Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Language
in Society.
http://www.jstor.org
REVIEWS
Departmentof Linguistics
University of Pennsylvania
(Received 6 May I979)
Philadelphia,
PA 19104
PERSONAL COLLECTIONS
MuRRAY B. EMENEAU, Language and linguistic area: Essays by Murray B.
REVIEWS
at that time has come to be taken for grantedby many scholars today, thanksto
the care and persistence with which Emeneauhas expressed and documentedhis
views.
Emeneau's definition of the term "linguistic area" has been widely quoted:
This term "linguisticarea" may be defined as meaningan area which includes
languages belonging to more than one family but showing traits in common
which are found not to belong to the other members of (at least) one of the
families (I24, n. 28).
He points out that he first saw the term used by H. V. Velten as a translationof
Troubetzkoy's Sprachbund (I24), and discusses the advantages and disadvantages of several other terms (I27). A number of the linguistic features he discusses belong to only a part of the subcontinent(though they all involve languages of more thanone family), and one feature(the numeralclassifiers, Ch. 6)
has a distributionthat goes far beyond India.
The volume contains fifteen papers, three of them writtenspecifically for this
collection, the remainder(several of which have been reprintedelsewhere) originally publishedbetween 1954 and 1974. In addition,thereis an editor's introduction (xi-xiv), an author'spostscript(350-54), and a bibliographyof Emeneau's
works (355-7i). The book is divided into three sections: "Language and Linguistic Areas: General," "India as a Linguistic Area," and "Brahui Language
Studies." Almost all the papers, however, deal with two overlappingconcerns:
(i) the general linguistic area hypothesis - that under certain conditions, languages that remain in contact over long periods of time (whether genetically
relatedor not) can and do exert influence on each other's structure(phonological,
morphological,syntactic, and semantic);and (2) the presentationand meticulous
documentationof specific cases that form the basis for this general hypothesis.
Emeneau's procedurein dealing with these cases involves two steps: first, the
presentation of evidence to establish a trait as an areal feature; second, the
attemptto discover the languageof origin of the trait. Indiais of course a fruitful
laboratoryfor this type of study, because of the existence of old records in both
Indo-Aryanand Dravidian(supplementedby comparativereconstructionsfor the
latter).
Emeneau's general thesis seems to have survived rather well, although a
numberof his specific cases have come underattack, particularlythose involving
presumed Dravidianinfluence on Indo-Aryan- and most particularlywhere he
has claimed this influence on the language of the Rigveda, which many
Sanskritistsare not preparedto accept (see, for example, Hock 1975; Deshpande
1979, Thieme I955) - implying as it does that the language of that period may
have been transmittedby non-native speakers(see below). In his I969 paperon
onomatopoetics (Ch. io in the volume under review), Emeneau felt entitled to
of defendingthe generalthesis" each
deny the need to "go throughthe formnality
time a new case is presented(25 I). The strengthof his general case rests partly
126
REVIEWS
REVIEWS
REFERENCES
Deshpande, Madhav. (1979). Genesis of rigvedic retroflection: A historical and sociolinguistic
investigation. In Deshpande & Hook (1979), 235-315.
& Hook, Peter(eds.). (1979). Aryanand non-Aryanin India. MichiganPapers on Southand
Southeast Asia 14. Center for South and Southeast Asian Studies. Ann Arbor: University of
Michigan.
Hock, Hans. (1975). Substratuminfluence on (Rig)-Vedic Sanskrit?Studies in the Linguistic Sciences, Universityof Illinois 5: 76-125.
Masica, Colin. (1976). Defining a linguistic area: SouthAsia. Chicago:Universityof Chicago Press.
Southworth,Franklin,& Apte, MahadevL. (eds.). (1974). Contactand convergence in South Asian
Languages. Special publication of the InternationalJournal of Dravidian Linguistics, Trivandrum, India.
Thieme, Paul. (1955). Review of Burrow, The SanskritLanguage. Language 31: 428-48.
Reviewed by FRANKLINC. SOUTHWORTH
HESSLING,
On the origin andformation of creoles: A miscelDIRKCHRISTIAAN
The ethnography of variation:
lany of articles, and HuGo SCHUCHARDT,
Selected writings on pidgins and creoles. (Linguistica ExtraneaStudia 3, 4)
Ann Arbor: Karoma, I979. Pp. 91 + 152.