tomorrow . . .

Apparently my "tomorrow" is about a month later . . . Picking up from my previous post on my own journey into the field of linguistics . . .

Outside of my Hebrew Reading class, I was also exposed to Pragmatics and philosophical linguistics in the concepts of Speech-Act Theory and Cognitive Linguistics. These ideas were helpful primarily on a hermeneutical and exegetical level in regard to helping me better understand how language functioned within particular texts.

In particular, the theory of Cognitive Linguistics helped me to better understand the function of metaphor. Given that a lot of my work was shifting to poetic texts, a recognition that metaphor went beyond merely "flowery language" was fundamental to my research. I first applied the theory in a class on Song of Songs in which I wrote a paper on the metaphor of beer/wine/drunkeness for love/sex in love literature in the ANE. I have to admit that was a lot of fun (beyond simply reading so much love literature . . . ). I later utilized cognitive linguistics again in exploring deity metaphors in communal laments for my master's thesis.

Nonetheless, neither Cognitive Linguistics nor Speech-Act Theory apply to the grammatical study of language. However, whenever I tried to read anything related to grammar that included linguistic material, I was often lost in technical jargon, trees (not the wood variety), and statistics. I worked to try to read material utilizing linguistics since that discipline is becoming more fundamental in ancient studies, particularly biblical studies. I felt the need to study linguistics, but was turned off by "boring" aspects (technical grammar in the form of phonetics, philology, and morphology) and apprehensive about the "over-my-head" (jargon, scientific analysis, statistics). All I wanted was to better understand Hebrew, Akkadian, and Sumerian!

Of course, I was approaching the study of linguistics more like a philologist would--I wanted specific information on specific languages and had very little patience for "digressions" into discussion of languages other than those or English. After all, why should I care how Russian structures a sentence when I want to know about focusing in Hebrew? One incident in my Akkadian class comes to mind: we were discussing some feature of grammar (what it was escapes me . . . ), but one of the linguistics-oriented students in the class started to say "It's like in Hawaiian . . . " my immediate reply was, "I don't know Hawaiian!" Translation: Why should I care about what Hawaiian does when I want to know what Akkadian does? This misguided thinking (along with natural busyness) led me to generally avoid basic introductions to linguistics since such examples permeate the literature.

It wasn't until after my intro Akkadian class (once my head stopped spinning -- Huehnergard in a single semester!!! Oi!) that our work in comparative Semitics (Akkadian somewhat via knowledge of Hebrew) helped me to better appreciate how other languages could inform my understanding of a particular language. This was cemented by a section at SBL that discussed Hebrew grammar in light of linguistic typology.

A course on Advanced Hebrew Grammar that dipped into features of historical grammar nourished this appreciation and helped me to appreciate phonology and morphology on par with syntax and discourse. To that point, I had generally found those aspects of grammar somewhat tedious. Since I was simultaneously starting work on Sumerian (and, since Sumerian is unrelated to Semitics . . . or any other language for that matter), phonology and morphology naturally grew in importance for me.

At that point, the rote grammar I had previously learned for Hebrew and Akkadian began to make a lot better sense as to why certain forms appeared as they did. Prior, I simply shrugged and memorized the forms rather than fully understanding the proverbial "whys and wherefores." This actually made studying languages easier and grammar more fun. To some degree, I really don't have a good explanation--things just began to click and make better sense. I finally figured out how to ask the right grammatical questions and actually was more interested in form and structure as much as (sometimes even moreso than) function.

Although I was exposed to grammar in language courses, Discourse Analysis/Text-Linguistics "in action" during my class in Hebrew Reading, and philosophical linguistics in exegesis courses, I lacked basic linguistic understanding until I began to think more like a linguist would rather simply as a philologist would.

Now, prior to beginning a much intensive degree track, I find myself absorbing all I can about general linguistics broadly as well as its application to dead langauges and relation to philology. Now that I have the opportunity, I'm actually reading an introductory text, and that's only increased my desire to pursue more study in linguistics. Luckily, Cal has one of the better linguistics departments in the country, so I certainly plan to take advantage of that so I can confidently apply linguistic methodology to my research in Sumerian and Semitics . . .