardt sur la parenté des langues (1905–1923)”. HEL 10:2.85–97. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1989b. “Schuchardt et la conception individualiste de l’étymologie: La polémique avec A. Thomas sur l’étymologie de trouver et caillou (1899–1905)”. Discours étymologiques (Actes du Colloque organisé à l’occasion du centenaire de Walter von Wartburg (1888–1971), 16–18 mai 1988, Universités de Mulhouse, Basel & Freiburg).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bickerton, Derek. 1979. “Introduction”. The Ethnography of Variation: Selected Writings on Pidgins and Creoles von Hugo Schuchardt hrsg. und übersetzt von Thomas L. Markey, VII-XVII1. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Karoma.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brugmann, Karl. 1907 “Die neuesten Weltsprachenprojekte”. Zur Kritik der künstlichen Weltsprachen von Brugmann & A. Leskien, 7–29. Straßburg: Karl J. Trübner, 38 S.. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brugmann, Karl & Hermann Osthoff. 1878. Morphologische Untersuchungen auf dem Gebiete der indo-germanischen Sprachen. I. Teil. Leipzig: S. Hirzel, XX1, 290 S. (Das “Vorwort” stammt von Brugmann.)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Caussat, Pierre & Claudine Normand, Hrsg. 1978. Avant-Saussure (1875–1924): Choix de textes. Bruxelles: Ed. Complexes. 208 S.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chavée, Honoré. 1862. Les langues et les races. Paris: Hermann, 62 S.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coelho, Francisco Adolpho. 1880. Os dialectos romanicos ou neo-latinos na Africa, Asia e America, Lissabon: 70 S.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Curtius, Georg. 1867. Zur Chronologie der indogermanischen Sprachforschung. Leipzig: S. Hirzel, 76 S.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1885. Zur Kritik der neusten Sprachforschung. Leipzig: S. Hirzel, 161 S.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hovelacque, Abel. 1876. La linguistique. Paris: F. Alcan, XI1, 365 S.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Literaturblatt für germanische und romanische Philologie. Leipzig, 1880–1944.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leskien, August. 1907. “Zur Kritik von Esperanto”. Zur Kritik der künstlichen Weltsprachen von Brugmann & Leskien, 31–38. (S. Brugmann 1907.)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meillet, Antoine. 1921. Rezension von Schuchardt (1919–20). BSLP 221.38–39.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1924. Rezension von Schuchardt (1922) und (1923). BSLP 251.18–19.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Osthoff, Hermann. 1879. Das physiologische und psychologische Moment in der Sprachlichen Formenbildung, Berlin: C. Habel, 48 S.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Paris, Gaston. 1888. “Les parlers de France”, Revue des patois galloromans, 21.161–175. (Wiederabdruck in Paris, 1909, 432–448.)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1909. Mélanges linguistiques. Paris. H. Champion, 731 S.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Passy, Paul. 1890. Etudes sur les changements phonétiques et leurs caractères généraux. Paris. Firmin Didot, 270 S.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Prudent, Lambert-Felix. 1980. Des baragouins à la langue antillaise. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Richter, Elise. 1928. “Hugo Schuchardt”. ZRPh 481.241–305.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
RLPC. Revue de linguistique et de philologie comparée. Paris 1867–1916. (Herausgeber: H. Chavée 1867–72; Abel Hovelacque 1872–86; Julien Vinson 1885–1916.)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rousselot, (Abbé), Pierre. 1891. Les modifications phonétiques du langage étudiées dans le patois d’une famille de Cellefrouin (Charente). Paris. H. Welter, 372 S.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Saussure, Ferdinand de. 1916. Cours de linguistique générale. Publié par Charles Βally & Abert Sechehaye avec la collaboration de Albert Riedlinger. Lausanne & Paris: Payot, 331 S.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schuchardt, Hugo. 1866–68. Vokalismus des Vulgärlateins. 31 vols. Leipzig: Β.G. Teubner.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1900. Über die Klassifikation der romanischen Mundarten. Graz: Univ. Buchdruckerei “Styria”, 31 S. (Probevorlesung in Leipzig, April 1870.)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1882. “Zur afrikanischen Sprachmischung”. Das Ausland, 867–869.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1887–90. “Kreolische Studien (I-IX)”. Sitzungberichte der Wiener Akademie der Wissenschaften; Phil.-Hist. Klasse 116:1.193–226, 227–234; 122:9.1–256.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1883. Rezension von Adam (1883). Literaturblatt 41.236–240.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1884. Slawo-deutsches und Slawo-Italienisches: Die Sprachmischung. Graz: Lenscher & Lubensky, 140 S.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1885. Über die Lautgesetze – Gegen die Junggrammatiker. Berlin: Oppenheimer, VII1, 39 S.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1887. Rezension von Ascoli (1886–88). Literaturblatt 81.12–26.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1889. “Franz. aller, span. lerdo usw.; port. ardego; span.-port. Lobrego; port. manteiga; span. manteca; port. ν adio .” ZRPh. 131.527–552.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1892. Rezension von Passy (1890) und Rousselot (1892). Literaturblatt 131.303–315.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1898. Tchèques et Allemands. Lettre par M. Hugo Schuchardt, membre de l’Institut de France, à M.***. Paris. H. Welter, 43 S.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1897–99. “Romanische Etymologien”. Sitzungberichte der Wiener Akademie der Wissenschaften 1381:1–82; 1411:1–222.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1904. “Bericht über die auf Schaffung einer künstlichen internationalen Hilfssprache gerichtete Bewegung”. Almanach der Wiener Akademie 1904.281–296. 1904.281–296.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1909. “Die lingua franca”. ZRPh. 331.441–461. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1912. “Sachen und Wörter”. Anthropos 71.827–839.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1914. Die Sprache der Saramakkaneger in Surinam. (= Verh. der Königlichen Akademie van Amsterdam; Nieuwe Reeks, Deel, XIV, n° 6). Amsterdam, XXXIV1, 121 S.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1917. Rezension von Saussure (1916). Literaturblatt 381.1–9.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1917–26. “Sprachverwandtschaft”. Sitzungsberichte der Berliner Akademie der Wissenschaften 1917.518–529; 1926.148–152.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1919–20. “Sprachursprung”. Sitzungsberichte der Berliner Akademie der Wissenschaften 1919.716–720, 863–69; 1920.448–462.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1922. “Sprachliche Beziehung”. Ibid. 199–208.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1923. “Individualismus”. Euphorion 161, Ergänzungsheft, 1–8.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1925. “Das Baskische und die Sprachwissenschaft”. Sitzungsberichte der Wiener Akademie 202/4,1–34.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1926. “Individualismus in der Sprachforschung”. Sitzungsberichte der Wiener Akademie, 202/4,1–21.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1928. Hugo-Schuchardt-Brevier: Ein Vademecum der allgemeinen Sprachwissenschaft. Hrsg. von Leo Spitzer. 21. Aufl. Halle/S.: M. Niemeyer, 483 S. (Wiederausdruck Darmstadt: Wiss. Buchgesellschaft, 1976.)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilbur, Terence H. 1972. “Hugo Schuchardt and the Neo-Grammarians”. Hugo Schuchardt, the Neo-Grammarians and the Transformational Theory of Linguistic Change. Hrsg. von Theo Vennemann & T. H. Wilbur, 73–113. Frankfurt/M. Athenäum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Gal, Susan & Judith T. Irvine
2019. Signs of Difference, DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 10 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue