Visit www.benjamins.com

Chapter 4. Methods and argumentation in historical linguistics

MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.
This Chapter is currently unavailable for purchase.
Abstract

The present chapter aims to discuss some properties of historical linguistics argumentation, through the analysis of examples taken from actual research practice. Relying on Kert&#233;sz and R&#225;kosi&#8217;s (2012) <i>p-model</i> of scientific theorizing, it compares three competing accounts of the historical development of the Catalan construction &#8220;<i>anar </i>&#8216;go&#8217; &#43; infinitive&#8221;, namely, those provided in Colon (1979a, b), in Detges (2004) and in Juge (2006). The simultaneous plausibility of some statements and their negations in the starting p-context formed by these three approaches leads to a p-inconsistency, which is eliminated by the extension of the starting p-context and, then, the coordination of the extended p-context. The analysis of historical research practice from a methodological point of view suggests that the development of the Catalan &#8220;<i>anar </i>&#8216;go&#8217; &#43; infinitive&#8221; construction finds the most satisfactory explanation under Juge&#8217;s (2006) proposal, which uses sources, research methods and argumentation techniques traditionally accepted in historical linguistics.

References

/content/books/9789027270559-04nag
dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
6
3
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address