Leonard Bloomfield and the Exclusion of Meaning from the Study of Language.docVIP

Leonard Bloomfield and the Exclusion of Meaning from the Study of Language 　　Abstract 　　In this study the attempt was made to find out whether Bloomfield was only interested in the structural description of language， and therefore he excluded the study of meaning. This was done by the examination of his （1933） published book LANGUAGE which is still considered to be the most relevant study on language ever written， because it covers all traditions of language study– historical-comparative， philosophical-descriptive and practical-descriptive. 　　The present paper has shown that Bloomfield regarded meaning as a weak point in language study and believed that it could be totally stated in behaviorist terms. For Bloomfield， the context of situation was an important level of linguistic analysis alongside syntax， morphology， phonology， and phonetics， all of which contribute to linguistic meaning. Meaning then covers a variety of aspects of language， and there is no general agreement about the nature of meaning. This paper， therefore， should be considered only as a clarification of Bloomfield’s understanding of meaning. 　　Key words： Context of situation； Traditional grammarians； Behaviourism； Mentalistic psychology； Linguistic meaning； Generative grammar 　　INTRODUCTION 　　Bloomfield’s approach to linguistics can be characterized by his emphasis on its scientific basis， his adherence to behaviourism， and by his emphasis on formal procedures for the analysis of linguistic data. This approach put the American linguists at dispute not only with rival approaches but also with the wide-spread philosophy and humanities. De Beaugrande emphasizes this aspect in his （1991） published book， he writes “Bloomfield’s language fostered in American linguistics a spirit of confrontation not merely against rival approaches，but also against prevailing philosophy， language teaching， and the humanities at large” （83ff）. 　　Bloomfield was annoyed with the philosophers because they “took it for