You are on page 1of 36


Baudouin de Courtenay (1845-1929) is probably one of the most interesting and complex figures of the linguistics of his time. He was one of the chief precursors of structuralist linguistics, father of several linguistic schools, and a role model for generations of Polish scholars. Presenting his scholarly profile in a few pages is a daunting task, not only because a lot has already been written about him,1 but also because his impressive scholarly output does not lend itself to neat pigeon-holing. Among the areas of linguistics to which Baudouin made important contributions one finds, among others: phonetics and phonology, historical linguistics, psycho- and sociolinguistics, contrastive linguistics, dialectology, language typology, lexicology and lexicography. He was also a distinguished Slavist and Indo-Europeanist. If one disregards the list of 22 principles of linguistics formulated in his autobiographical note (Baudouin 1897:33-35), Baudouin never produced anything approaching a synthesis of his views. We are told by his contemporaries (e.g., Rozwadowski 1929) that, looking back at his long career, he reprimanded himself for having frittered away his energies on too many diverse topics. An author dealing with Baudouin is thus confronted with the sheer bulk of his production (over 400 publications, mostly scattered in obscure periodicals) and hampered by the lack of a major synthetic oeuvre. Additionally, there is the awareness that, since only a tiny fraction of Baudouin's work has been translated into English, the burden of responsibility to one's Western readers is perhaps greater than usual.
1 See especially Husler (1968), Koerner (1972), aradzenidze (1980), Mugdan (1984), and Rieger & Szymczak (1989).


Historiographia Linguistica 25:1-2 (1998), 25-60. DOI 10.1075/hl.25.1-2.05ada ISSN 0302-5160 / E-ISSN 1569-9781 John Benjamins Publishing Company



Owing to the preceding observations, some self-imposed restrictions seem to be in order. I have decided to concentrate on what is likely to be of interest to students of general linguistics (thus ignoring, e.g., Baudouin's achievements in the area of Slavic), and on what is of special interest to me personally (hence the noticeable bias towards Baudouin's treatment of language change).2 This seems to me to be a more fruitful path to follow than attempting to produce a paper of comparable size dealing with a larger number of issues, but in a more perfunctory way. The References at the end should provide a reasonably exhaustive guide for readers wishing to find out more about any particular topic connected with Baudouin. Where possible, I have tried to let my subject speak in his own voice, both in order to give the readers a taste of his admittedly heavy prose, and, more importantly, in order to minimise the danger of misrepresenting his thoughts.3 2. Biographical sketch Baudouin was descended from a long line of French aristocrats which went back to the 13th century and which died out in France by 1730. Some time before that date two of Baudouin's impoverished ancestors had migrated to Poland. One of the brothers, a colonel of artillery, became head of the foreign court-guard of King August II; the other founded the famous Hospital of the Infant Jesus for abandoned children in Warsaw. The colonel's son (Baudouin's great-grandfather) was chamberlain and advisor to the last Polish king, Stanislaw August Poniatowski. He became fairly well-known as a translator of Molire and author of numerous works on mesmerism. Baudouin's father was a land surveyor and his mother came from the landed gentry; they had twelve children and lived a life typical of 19th-century Polish intelligentsia. Baudouin himself was born in 1845 in Radzymin near Warsaw. Despite his French background, and the fact that he spent merely a fraction of his life in an independent Poland, the testimony of one of his daughters (Malachowska 1973) makes it clear that Baudouin thought of himself as a Pole. At the same
A subject treated in considerable detail in Adamska-Salaciak (1996). Unless indicated otherwise, all translations into English are mine. 4 This section is based on a number of published sources including Baudouin (1897), Buli (1897), Rozwadowski (1929), Jakobson (1929), Korbut (1930), Szober (1930), Uiaszyn (1934), Nitsch (1935), Vasmer (1947), Leont'ev (1960), Vinogradov (1963), Husler (1968), Koerner (1972; 1973[1971]:138-147), Stankiewicz (1972), Maiachowska (1973), aradzenidze (1980), Mugdan (1984), Rusek (1989), Stachurski (1989), Urbaczyk (1989) and on personal communication with Prof. Magdalena SmoczyAska of the Jagiellonian University.
3 2



Picture of the young Baudouin de Courtenay



time, being passionately opposed to all forms of nationalism and institutionalised religion, he insisted that every individual had the right to belong to the nation and denomination of his choice, including no nation and no denomination.5 In 1862 Baudouin entered the historical-philological faculty of the newly opened Warsaw University (called Szkoia Glwna "Main School")- When, two years later, the faculty split into three departments, he chose Slavic philology. In his own view (Baudouin 1897:22), he was an autodidact from the start, pursuing, apart from curricular subjects, the study of Sanskrit, Lithuanian, and of the physiology of sounds. It was also around that time that he developed a profound interest in psychology, thanks mainly to contact with the works of Steinthal. After receiving his master's degree in 1866, Baudouin was sent abroad in order to prepare for a professorial career at the Szkola Glwna. He went to Prague, Jena and Berlin, spending at most a semester in each place, but coming into contact with some of the most prominent linguists and natural scientists of his time. In the years 1868-1870 Baudouin studied in St. Petersburg under Izmail Ivanovic Sreznevskij (1812-1880), who encouraged his incipient interest in dialectology. In 1870 he spent some months in Leipzig, where, at the instigation of his former fellow-student at Jena, August Leskien (1840-1916), he received a doctorate for "Einige Flle der Wirkung der Analogie in der polnischen Declination" (which had appeared in 1868 in a journai edited by August Schleicher and Adalbert Kuhn). It was also in Leipzig that he published O drevne-pol'skom jazyke do XIVgo stoletija (1870),6 a work for which he was awarded an M.A. by the University of St. Petersburg (the Warsaw degree was not recognised in Russia) and offered the post of privat-docent of comparative grammar. Baudouin might have preferred to go elsewhere, but in the end he had little choice. In 1871 the historical-philological faculty of Kiev University nominated him to the post of docent of comparative grammar, but the university council vetoed the decision on the grounds of the candidate's nationality. For the same reason, and despite earlier promises, he was not wanted at his Warsaw alma mater, by then completely Russified. Finally, having once held a scholarship from the Russian government, he could not accept the post of professor of Slavic offered him by the Jagiellonian University in Cracow, which was then under Austro-Hungarian administration. This scenario of settling for
See excerpts from his letter to Arnosi Muka in Besta (1962:440). English translations of all Polish and Russian titles are given in the References.



second best was to be repeated more than once in the course of his subsequent career. In 1872 the Russian Academy agreed to finance Baudouin's fieldwork on the Slovenian dialects of southern Austria and northern Italy, a study undertaken at the suggestion of Sreznevskij. Apart from providing the eager young scholar with the opportunity to attend Ascoli's lectures in Milan and Leskien's lectures in Leipzig, the trip ultimately resulted in Opyt fonetiki rez'janskix govorov (1875), a work which earned him a doctorate from St. Petersburg. Meanwhile, in 1874, the University of Kazan offered Baudouin the post of docent of comparative grammar. He moved there in the autumn of 1875, soon after defending his dissertation. In August 1876 he married Cezaria Pryfke, whom he had known since his student days in Warsaw. Baudouin was to stay in Kazan until 1883, although he never ceased to complain of the place's provincialism and his scholarly isolation. A brighter aspect of his stay there was that he managed to attract some highly motivated and talented students with whom he met regularly not only at the university, but also privately, during weekly seminars at which original papers were read and new developments in Western linguistics discussed. The group of enthusiasts included V. A. Bogorodickij, S. K. Buli, W. Radloff, and, last but not least, Mikolaj Habdank Kruszewski (1851-1887), with whom, for a few seminal years, Baudouin collaborated very closely. Unfortunately, towards the end of Baudouin's Kazan period, the views of the two scholars started to diverge; not long afterwards, Kruszewski became terminally ill and died at the age of thirty-six. Both facts filled Baudouin with a bitterness discernible in virtually all his subsequent writings in which reference is made to the so-called Kazan School. An even more personal tragedy had struck earlier: in 1878 Baudouin's wife, pregnant with twins, had died at her parents' house in Warsaw, where she had gone in the hope of having a safer delivery. In the academic year 1881-1882 Baudouin applied for a sabbatical, proposing to devote it to a continuation of his fieldwork on Slovenian dialects. As it happened, he used the leave primarily to refresh his contacts with Western scholarship. He went to the Third International Congress of Geography in Venice, participated in several sessions of the Socit de linguistique de Paris (meeting Saussure,7 Bral and Havet, and receiving life membership in the society), and spent some time in Leipzig, working on his dialectological data and studying Celtic with Ernst Windisch (1843-1918). In January 1882 he married Romualda Bagnicka, a student of the historical-philological faculty at

See Sljusareva (1974) for information on the subsequent correspondence between the two scholars.



the St. Petersburg Higher School for Women. She was later to become a recognised author (mainly of historical and biographical works) and a campaigner for women's rights, particularly active in the fight for the admission of women to universities. The couple had five children, whose speech Baudouin studied systematically for 19 years (1885-1904).8 In 1883 they moved to Dorpat (now Tartu in Estonia), where Baudouin received the newly founded Chair of Comparative Slavic Grammar. Owing to its geographical location (closer to the West) and to the fact that the university was German-speaking, Baudouin must have considered it to be an improvement upon Kazan, though still a far cry from what he aspired to.9 He taught general linguistics, Slavic and Lithuanian, studied Armenian, Estonian, Latvian and Arabic, and took courses in higher mathematics and speech pathology. It was during the Dorpat period that he wrote his most important theoretical studies, including Mikolaj Kruszewski, jego zycie i prace naukowe (1888-1889), O zadaniach jezykoznawstwa (1890), and O oglnych przyczynach zmian dzwiekowych (1890). In 1893, having worked in Russia for the twenty-five years entitling him to early retirement, Baudouin wasfinallyable to transfer to Cracow, where he became titular professor of comparative linguistics. His best-known publication from the period is the treatise on sound alternations, Prba teorji alternacyj fonetycznych (1894), whose German version was published the following year (Baudouin 1895). In addition to fulfilling his professorial duties at the Jagiellonian University and being a spectacularly active member of the Academy of Sciences, Baudouin organised private seminars for academics and advanced students of linguistics, as well as presided over linguistic discussions open to university lecturers and distinguished secondary school teachers. His influence on the intellectual life of Cracow was immense. Working at what was essentially a Polish university, surrounded once again by a group of dedicated students (including Kazimierz Nitsch, Stanislaw Szober, Henryk Ulaszyn, and Tytus Benni all later to become distinguished scholars in their own right), Baudouin was finally reasonably happy. Sadly, extending his stay in Cracow proved impossible, since the ministry of education in Vienna, under some pressure from
For details, see Chmura-Klekotowa (1974:6). From Baudouin's copious correspondence with his friends and colleagues, extending over many decades, we learn of his dashed hopes regarding various academic posts, one example being the chair of Slavic in Vienna (Seldeslachts & Swiggers, to appear). 10 The Polish territories administered from Vienna enjoyed a considerable degree of cultural autonomy compared with those under Russian or Prussian rule.
9 8



Baudouin's enemies at the university,11 refused to renew his five-year contract. The immediate reason was, allegedly, a pamphlet in which Baudouin attacked the corrupt practices of the Austro-Hungarian administration; a less direct reason may have been his interest in the Slavic languages, which was interpreted by Hungarian nationalists as a symptom of dangerous 'panslavism'. As a result, Baudouin, still technically a Russian citizen, returned to St. Petersburg. In addition to general linguistics and phonetics, his interests now encompassed lexicology, lexicography and language typology; he also continued to delve deeper and deeper into the psychological substrate of linguistic phenomena. In 1904 he published Szkice jezykoznawcze, an important collection of essays written in earlier periods and scattered in various Polish, Russian and German periodicals. In 1907 he entered into a polemic with the Leipzig professors Brugmann and Leskien (1907), declaring himself a staunch supporter of artificial languages. He published a number of textbooks for students of various Slavic languages, as well as a highly successful introduction to linguistics, Vvedenie v jazykovedenije (1917[1909]). Much as in Kazan a quarter of a century earlier, he again raised a group of first-rate linguists. One of his disciples, Lev Vladimirovi Scerba (1880-1944), was later to become the head of yet another linguistic school known in Soviet historiography as the Leningrad School whose major achievement was the development of Baudouin's ideas in phonology. However respected he may have been as a scholar, Baudouin's political sympathies did little to endear him to the tsarist regime. The situation became critical when in 1913, true to his lifelong commitment to social justice, he published a pamphlet on the suppression of the rights of national minorities in the empire. The move resulted in his suspension from the university and a twoyear prison sentence. He was released from prison after a few months, with the outbreak of World War I, but all his personal property, including linguistic documentation gathered painstakingly over many years, was lost in the wake of the war and the Bolshevik Revolution. After the revolution Baudouin briefly resumed his duties at St. Petersburg. Upon the re-emergence of an independent Polish state in 1918 he took the Chair of Indo-European Linguistics at the University of Warsaw, where he was to remain for the rest of his life. During that final decade he continued to be active as a scholar, pedagogue, and indefatigable writer on ethical, social and political issues. His personal integrity had won him immense respect, particularly with those social groups in whose defence he had frequently risked
Mostly conservative Catholics, resentful of his professed agnosticism and his passion for social reform.



his career: he was even the minorities' candidate for the presidency of Poland in 1922. Recognition of his professional achievement resulted in the appearance in 1921 of the first Festschrift ever to be devoted to a Polish linguist. In 1922 Baudouin spent some time in Prague, lecturing on the classification of languages; in 1923, at the invitation of Holger Pedersen (1867-1953), he went to Copenhagen to give a lecture on the influence of language on worldview (published as Baudouin de Courtenay 1929). This was to be his last trip abroad. He died in Warsaw in 1929. 3. Baudouin's views on language In various places Baudouin characterised language in various ways. Although the characterisations are not mutually exclusive, they are usually given in passing, which does not facilitate interpretation. To start with, language is not a (Schleicherian) organism, but one of the functions of an organism (Baudouin 1869). It is also defined, in a Humboldtian manner, as 'a universal reaction of the spirit to the incitements or stimuli of the world' (1990[1903]: 335), the formative organ for thought, or a kind of world-view. Given its origin and functioning, language is again in Humboldtian terms both an ergon and energeia, the latter aspect being responsible for the ubiquity of change, the former justifying conscious attempts at language improvement on the part of its users. This ergon-cum-energeia nature of language underlies Baudouin's (1907) defence of artificial languages:12
Die Sprache ist weder ein in sich geschlossener Organismus, noch ein unantastbarer Abgott, sondern ein Werkzeug und eine Ttigkeit. Und der Mensch hat nicht nur das Recht, sondern geradezu die soziale Pflicht, seine Werkzeuge zweckmig zu verbessern, oder sogar die schon bestehenden Werkzeuge durch andere bessere zu ersetzen. (1907:394) Die Sprache ist wohl ein viel komplizierteres Gebilde, als z.B. ein Gedicht oder ein Musikstck, aber es ist auch gewissermaen ein Kunstprodukt. Neben der 'kollektiven' Schpfung einer ganzen Sprachgenossenschaft ist auch hier eine individuelle schpferische Ttigkeit hervorragender Erfinder denkbar. (1907:397)

In the nature-culture debate Baudouin would thus seem to stand somewhere in the middle, conceiving of language as both a function of the human organism and a cultural product. Baudouin was a uniformitarianist. In his view, the essential features of language, including its polygenetic origin, followed from the identity of the physiological and psychological constitution of all humans. Uniformitarianism also lay at the heart of his belief that any language at any time must be a mixture of
Note that original emphasis has been retained in all quotations.



old and new elements, since this is what one finds in the living languages available for inspection. Most importantly, Baudouin's concept of language was psychological, as evidenced by his oft-repeated dictum that a language exists only in the minds of its speakers: Language is a psychical phenomenon through and through. The basis for all its manifestations is exclusively psychical, cerebral. (1904[1888-1889]: 165) In particular, Baudouin insisted that what he called "the people's feeling for the language" (Russ. ut'je jazyka narodom) was something real and objectively verifiable: The people's feeling for the language is not afiction,not a subjective delusion, but a real, positive category (function), which can be determined by its properties and effects, confirmed objectively, proven by facts. (1990[1871]:48) This psychological bias became more pronounced with time, reaching a culmination in Baudouin de Courtenay (1915). Contrary to Jakobson's claim (1971:417ff.), however, it is evident not only in Baudouin's post-Kazan period, but virtually in all his writings (cf. Buli 1897:47). Although psychologism was exceedingly common in 19th-century linguistics, Baudouin's own version of it appears somewhat idiosyncratic. In addition to drawing upon associative psychology, it also contains elements of ethnopsychology.13 This has created a difficulty for later commentators, some of whom have dubbed Baudouin a 'psychologist', others a 'sociologist', 14 while still others such as Cikobava (1959) or Leont'ev (1965) have used both labels in different combinations. If one insists on characterising his stance in those terms, the last option seems the most sensible one. Baudouin's 'psychologism' does indeed appear to be combined with a 'sociologism' of sorts. As already indicated, the latter is rather peculiar. For Baudouin there was no such thing as a collective soul or a collective language, no society other than the average of individuals, and no ethnopsychology in the literal sense. Unlike Steinthal, Lazarus or Wundt, he never talked of the national language as a manifestation and measure of the national spirit; in fact, he hardly ever talked of the national spirit at all. This is understandable, given his decisive rejection of all personification in science (cf. Mugdan 1984:145), as well as his pro-

13 This may have bothered those (including the ethnopsychologist Wundt himself) who regarded Herbartian associationism and Vlkerpsychologie as incompatible; cf. Wundt's (1901) exchange with Delbrck (1901). 14 For details, see Saradzenidze (1980:32n.l3).



found distaste for anything even vaguely suggestive of nationalism.15 Still, like Steinthal, he looked upon language as the linguistic activity of groups of people making up a society. Accordingly, he approved of the central idea behind Vlkerpsychologie, viz. that individual psychology must be supplemented by sociological considerations. He gave the ususal raison d'tre for a 'psychology of the people', namely, that the development of such phenomena as language, myths, customs etc. did not normally depend on individual acts of will. One would look in vain for a coherent theory of language as a social phenomenon among Baudouin's theoretical pronouncements, most of which do not go beyond slogans of the type: The existence of language is only possible within a society. (1904[1888-89]: 128) However, Baudouin's work with concrete linguistic data testifies to his profound awareness of the role of the social in language. As early as in the 1870 monograph, he is to be found making a largely successful attempt at reconstructing the phonetic features of different Old Polish dialects on the basis of historical documents. What we now call socially conditioned synchronic variation figures prominently in the writings based on his own fieldwork. Analyses such as that of the loss of h or the variable realisation of word-final consonants in the Resia dialects (1875 and many later mentions) distinctly resemble subsequent work in sociolinguistics, a discipline of which Baudouin is rightly considered to have been a forerunner (see, e.g., Rothstein 1975, Stone 1989). In sum, Baudouin seems to have realised that the language-society nexus was far more complicated than allowed for in current linguistic theory. Paradoxically, he paid a high price for his innovative frame of mind. It seems obvious if only from a cursory glance at Jakobson's writings on the Kazan School that Baudouin's "precocious, premature and unappreciated discovery of what is now called sociolinguistics and, following from that, his immersion in what is now called psycholinguistics" (Olmsted 1989:26) proved damaging to his reputation as a structuralist, costing him the loss of influence over scholars who embraced this new direction in linguistics. 4. Baudouin's views on linguistics Baudouin was distinctly unhappy with the natural-historical dichotomy, so popular in his time in the classification of the sciences: For some exemplary evidence, see Baudouin de Courtenay (1908); for more discussion see Rothstein (1989).



Contrasting 'historicalness' with 'naturalness' is illogical, and smacks of contrasting, e.g., length with youth, or weight with colour. (1904[1888-1889]: 127)

Linguistics was for him a discipline sui generis. When forced to think in terms of the simplistic dichotomy, he suggested that linguistics was a psychological-historical discipline by virtue of its attitude to the object investigated, whereas its method, as well as its whole internal organisation, brought it close to the natural sciences (Baudouin 1963[1869]:37; 1881b:278). Believing firmly in the psychological character of language, he stressed the links between linguistics and psychology, demanding that all linguists be familiar with the principles of psychology (Baudouin 1904[1901]:6). Another issue that figures prominently in his reflections on the nature of linguistics as a science is the relation between the linguistic past and present. It has often been suggested that the synchronic/descriptive and the diachronic study of language are equally important in Baudouin's work. This is true enough, if we take his division of linguistics to be analogous to that championed later by de Saussure. Such an assumption is wholly justified for a large part of Baudouin's work. However, in a number of writings e.g., in Baudouin (1889, 1890, 1897, or 1899) we see an attempt to introduce a threefold division of linguistics, corresponding to the three interrelated aspects of language: the static, the dynamic, and the historical. None of the three is coextensive with either half of the Saussurean dichotomy. Baudouin's statics is a limiting case of dynamics, an abstraction (for the purposes of description) from the real behaviour of languages, which exhibit change also in their synchrony:
In language, as in nature in general, everything is alive, everything is moving and changing. All stillness, rest, stagnation, is only apparent: a special case of movement in conditions of minimal change. The statics of language is but a special case of its dynamics [...] (1897:34)

Dynamics is the central part of linguistics, the one which reflects the everchanging reality of language and looks for the causes of the changeability. The third member of the triad, history, would seem to be a mere chronicle, a noncausal account of the sequence of events in the tribal/national language. Baudouin declared history to be marginal in his work, since his professed concern was with development, i.e., with what can only happen in the individual language. In practice, the investigation of tribal/national languages played a much more important role in his work than he was willing to admit. In Baudouin (1922), for instance, he deals with the history of the (average, collective etc.) Polish language, and not with the development of the languages of individual Poles. Little is altered by his insistence that the history of a language equals the history of mental representations, as in the following:



[...] what is the internal history of the Polish language a history of? It is by no means a history of transient phonetic-acoustic or graphic-visual phenomena, indispensable for interpersonal interaction in the domain of human language or speech, but a history of the representations corresponding to those phenomena and stored in individual human souls. (1983[1922]: 101)

In sum, regarding the synchrony - diachrony issue, it is probably fair to say that, while one cannot equate Baudouin's and de Saussure's views on the matter, one must not overestimate their differences either. In both cases the underlying division is between the unchanging (Baudouin's statics, Saussure's synchrony) and the changing (Baudouin's dynamics, Saussure's diachrony). Superimposed upon this distinction is Baudouin's notion of history, which comprises not only change, but also persistence: change and lack of change are thus conceived as complementary.16 5. Baudouin's contribution to phonology Of all the topics connected with Baudouin this is the one most thoroughly dealt with in the existing literature, both in historiographically oriented studies and in strictly phonological ones.17 While there may be differences of opinion regarding the extent of Baudouin's importance for any other area of linguistics, his contribution to the development of phonology appears undisputed. Already in the Kazan period Baudouin distinguished between what he called 'anthropophonics' (roughly, today's phonetics) and 'phonetics' (corresponding to later (morpho)phonology). Subsequently, he tried to disambiguate the latter term by talking of 'psychophonetics'. Anthropophonics dealt with sounds and psychophonetics with phonemes. Alongside the distinction between these two aspects of the study of speech sounds, Baudouin insisted on the yet more basic separation of the study of sounds/phonemes from the study of graphemes (a term he himself coined). The issues are discussed, for instance, in his early lecture programmes (Baudouin 1876 and 1877-78) and in his mature work on sound laws (Baudouin 1910). Like most pioneers, Baudouin did not always use his own distinctions consistently. Thus, one occasionally finds him using the terms 'sound' and phoneme' interchangeably, which has not escaped the attention of later phonologists (e.g., Jakobson 1971[1960]:420).
For a diagram illustrating the synchrony-diachrony and statics-dynamics perspectives, see Lenek (1989:75n.6). 17 Despite some reservations expressed below, and despite the subsequent appearance of a number of works devoted to the topic, Jakobson's (1960) treatment still remains unsurpassed. 18 Baudouin's creations, side by side with dozens of terms which were never to be used outside the Kazan circle, included also such felicitous coinages as 'morpheme'.



The elaboration of the phoneme concept dates back to the time when Baudouin and Kruszewski worked in tandem, which makes it difficult, if not impossible, to assess their respective contributions to this fundamental development in structuralist phonology.19 The relevant publications appeared in the same year (Baudouin 1881a, Kruszewski 1881a,b), and both scholars readily acknowledged their debt to each other. Despite his subsequent disappointment with Kruszewski's major work, Oderk nauki o jazyke (1883), and long after he had become disenchanted with the whole Kazan era, Baudouin continued to pay tribute to his late student, especially as regards the logical organisation and orderly presentation of their common findings. It is not unlikely that, had he acted differently, the part played by Kruszewski would have fallen into oblivion. Pursuing the age-old question of the relation between sound and meaning, Baudouin and Kruszewski arrived at the concept of the phoneme as a meaningdifferentiating unit through the study of phonetic alternations. Their notion of alternation is therefore sketched briefly in the following section. 5.1 Alternations The topic of alternations occupied Baudouin for half a century, from his article on the s ~ ch alternation in Polish (Baudouin 1868b) until his introduction to linguistics (Baudouin 1917[11909]); his 1894 monograph (German version: Baudouin 1895) contains the fullest exposition of his views on the subject. In that work an alternation is defined as the coexistence (das Nebeneinander) of phonetically different but etymologically related sounds. Three basic classes of alternations are distinguished: 1) neophonetic alternations (divergences), 2) paleophonetic or traditional alternations, and 3) psychophonetic alternations (correlations). Divergences result from the influence upon a sound of its phonetic context; their members, divergents, are combinatory variants of the same sound. Traditional alternations are residues of divergences, i.e., they attest to past operation of sound changes which are no longer active. Finally, in correlations phonetic differences perpetuated by tradition come to be utilised "for psychical purposes" (1990[1894]:143), i.e., as signals of morphological or semasiological distinctions. Another property exclusive to alternations of the

It has been known since at least Jakobson (1971[1960]:396) that Baudouin and Kruszewski acquired the term from Saussure (1879), who got it from A. Dufriche-Desgenettes (1804-1877), possibly via Havet. It should be clear, though, that it is not the word 'phoneme' I am concerned with, but the concept.




third type is their 'vitality', manifested in the analogical extension of their members {correlatives) to new words. The boundaries between the three classes are not sharp, since alternations of one type gradually evolve into those of another. The usual scenario is as follows: with the obliteration of the phonetic context (caused, among others, by the gradual transformation of a formerly combinatory phonetic process into a spontaneous one), a divergence is transformed into a regular, traditional alternation, which eventually acquires a morphological/semasiological function, thus turning into a correlation. With the passage of time, the resulting correlation tends to lose its psychological motivation, changing back into a traditional alternation. What at a given time still constitutes a psychophonetic alternation for one individual may already be a traditional alternation for another. The study of alternations was one of the manifestations of Baudouin's conviction that linguists should work with living languages prior to investigating dead ones (see, e.g., Baudouin 1897:34). Unlike with the Neogrammarians, this was not simply a theoretical postulate largely devoid of practical consequences, but a principle Baudouin adhered to consistently. At the same time, the theory of alternations had important consequences for Baudouin's conceptualisation of language change. He tried to introduce some order into the current treatments of the subject, arguing that one should not mistake currently operating processes for historical changes, or, in general, invoke the terminology of historical linguistics without making sure that what one was dealing with really was the result of a historical process. In his view, the only type of phonetic change occurring in the linguistic present resulted from the discrepancy between the speaker's phonetic intention and its realisation, thus amounting to no more than a mere substitution: [T]he substitution of an actual pronunciation for an intended one is the only strictly phonetic change, the only phonetic 'transition' which can take place in the linguistic present. That, however, which is usually called phonetic 'change', or 'transition' of one sound into another, is, from the objective point of view, merely coexistence, or alternation. (1990[1894]:167) As an example of alternation as opposed to substitution Baudouin cited pairs such as the Polish k ~ in reka "hand" ~ rqczka "little hand", where the appearance of could not be due to a discrepancy between the intended and the actual, since speakers of Polish could easily pronounce a k in the relevant context. Unlike substitutions, alternations are results of historical changes. This is not to say that the whole issue boils down to an either-or choice between 'syn-



chronic' vs. historical processes. The occurrence of different sounds in related morphemes may be an instance of a simple substitution or a reflex of a historical change, but it may also be due to both factors, i.e., to a process which started in the past, but is still operative in the present. Baudouin insisted that using the cover term Lautwandel or Lautbergang to describe all these phenomena would gloss over important differences between them. The immediate response to these proposals was lukewarm at best. Baudouin and Kruszewski failed to convince their contemporaries that the distinction between sound alternation20 and sound change was worth maintaining, as is evident from the reviews of Baudouin (1895) by Lloyd (1896), Meringer (1896) and Wagner (1896), or, earlier, from the review of Kruszewski (1881a) by Brckner (1881) and of Kruszewski (1881b) by no lesser a scholar than Brugmann (1882). Many years had to pass before the value of the concept of alternation came to be appreciated (see, e.g., Kilbury 1974, Klausenburger 1978). 5.2 The phoneme As indicated above, the idea of sound alternations served Baudouin and Kruszewski as a point of departure for distinguishing between sounds and phonemes. The phoneme was, for both of them, a phonetic unit (as opposed to the sound, an anthropophonic unit) which constituted the invariant part of the word. At first, they viewed phonemes as prototypes of sound correspondences in related languages (i.e., rather like Saussure in 1879), as well as prototypes underlying sound alternations in a given language (see, e.g., Kruszewski 1995 [1881b]:14n.5). Most of the time, however, their attention was focussed on the synchronic plane, the phoneme being defined as:
[...] the sum of generalised anthropophonic properties of a given phonetic part of the word, indivisible in the process of establishing the links of correlation within one language and the links of correspondence within several languages. In other words: the phoneme is what is phonetically indivisible from the point of view of the comparability of phonetic parts of the word. (Baudouin 188la:69)

There is a much commented upon difference between this definition and a later one, which reads:
The phoneme = a uniform representation from the phonetic world, which comes into existence in the mind through the psychical fusion of impressions obtained by pronouncing one and the same sound = the psychical equivalent of a sound. (Baudouin 1990[1894]:153)

The term 'Lautalternation' was first used by Baudouin's student, Radloff (1882). In their earlier works Baudouin and Kruszewski talked of 'Lautabwechslung' or 'Lautwechsel'.



The shift from defining the phoneme in functional terms to conceiving it as a psychological unit has generally been treated, especially by representatives of the Prague School, as a sign of regression on Baudouin's part. This assessment, entirely typical of early structuralism, is also evident, for example, in the relative indifference to Sapir's psychological definition of the phoneme three decades later (Sapir 1921, 1925, 1933), or in Trubetzkoy's abandonment of his earlier mentalist approach (Trubetzkoy 1929, 1933) in favour of a functionalist one (Trubetzkoy 1939). Although the advent of generative phonology to some extent legitimised the mentalist treatment, it is probably fair to say that in the end the functional approach proved more fruitful. Still, one ought to be aware that the definitions of the phoneme Baudouin proposed at different points in his career differ more in theory than in practice: no matter which definition is adopted, the units identified as phonemes will turn out largely to be the same, and, more often than not, identical to the units arrived at through later phonemic analysis. A detailed examination of the reasons which led Baudouin to concentrating on the psychological aspects of the phoneme falls outside the scope of the present article. Suffice it to say that there is little evidence to support Jakobson's (1971[1960]:419) claim that the move was "fundamentally just camouflage to justify his discoveries in the eyes of his contemporaries", who, for the most part, stressed the dependence of linguistics on psychology and favoured the genetic approach. Contrary to Jakobson (1967), there is also no indication that towards the end of his life Baudouin reverted to the functional understanding of the phoneme championed in the Kazan period. Such claims run deeply against what we know about Baudouin's lifelong allegiance to the psychological interpretation of the facts of language and about his scholarly and personal integrity. In my view, there is no reason to disbelieve what he himself said on the topic, and that hardly leaves any doubts as to his genuine conviction mistaken as it may have been that the psychological approach to the phoneme was an improvement upon his own earlier treatments of the subject. 5.3 Distinctive features21 Although in the early stages of Baudouin's and Kruszewski's work one of the defining features of the phoneme was its indivisibility, the later Baudouin (e.g., 1910) proposed to resolve the unit into still smaller components: the simplest indivisible mental representations of single articulatory actions and of the acoustic impressions evoked by those actions. He called these two types of representations kinemas and akusmas, and defined the phoneme accordingly as
See Ruszkiewicz (1973) for more on Baudouin's treatment of distinctive features.



"a complex of kinemas and the corresponding akusmas, joined into one whole by their simultaneity, with an inseparable beginning and end" (1990[1910]: 416). The immediate reason behind this resolution of the phoneme into what were later called distinctive features was the need to disambiguate the notion of sound change, which Baudouin believed to be hopelessly misunderstood by most of his contemporaries. He argued that representing phonemes and, eo ipso, their changes as complexes of kinemas and akusmas would help the linguist to see what really changed in the course of a sound change. Rather than saying, for instance, that b has changed into p, one would have to say that "the group of kinemas and akusmas characteristic of the phoneme associated with the grapheme b has been replaced by a different group of kinemas and akusmas, characteristic of the phoneme associated with the grapheme p" (1990[1910]:416). A schematic presentation of that statement, with all the properties of b listed on the left and those of p on the right, allows one to see that the kinemas and akusmas are identical on both sides, except that the akusma of voicing (with its underlying kinema) has changed into the akusma of voicelessness. Baudouin also pointed out that, apart from clearly identifying the changing elements of a sound in a particular sound change, his way of representing phonemes facilitated the identification of factors responsible for the varying degrees of changeability of different sounds. The more complex a phoneme in terms of its composition, he argued, the greater the likelihood of its succumbing to change: p, b, t or d, for instance, are more stable than their palatalised counterparts. Also, fairly rare or unusual combinations of kinemas and akusmas such as r or / are more prone to change than commoner combinations of features, present in whole series of phonemes. Interestingly, Baudouin does not seem to have regarded the reasoning behind his proposal as particularly innovative, as the following quote makes clear:
All this has long been known to all thinking linguists. All I am trying to demonstrate is the desirability of representing the simplest articulatory-auditory elements by means of stable technical terms and symbols. (1990[1910]:418)

'All thinking linguists' probably included scholars such as Sweet or Passy, who shared Baudouin's concern with the optimal graphic representation of sound. Since the late 1870s Baudouin had recognised the need to develop two systems of transcription, differing in the amount of phonetic detail included; around 1900 this became the subject of abundant correspondence between him and Henry Sweet (see Jakobson 1971[1960]:424-425).

6 . Baudouin's


views on language change

Like most of his contemporaries, Baudouin talked of language change in terms of sound change and analogy, and had to take a stand on the notorious controversy over sound laws. The following two sections summarise his thinking on the subject. 6.1 Analogy Baudouin's pioneering study on analogy (1868a), published in German in the same year as Scherer (1868), was hardly noticed by his contemporaries. One of the reasons for this lack of recognition was certainly the fact that the data for the study came from Polish; a contributing factor may have been Schleicher's editorial intervention, which consisted in removing (without the author's knowledge) the whole theoretical introduction to the study. What was left of the article just about succeeded in dispelling the myth of the existence of vocalic stems in Polish declension. In all probability, however, without the omitted theoretical preface it was hard to appreciate the innovative character of Baudouin's analysis, especially his argument that the only valid criterion for morphological boundary placement was the state of the language at a given time, or, more precisely, 'the linguistic feeling of the speakers'. Ever since this early work Baudouin's view of analogy was in all important respects identical to that championed later by the Neogrammarians (who, as is well known, acknowledged their debt to Scherer) and sharply opposed to the teaching of Schleicher. In short, Baudouin stressed the universality of analogy, insisting that its operation should be recognised not only for contemporary, but also for past (including pre-historical) stages of languages. 6.2 Sound change and sound laws Baudouin's writings from all periods abound in statements questioning the reality of sound changes and sound laws, for example:
There are no phonetic changes or 'phonetic laws' (Lautgesetze), nor can there be any, if only for the reason that the human voice in general, and the sounds of language in particular, do not have, and cannot have, any continuity. A pronounced word or sentence disappears as soon as it has been pronounced. There is no physical connection between one utterance and the next. The link between successive utterances of a given sound, a given phonetic word, or, finally, the whole of phonetic speech (i.e., the speech that is heard and perceived by ear) is constituted by representations, memory images {Erinnerungsbilder), which in the course of pronouncing become the stimuli for moving the organs of speech in the appropriate manner. (1990[1894]: 165-166)



As for changes (as distinct from laws), what Baudouin rejected was merely the idea of a sound change as a synchronic process (cf. 5.1 above); the issue might thus be considered to be partly terminological. His rejection of neogrammarian sound laws, on the other hand, was something much more serious. It followed from his insistence on distinguishing between individual and social language, his conviction that sounds have no continuity, and, above all, his belief in the psychological character of language.22 For Baudouin, the notion of Lautgesetze would only appear to make sense,
[i]f we replace the articulatory-auditory representation permanently present in individuals with its transient, short-lived manifestation during inter-individual intercourse, if we forget about the unfilled breaks between the individual psyches, if, finally, we assume that 'sound changes' (Lautwandel) are effected in and of themselves, independently of articulatory-auditory representations. (1990[1910]:413)

He argued further that the assumption of an uninterrupted, continuous existence of sounds was patently wrong. There are no such sounds, and that which does not exist, but is merely a transitory manifestation of that which does, cannot change. Neither sounds nor words are capable of phonetic development. What can and does develop are the speakers' mental representations of linguistic units, as well as the skill of their articulatory and auditory organs. Consequently, the only real Lautgesetze are the laws of acoustics, which, by virtue of being applicable to all (including nonlinguistic) sounds, belong together with other laws of the physical world. Linguists have been misled into postulating specifically linguistic sound laws by the stability of graphemic representations, which obscures the gradual nature of change:
A uniform representation of a letter, i.e., a uniform grapheme, [...] furnishes the grounds for regarding the corresponding representation of a sound as something uniform. However, any representation of a sound, any phoneme, must, by the nature of things, be broad, unstable and changeable. Related to the failure to distinguish between letters and sounds, graphemes and phonemes, is another misunderstanding in the thinking on 'sound laws'. The overwhelming majority of linguists are unable to understand that the relations of dependence, subsumable under the notion of a law, can only be present here in vacillations and changes which are imperceptible, microscopic. Between the two end-points of the historical changes which have led, for instance, from the k of the linguistic ancestors to the 6 of the linguistic descendants [...] there is no relationship that could be captured by a formula of a law of development. However, on the way along which a whole series of generations has proceeded in this direction, one must assume an infinite number of discrete points, such that each successive stage depends directly on the conditions of individual linguistic thought and social intercourse. (1990[1910]:414-415)

For a more extensive discussion than is possible here, see Adamska-Salaciak (1997).



The distinction Baudouin was after seems to me to be analogous to the distinction between diachronic correspondence and diachronic change introduced by Andersen (1972). A correspondence is an epiphenomenal result of a change, often first identifiable on the basis of a difference in spelling. Changes are what happens in the linguistic microcosm, while correspondences are what historical linguists have access to, and what they often perceive as regular enough to be deserving of the name 'law'. Given enough time and a large enough territory, changes do indeed result in regular correspondences:
[...] the psychical processes which accompany the activation and manifestation of phonemes, as well as social processes [...], lead to historical-phonetic changes in the average language. The results of those changes, ascertained statistically, exhibit regularity over vast territories and long time stretches. (1990[1910]:443-444)

Baudouin himself was much more interested in micro- than in macrochange. He called the former change in actu and claimed it was reflected, among others, in the 'multilingualism' of all members of any speech community, as well as in the differences observable in the speech of successive generations, or in the speech of one and the same individual over the years.23 He refused to be impressed by superficial generalisations about secondary macrochanges:
The 'exceptionlessness' characteristic of such phonetic correspondences and generalisations, pompously christened 'sound laws', is on a par with the 'laws' or generalisations of meteorology [...]. It is simply the ascertaining of that which occurs on the surface of the phenomenal world. The actual 'laws', the laws of dependence, are hidden deep down, in a complicated tangle of most varied factors. (1990[1910]:416)

Unlike for some other critics of the neogrammarian dogma, such as, for example, Schuchardt (1885), for Baudouin the rejection of the sound law concept did not mean embracing the other extreme, i.e., treating all change as the result of more or less conscious imitation. Phonetic change usually proceeds slowly and imperceptibly, he claimed, "so that fashion and conscious imitation are out of the question" (1990[1910]:447). 6.3 Causation Like his views on sound laws, Baudouin's ideas on the causes of language change remained remarkably stable over the years. The fullest treatment of the topic is given in Baudouin (1890), but remarks similar to those quoted below can be found in his writings from different periods.


Cf. his observations on the changes in his own pronunciation (e.g., Baudouin 1990 [1910]:433).



It is hardly surprising, in view of Baudouin's psychological bent, that he considered the individual brain to be the main locus for change and, at the same time, a guarantee of language maintenance:
The nervous centre, the brain, is characterised in relation to language by the ability to bring about correspondence, harmony, between content and form, that is, to bring closer in form what is close in content, and, conversely, to bring closer in content what is close in form, as well as to differentiate in form what is different in content, and, conversely, to differentiate in content what is different in form. Here resides both a guarantee of maintaining the state of the language, as well as a stimulus for change. (1904[1890]:57)

Broadly speaking, change in language is due to the following factors: 1) The linguistic stock of form-content combinations arises in an unplanned fashion, through chance associations of images; this results in the simultaneous excess and shortage of means of expression, both conducive to change. 2) Linguistic intercourse is indirect (the linguistic images of one individual must be transmitted to the 'psychical reservoirs' of other individuals), which leads to the loss of form-content connections; when etymological links are forgotten, words become isolated and more susceptible to change. 3) Creative individuals enrich both the resources of their own language and, through contact with others, those of the social language. 4) Due to the haphazard manner in which its resources accumulate, language may sometimes impede logical thinking; this leads to changes which make language more orderly and logical. 5) The universal tendency of human thought to become increasingly more abstract leads to changes of meaning through metaphor, "through making words, qua linguistic vehicles for concepts, more abstract, [...] through the association of images according to similarity, in a certain fixed direction" (1904 [1890]:58). It should be clear from the above that the factors which bring about change at the same time determine its direction(s). In the most general terms, change is governed by the tendency to minimise effort in three areas: articulation, perception, and 'cerebration'. The underlying assumption is that, in relation to language, the human mind works in three directions: from the centre outwards (the work of motor nerves, the muscular work involved in speaking, i.e., phonation), from the outside inwards (the work of sensory nerves, listening, directing attention to what is heard, i.e., audition and perception), and in the very centre of the brain (the work of the nerves in the central nervous system, attention, memory, linguistic thinking, or, in Baudouin's terminology, 'cerebration'). Each of the three aspects of our mental work is subject to the tendency to minimise effort. Accordingly, any change motivated by this tendency



will proceed in one or more of the three directions. The tendencies sometimes counteract one another,
[a]nd a perfectly natural thing it is, too, since [...] [a]ll three types of linguistic work take place during every single act of speaking. No wonder, then, that tendencies in one direction may be paralysed by tendencies in another direction, so that, for instance, the effects of the tendency to facilitate pronunciation manifest themselves only insofar as there is no interferencefromthe tendency towards clarity and towards preserving links among forms which constitute one family. (1904[1890]:63)

Baudouin's examples of the operation of the three basic tendencies of change are of the following kind: 1. F (changes resulting from the tendency towards ease of phonation): simplification of consonant clusters,finalvowel reduction, dissimilation of liquids (as in the Polish barwierz > balwierz "barber"). 2. F(-C) (as above, unless the tendency towards ease of cerebration intervenes): palatalisation of Polish s and z (to s and z respectively) before palatal p',b',m' ,w', except when the s and z are still perceived as prepositional in origin (thus spi "is sleeping", wezmie "will take" (3rd sg.), but zbierac"to gather", zmiana "change", spisac"to write down"). 3. F+A (simultaneous operation of the tendencies towards ease of phonation and ease of audition): failure to pronounce the Polish f (dark /) syllable-finally, e.g., in nisl "he carried" or jabiko "apple". 4. F+A(-C) (as above, unless the change is arrested by the tendency towards ease of cerebration): i, lost in similar contexts, was preserved in picha "louse", where it was "felt by the Poles to constitute an indispensable phonetic part of the word"24 (1904[1890]:69). 5. C (changes resulting from the tendency towards ease of cerebration, i.e., towards "the removal of redundant differences which violate [...] the agreement between content and form" (1904[1890]:72)): loss of grammatical gender, adoption of the same case ending for several declensions, rise of prepositions and articles. A finer distinction needs to be made in the case of changes in meaning motivated by the ease of cerebration, since there one has to deal with two conflicting aspects of the relevant tendency: the tendency towards poetic creativity, which makes language more concrete and lively, and the tendency towards the isolation of individual words, which facilitates logical and abstract thinking. Depending on which tendency is favoured on a given occasion, the human mind executes a simplification in either one or the other direction: While metaphor is a mnemonic device, which facilitates the remembering of words through association by similarity [...], the forgetting of etymological links between
Presumably because of the threat of homonymy with pcha "is pushing".



words whose semantic affinity has become obscured adds to their clarity, distinctness and psychical force. As a result, words become more precise symbols, less unstable than they used to be when their etymological connection with other words was still felt. (1904[1890]:76)

Several observations are worth making at this point. First, when Baudouin's contemporaries talked of ease as a factor determining the direction of change, they usually meant ease of pronunciation alone. Baudouin's treatment of the issue resembles the much later, and much better known, 'principle of economy' advocated by Martinet (1955). Secondly, Baudouin's discussion of the desired harmony between content and form amounts to invoking one of the fundamental principles of language organisation, viz. the principle of 'one meaning, one form'. Another prominent motif in his discussion of the ease of cerebration is the conflict between the tendency towards greater iconicity (metaphor, folk etymology) and the tendency towards greater symbolisation (obliteration of etymologies). This is a theme familiar from many present-day treatments of change, notably those carried out with the apparatus of Peirceantype semiotics (cf., e.g., Anttila 1989). Occasionally, Baudouin makes yet another distinction: between causation in the absolute sense and causation 'in a given state of the language'. The former is responsible for the appearance of alternations (it is in this sense that the cause of an alternation is always phonetic), while the latter ensures the continued presence of alternations (particularly, though not exclusively, traditional ones) in the speech of an individual or a group of individuals:
In a given state of the language, only tradition (transmission by some members of a speech community to other members of that community) can be considered the cause of an alternation [...]. We have learnt to speak the way we do from our surroundings and from our ancestors this explanation is entirely sufficient. (1990[1894]:210)

In general, questions concerning the appearance and evolution of different alternation types are directly related to the larger question of the mechanisms of change. According to Baudouin, it is the least strongly motivated (i.e., paleophonetic or traditional) alternations which carry within them the seeds of change. Supported by tradition alone, they are most likely to fall victim to the conflict of individual strivings and needs with that tradition:
Psychical associations, which secure the preservation of traditional alternations, are constantly in collision with the tendency to eliminate those phonetic differences which are justified neither by individual anthropophonic tendencies nor by individual psychical needs. (1990[1894]:224)

The conflict is typically resolved in one of the following ways: 1) the alternation in question may be eliminated through the replacement of one of the al-



ternants with the other; 2) it may be eliminated through the loss of the feeling of an etymological relationship between the relevant morphemes; 3) it may evolve into a psychophonetic alternation (correlation) through endowing the difference between the alternants with a morphological or semasiological function (1990[1894]:256-257). The winner in cases 1) and 2) is the tendency towards 'one meaning, one form'; in 3) tradition prevails, but only if new associations are formed. In the long run, a traditional alternation will either disappear or change into a correlation. One could find numerous examples of quotes illustrating Baudouin's ideas on causation, but they would hardly affect the picture sketched above. Change is consistently presented in his writings as a reaction to a situation of conflict (between different tendencies, needs etc.), with the solution to the conflict being unpredictable in advance, since it depends on which tendency prevails on a given occasion. 6.4 Linguistic innovations Baudouin seems to have believed that all languages abound in potential innovations resulting from the reinterpretation by language users of the linguistic material available to them. The following is one of the clearest formulations of this thought: The normal functioning of objective linguistic thinking consists in continuous and incessant assimilation, in [...] bringing the incomprehensible back to life by linking it to the comprehensible, in [...] endowing it with meaning and subsuming it under known types. Objective linguistic thinking is characterised by the constant joining of words and their meaningful parts into groups which share a common semasiological image, i.e. by constant 'etymologising*. We only notice it, however, when a word's lack of meaning connection [to other words] activates the tendency to endow it with meaning in one way or another. Objective linguistic thinking is characterised by the joining of linguistic forms into groups/types which share a common, morphologically laden, phonetic (articulatory-auditory) image. We only notice it, however, when this joining leads to the rise of unexpected forms, of neologisms. At any time, therefore, we should be prepared for the surfacing of latent 'folk etymology' and latent 'analogy'. (1983[1915]:63-64) In addition to saying what it does, the quote illustrates a rather exasperating habit of Baudouin's: an original thought is expressed in passing, 25 probably judged by the author to be self-evident, and never developed in enough detail. A careful reader, however, might agree that it does not seem too far-fetched to

In this particular case, in a book on the Polish language, and not, say, a theoretical work on language change.



compare the scenario sketched by Baudouin with Andersen's (1973) notion of abductive innovation in evolutive change. As those familiar with Andersen's model will recall, this type of innovation remains covert or, as Baudouin would have said, 'latent' unless it is followed by a deductive innovation which makes the reanalysis explicit. 6.5 The language system What most distinguishes Baudouin's approach to change especially sound change from the atomism dominant in the linguistics of his time is probably his recognition of the role played in change by the system of the language which undergoes it. Already in his 1870 master's thesis and in his early university lectures he pointed out that physiologically identical sounds in different languages could differ in value depending on their relations to the remaining sounds of the same language, i.e., to the sound system of that language. Such differences have important consequences for the historical development of sounds:
[...] one must not forget about the possibility of one and the same sound in different languages developing differently [...] in connection with the difference of the whole sound system. [...] German s may have developed into r due to the fact that the whole sound system of German was at that time completely different from the sound system of Slavic, where s did not undergo a similar change. (1904[1888-89]: 165)

Other changes with which Baudouin illustrated "the mutual relationship and interdependence of the details of the phonetic system" include, for instance, the rise of nasal vowels in open-syllable languages, followed by their gradual loss after the languages in question develop closed syllables (1990[1910]:445). Baudouin went further than viewing individual changes as system-dependent: he believed that even notions such as economy and ease were relative to the language system in question. This thought was formulated in response to Delbrck's (1902:296-297) objections against appealing to economy as an explanatory device. Delbrck's question was, roughly, how to account for developments which are the exact opposites of changes associated with minimisation of effort, e.g., in a situation when we find both the change ai > ei and the change ei >ai.Baudouin proposed that one must allow for the relative nature of ease. The following was his example:
For many people, the phonemes associated with the graphemes and x (ch) are quite easy, while for the Lithuanians they sometimes constitute such an insurmountable difficulty that they have to be replaced by p and k [respectively]. (1990[1910]:421)



He immediately added that there was more to minimisation of effort than facilitating pronunciation, referring the reader to the threefold notion of economy introduced in his earlier work (cf. 6.3). With reference to morphological and semantic change, Baudouin seems to have been of the opinion that, as a language develops, its systematic character increases, primarily through the subsumption of originally isolated forms under different form types (cf. 6.4). Authors such as Leont'ev (1960:14) have taken this to be one of the most important features of his treatment of change. The issue may not be self-evident, since the notion of the linguistic system in most of Baudouin's work seems to be taken for granted rather than argued for explicitly. As a result, some scholars have underplayed its relevance for Baudouin, while others have tended to exaggerate it. While I obviously cannot agree with the opinion that "there is no indication that Baudouin ever conceived of language as a system in the manner in which Saussure formulated it" (Koerner 1973:140), I think one should also be careful with statements to the effect that "Baudouin's understanding of language as a system is considerably deeper and more seminal for contemporary linguistics than the notion of system proposed by de Saussure" (Berezin 1976:190). What we can be reasonably sure of, given the evidence presented in this section, is that Berezin was right in one respect, namely, with regard to the importance of the role of the language system in language change. 6.6 Goals of change Baudouin appreciated the role played in change by both internal and external factors, recognising what is now called the multiple causation of change. Most importantly, he believed that the causes of language change could not be extricated from the speakers. He speculated that change could best be viewed as the fight of the chaos of nature and life with the 'ordering human spirit' : In the life of language we can observe constant work directed at removing chaos and divergence, and at introducing order and uniformity. (1990[1903]:353) The ordering tendency, which counteracted the lack of one-to-one correspondence between meaning and form, was aided by language mixture, which, in addition to introducing change from without (e.g., through borrowing), constituted a powerful simplificatory force. Apart from ordering/simplificatory trends, Baudouin occasionally talked of other universal tendencies of language (or rather, of language users), such as, e.g., the tendency towards morphologisation and towards semasiologisation. He also identified tendencies in the development of separate languages and language groups, one frequently men-



tioned example being the drift towards the consonantal type in the history of certain Slavic languages. In short, Baudouin's view of change was distinctly teleological. The version of teleology which he espoused albeit implicitly is common enough in the literature on the subject, where change is conceived of as a result of the competition of a number of tendencies operating with or (more often) without the language users' consciousness. Baudouin's work is especially rich in references to short-term processes whose nature can only be construed as teleological. Here belong, for instance, cases of so-called 'prohibitive analogy', i.e., "the tendency towards a phonetic uniformisation of morphemes which are felt to belong together psychically" (1990[1894]:197), or cases where the 'preventive' or 'conservative' effect (i.e., the non-occurrence of change) is attributed to the high frequency of a given form or to its "high psychical weight coefficient" (1990[1905]:380). Needless to say, Baudouin (e.g., 1904[1888-1889]) explicitly rejected the kind of teleology that ascribes goals to language itself. The tendencies/forces whose operation he admitted in language were all supposed to be derived from the tendencies of the speakers. The overriding goal of language users, as indicated above (6.3), was the minimisation of effort in the domains of language production, perception and mental processing. Here is a typical example of his reasoning on the subject:
The simplification of linguistic forms, [...] the introduction of greater agreement between form and content, between word and thought, does not occur because of a striving towards any goal given in advance, but only in order to facilitate the process of speaking, as a simple, unconscious mnemonic device, as a striving to spare oneself unnecessary work. What is at work here are simple egoistic and altruistic motives, the tendency to facilitate, on the one hand, the mental development of the individual, and, on the other hand, social life. The fact that, in the process, parts of the language come closer to the ideal indicated by Kruszewski26 is only an unintentional, accidental effect, which has nothing to do with the real cause of the changes. (1904 [1888 1889]: 166-167; emphasis in the original)

Readers familiar with Keller (1990) will no doubt have noticed the essentially 'invisible-hand' conceptualisation of change implicit in the above. Just as the increase of general prosperity (e.g., in Mandeville's Fable of the Bees) is an unintended consequence of countless individual actions which are guided by selfish motives, and not by any desire to further the common good, so the optimisation of linguistic structure (in particular, the increase in the degree of oneThe ideal referred to is the principle of "correspondence between the world of words and the world of ideas" (Kruszewski [1995:173], translated from the fifth and last of the Poloenija "Theses" which Kruszewski appended to his dissertation [1883:149]).



to-one correspondence between form and content) is, in Baudouin's scheme of things, a contingent result of a mass of individual actions which, although goal-directed, are not intended by the actors as means towards attaining the state of affairs they happen to bring about. 7. Concluding remarks I tried to make it clear in the Introduction that the present paper would not, and could not, do justice to Baudouin's versatility, or to the impact his work has had on many different branches of linguistics. By concentrating on a few chosen areas, I hope to have given the reader a taste of how innovative and original Baudouin's work was for his time. It is in this light that one should view the tentative comparisons I have drawn between some of Baudouin's statements and later developments in linguistics, such as, e.g., Andersen's model of abductive and deductive change or Keller's invisible-hand theory of language. The singling out of these models inevitably reflects my own bias and interests. Other commentators would no doubt be able to show parallels between Baudouin and other recent approaches. This, of course, attests to the necessarily subjective character of the historiographer's endeavour, but is also, I believe, indicative of something more important: far from being of merely historical value, Baudouin's ideas continue to hold interest and relevance for students of linguistics, largely irrespective of their theoretical allegiance. Author's address: Arleta Adamska-Salaciak School of English Adam Mickiewicz University al. Niepodleglosci 4 PL-61-874 POZNAN, Poland e-mail: REFERENCES Adamska-Salaciak, Arleta. 1996. Language Change in the Works of Kruszewski, Baudouin de Courtenay and Rozwadowski. Poznan: Motivex. 1997. "Baudouin de Courtenay on Lautgesetze". Hickey & Puppel 1997.911-921. Andersen, Henning. 1972. "Diphthongization". Language 48.11-50. . 1973. "Abductive and Deductive Change". Language 49.765-793.

For some attempts, see the contributions to the Rieger & Szymczak volume of 1989.



Anttila, Raimo. 1989. Historical and Comparative Linguistics. 2nd ed. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Baudouin de Courtenay, Jan (Ignacy Niecislaw). 1868a. "Einige Flle der Wirkung der Analogie in der polnischen Declination". Beitrge zur vergleichenden Sprachforschung auf dem Gebiete der arischen, celtischen und slavischen Sprachen 6.19-88. (Polish translation with restored preface in Baudouin 1904:176-248.) -. 1868b. "Wechsel des s (, ) mit ch in der polnischen Sprache". Ibid., 221-222. -. 1869. "August Schleicher". Tygodnik Ilustrowany 104.317-319. (Russian transl. in Baudouin 1963 I, 35-44.) . 1870. O drevne-pol' skom jazyke do XIVgo stoletija [On the Old Polish language before the 14th century]. Leipzig: Behr & Hermann. . 1875. Opyt fonetiki rez'janskix govorov [An attempt at a phonetics of the Resia dialects]. Warsaw: E. Wende. . 1876. "Programma tenij docenta sravnitel'noj grammatiki indoevropejskix jazykov v tekuem 1875/76 akad. godu [A programme of readings by a docent of comparative grammar of Indo-European languages in the current academic year 1875-1876]". Izvestija Imperatorskogo Kazanskogo Universiteta 1.191-195. (English transl. in Baudouin 1972:81-91.) . 1877-78. "Podrobnaja programma lekcij v 1876-77 ucebnom godu [A detailed program of lectures in the academic year 1876-1877]". Izvestija Imperatorskogo Kazanskogo Universiteta 13.309-324, 14.1.61-133. (English transl. in Baudouin 1972:92-113.) . 1881a. "Nekotorye otdely 'sravniternoj grammatiki' slavjanskix jazykov [Some chapters of the 'comparative grammar' of the Slavic languages]". Russkij Filologiceskij Vestnik 5.265-344. 1881b. "Neskol'ko slov' o 'sravnitel'noj grammatike indoevropejskix jazykov' [A few words about the 'comparative grammar of Indo-European languages']". Zurnal Ministerstva Narodnogo Prosveenija 218:2.269321. . 1888-89. "Mikolaj Kruszewski, jego zycie i prace naukowe [Mikolaj Kruszewski, his life and scholarly works]". Prace Filologiczne 2:3.837-849, 3:1.116-175. (Repr. in Baudouin 1904:96-175.) . 1889. "O zadaniach jezykoznawstwa [On the tasks of linguistics]". Pracefilologiczne3:1.92-115. (Repr. in Baudouin 1904:24-49.) . 1890. "O oglnych przyczynach zmian jezykowych [On the general causes of linguistic changes]". Prace Filologiczne 3:2.447-488. (Repr. in Baudouin 1904:50-95.) 1894. "Prba teorji alternacyj fonetycznych [An attempt at a theory of phonetic alternations]". Rozprawy Akademii Umiejetnoci:Wydziaifilologiczny 2:5.219-364. (Repr. in Baudouin 1990:140-278.) . 1895. Versuch einer Theorie phonetischer Alternationen: Ein Kapitel aus der Psychophonetik. Strassburg: Karl J. Trbner.



. 1897. "Bodun de Kurten, Ivan Aleksandrovic: Avtobiograficeskaja zametka [Bodun de Kurten, Ivan Aleksandrovic: An autobiographical note]". Vengerov 1897.18-45. 1899. "Fonologija [Phonology]". Wielka encyklopedia powszechna ilustrowana, vol.XXII, 791-798. Warsaw. (Repr. in Baudouin 1990:281294.) . 1901. "Jezykoznawstwo czyli lingwistyka w wieku XIX-ym [Linguistics in the 19th century]". Prawda 1.1-23. (Slightly expanded version in Baudouin 1904:1-23.) . 1903. "Jezyk i jezyki [Language and languages]". Wielka encyklopedia powszechna ilustrowana, vol.XXXIII, 266-278. Warsaw. (Repr. in Baudouin 1990:332-354.) . 1904. Szkice jzykoznawcze [Linguistic sketches]. Vol.1. Warsaw: Piotr Laskauer. . 1905. "Prba uzasadnienia samoistnosci zjawisk psychicznych na podstawie faktw jezykowych [An attempt to justify the independence of psychical phenomena on the basis of linguistic facts]". Sprawozdania z posiedzen Wydzialu Filologicznego AU w Krakowie 1-3. (Repr. in Baudouin 1990:372-392.) . 1907. "Zur Kritik der knstlichen Weltsprachen". Annalen der Naturphilosophie 6.385-433. . 1910. "O 'prawach glosowych' [On 'sound laws']". Rocznik slawistyczny 3.1-72. (Repr. in Baudouin 1990:410-471.) . 1913. National'nyj i tentorial'nyj priznak v avtonomii [The national and the territorial criterion in autonomy]. St. Petersburg: Tipografija M. M. Stasjulevica. . 1915. "Charakterystykapsychologicznajzyka polskiego [A psychological profile of the Polish language]". Encyklopedya polska, vol.II:3.154226. Warsaw. (Repr. in Baudouin 1983:28-98.) . 1917[1909]. Vvedenie v jazykovedenie [Introduction to linguistics]. 4th ed. St. Petersburg: Author, 233 pp. (Extracts repr. in Baudouin 1963 II, 246-293.) . 1922. Zarys historji jezyka polskiego [An outline of the history of the Polish language]. Warszawa: Polska Skladnica Pomocy Szkolnych. (Repr. in Baudouin 1983:99-186.) . 1929 "Einfluss der Sprache auf Weltanschauung und Stimmung". Prace Filologiczne 14.184-225. . 1960. I. A. Bodun de Kurten (k 30-letiju so dnja smerti) [I. A. Bodun de Kurten (on the occasion of the 30th anniversary of his death)]. Ed. by S[amuel] B[orisovi] Bernstejn. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR. . 1963. I. A. Bodun de Kurten: Izbrannye trudy po obemu jazykoznaniju [I. A. Bodun de Kurten: Selected works in general linguistics]. 2 vols. Ed. by V[iktor] P. Grigor'ev & A[leksej] A. Leont'ev. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR.



. 1972. A Baudouin de Courtenay anthology: The beginnings of structural linguistics. Ed., transl. and with an introduction by Edward Stankiewicz. Bloomington & London: Indiana Univ. Press. . 1974. Spostrzezenia nad jezykiem dziecka [Observations on child language]. Ed. with an introduction by Maria Chmura-Klekotowa. Wroclaw-Warszawa-Krakw-Gdansk: Zaklad Narodowy Imienia Ossolinskich. -. 1983. Dzieia wybrane [Selected works]. Vol.V. Warszawa: Pastwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe. . 1990. Dziela wybrane [Selected works]. Vol.1V. Ibid. Berezin, F[edor] M. 1976[1968]. Russkoe jazykoznanie: Konca XIX - nacala XX v. [Russian linguistics: Late 19th - early 20th century]. 2nd rev. ed. Moscow: Izdatel'stvo "Nauka". Besta, Theodor. 1962. "Neznm listy J. Baudouina de Courtenay luzickosrbskmu buditeli A. Mukovi [Unknown letters of J. Baudouin de Courtenay to the Sorbian activist A[rnost] Muka]". Slavia 31:3.419-440. Bodun de Kurten, Ivan Aleksandrovic = Baudouin de Courtenay, Jan Ignacy Niecislaw. Brckner, Aleksander. 1881. Review of Kruszewski (1881a). Archiv fr Slavische Philologie 5.685-686. Brugmann, Karl. 1882. Review of Kruszewski (1881b). Literarisches Centralblatt fr Deutschland 32:12.400-401. Brugmann, Karl & August Leskien. 1907. Zur Kritik der knstlichen Weltsprachen. Strassburg: Karl J. Trbner. Bulic, Sergej K. 1897. "Bodun de Kurten, Ivan Aleksandrovic". Vengerov 1897.45-50. Chmura-Klekotowa, Maria. 1974. "Wstep [Introduction]". Baudouin 1974:59. Cikobava, Arnold S. 1959. Problema jazyka kak predmeta jazykoznanija [The problem of language as the subject of linguistics]. Moskva: Gosudarstvennoe ucebno-pedagogiceskoe izdatel'stvo Ministerstva prosveenija. Delbrck, Berthold. 1901. Grundfragen der Sprachforschung mit Rcksicht auf Wundts Sprachpsychologie errtert. Strassburg: Karl J. Trbner. . 1902. "Das Wesen der Lautgesetze". Annalen der Naturphilosophie 1.277-308. Erlich, Victor, Roman Jakobson & Czeslaw Milosz, eds. 1975. For Wiktor Weintraub: Essays in Polish literature, language and history presented on the occasion of his 65th birthday. The Hague: Mouton. Husler, Frank. 1968. Das Problem Phonetik und Phonologie bei Baudouin de Courtenay und in seiner Nachfolge. Halle/Saale: Max Niemeyer. (2nd rev. ed., 1976.) Heilmann, Luigi, ed. 1974. Proceedings of the 11th International Congress of Linguists. 2 vols. Bologna: II Mulino. Hickey, Raymond & Stanislaw Puppel, eds. 1997. Language History and Linguistic Modelling: A Festschrift for Jacek Fisiak on his 60th birthday. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.



Jakobson, Roman. 1929. "Jan Baudouin de Courtenay". Slavische Rundschau 1.809-812. (English transl. in Jakobson 1971.389-393.) . 1960. "Kazaska szkola polskiej lingwistyki i jej miejsce w swiatowym rozwoju fonologii [The Kazan' school of Polish linguistics and its place in the international development of phonology]". Biuletyn Polskiego Towarzystwa Jezykoznawczego 19.3-34. (English transl. in Jakobson 1971: 394-428.) . 1967. "Znaczenie Kruszewskiego w rozwoju jezykoznawstwa oglnego [The significance of Kruszewski in the development of general linguistics]". Kruszewski 1967:x-xxv. . 1971. Selected Writings. Vol.11: Word and language. The Hague: Mouton. Keller, Rudi. 1990. Sprachwandel: Von der unsichtbaren Hand in der Sprache. Tbingen: Francke. Kilbury, James. 1974. "The Emergence of Morphophonemics: A survey of theory and practice from 1876 to 1939". Lingua 33.235-252. Klausenburger, Jrgen. 1978. "Mikolaj Kruszewski's Theory of Morphonology". Historiographia Linguistica 5.109-120. Koerner, E. F. K[onrad]. 1972. "Jan Baudouin de Courtenay: His place in the history of linguistic science". Canadian Slavonic Papers/Revue canadienne des Slavistes 14:4.663-682. (Repr. in Koerner 1978:107-126.). . 1973[1971]. Ferdinand de Saussure: Origin and development of his linguistic thought in Western studies on language. Braunschweig: Friedrich Vieweg & Sohn. . 1978a. Toward a Historiography of Linguistics: Selected essays. Foreword by R. H. Robins. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. . 1986. "Kruszewski's Contribution to General Linguistic Theory". Linguistics across Historical and Geographical Boundaries: In honour of Jacek Fisiak ed. by Dieter Kastovsky & Aleksander Szwedek, vol.1: Linguistic Theory and Historical Linguistics, 53-75. Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter. (Revised and extended version, with a full bibliography of Kruszewski's writings, in Kruszewski 1995:xi-xxxv.) Korbut, Gabrjel. 1930. "Jan Niecislaw Baudouin de Courtenay". Wiedza i iycie 2 (offprint). Kruszewski, Mikolaj Habdank. 1881a. "K voprosu o gune: Issledovanie v oblasti staroslavjanskogo vokalizma [On the question of guna: A study in the field of Old Slavic vocalism]". Russkij Filologideskij Vestnik 5:1.1-109. (Partial Polish transl. in Kruszewski 1967:25-46.) . 1881b. Ueber die Lautabwechslung. Kazan: Universittsbuchdruckerei. (English transl. by Robert Austerlitz in Kruszewski 1995:5-34.) . 1883. Ocerk nauki o jazyke [An outline of the science of language]. Kazan: Tipografija Imperatorskogo Universiteta. (English transi by Gregory M. Eramian in Kruszewski 1995:51-173.) . 1967. Wybrpism [Selected writings]. Transl. by Jerzy Kurylowicz and Krystyna Pomorska, with introductory articles by Jerzy Kurylowicz and



Roman Jakobson. Wroclaw-Warszawa-Krakow: Zaklad Narodowy Imienia Ossoliiiskich. . 1995. Writings in General Linguistics: On Vocalic Aternations; An Outline of Linguistic Science. Ed. with an Introduction by Konrad Koerner. (= Amsterdam Classics in Linguistics, 1800-1925, 11.) Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Krusevskij, Nikolaj Vjaceslavovic = Kruszewski, Mikolaj Habdank. Lencek, Rado L. 1989. "Language-Society Nexus in Baudouin's Theory of Language Evolution: Language change in progress". Rieger & Szymczak 1989.73-81. Leont'ev, Aleksej A. 1960. "Tvorceskij put' i osnovnye certy lingvistieskoj koncepcii I. A. Boduna de Kurten [The creative path of I. A. Bodun de Kurten and the basic characteristics of his linguistic conception]". Baudouin 1960.5-27. . 1965. "I. A. Bodun de Kurten i ego ucenie o jazyke (K 120-letiju so dnja rozdenija) [I.A. Bodun de Kurten and his teaching on language (On the occasion of the 120th anniversary of his birth)]". Russkij Jazyk v Skole 29:2.87-93. Lloyd, Richard John. 1896. Review of Baudouin de Courtenay (1895). Die Neueren Sprachen 3.615-617. Makkai, Valerie Becker, ed. 1972. Phonological Theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Malachowska, Ewelina. 1973. "Jan Baudouin de Courtenay w zyciu prywatnym [Jan Baudouin de Courtenay in private]". Przeglad Humanistyczny 5.92-104, 119-131. Martinet, Andr. 1955. conomie des changements phontiques. Berne: A. Francke. Meringer, Rudolf. 1897. Review of Baudouin de Courtenay (1895). sterreichisches Litteraturblatt 22.684-686. Mugdan, Joachim. 1984. Jan Baudouin de Courtenay (1845-1929): Leben und Werk. Mnchen: Wilhelm Fink. Nitsch, Kazimierz. 1935. "Jan Baudouin de Courtenay 13 III 1845 - 3 XI 1929". Polski siownik biograficzny, vol.1, 359-369. Warsaw. (Repr. in Nitsch 1960:182-216.) . 1960. Ze wspomnienjzykoznawcy [From the memoirs of a linguist]. Krakw: Pastwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe. Olmsted, D[avid] L[ockwood]. 1989. "Baudouin, Structuralism and Society". Rieger & Szymczak 1989.25-34. Prace lingwistyczne ofiarowane Janowi Baudouinowi de Courtenay dla uczczenia jego dzialalnosci naukowej 1868-1921 [Linguistic works presented to Jan Baudouin de Courtenay to celebrate his scholarly activity 1868 1921]. 1921. Krakw: Drukarnia Uniw. Jagiellonskiego. Radloff, Wilhelm. 1882. "Die Lautalternation und ihre Bedeutung fr die Sprachentwicklung, belegt durch Beispiele aus den Trksprachen". Abhandlungen des Fnften Internationalen Orientalisten-Congresses gehalten zu Berlin im September 1881, vol.III, 54-70. Berlin: Ascher.



Rieger, Janusz & Mieczysiaw Szymczak, eds. 1989. Jan Baudouin de Courtenay a lingwistyka swiatowa: Materialy z konferencji miedzynarodowej, Warszawa 4-7 IX 1979 [Jan Baudouin de Courtenay and world linguistics: Materials from an international conference, Warsaw 4-7 IX 1979]. Wroclaw-Warszawa-Krakw: Zaklad Narodowy Imienia Ossoliskich. Rothstein, Robert A. 1975. "The Linguist as Dissenter: Jan Baudouin de Courtenay". Erlich et al. 1975.392-405. . 1989. "Jednostka ludzka jako motyw przewodni twrczosci Jana Baudouina de Courtenay [The individual as the leading motif of Jan Baudouin de Courtenay's output]". Rieger & Szymczak 1989.529-537. Rozwadowski, Jan Michal. 1929. "Jan Baudouin de Courtenay". Jzyk polski 14.164-170. (Repr. in Rozwadowski 1960:260-265.) . 1960. Wybr pism [Selected writings]. Vol.Ill: Jezykoznawstwo oglne [General linguistics]. Warszawa: Pastwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe. Rusek, Jerzy. 1989. "Krakowski okres dzialalnosci Jana Baudouina de Courtenay [Jan Baudouin de Courtenay's Cracow period]". Rieger & Szymczak 1989.603-608. Ruszkiewicz, Piotr. 1973. "Baudouin de Courtenay and the Theory of Distinctive Features". Biuletyn Fonograficzny 14.91-99. Sapir, Edward.1921. Language: An introduction to the study of speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co. . 1925. "Sound Patterns in Language". Language 1.37-51. (Repr. in Makkai 1972.13-21.) 1933. "La ralit psychologiques des phonmes". Journal de psychologie normale et pathologique 30.247-265. (English original, "The Psychological Reality of Phonemes", first published in 1949, has been reprinted in Makkai 1972.22-31.) Saussure, Ferdinand de. 1879. Mmoire sur le systme primitif des voyelles dans les langues indo-europennes. Leipzig: B. G. Teubner. Saradzenidze, T[inatin] S. 1980. Lingvisticeskaja teorija I. A. Boduna de Kurten i ee mesto v jazykoznanii XIX - XX vekov [I. A. Bodun de Kurten's linguistic theory and its place in 19th and 20th-century linguistics]. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo "Nauka". Scherer, Wilhelm. 1868. Zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache. Berlin: Weidmann. (Repr., with an Introd. by Kurt R. Jankowsky [ix-lv], Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1995.) Schuchardt, Hugo. 1885. Ueber die Lautgesetze: Gegen die Junggrammatiker. Berlin: Robert Oppenheim. Seldeslachts, Herman & Pierre Swiggers. To appear. "The Image of Jan Baudouin de Courtenay in his Correspondence with Hugo Schuchardt". Paper presented at ICHoLS VII, Oxford, 12-17 Sept. 1996. Sljusareva, N[atalija] A. 1974. "Problems of Scientific Connections and Influence (F. de Saussure and J. Baudouin de Courtenay)". Heilmann 1974 II, 753-757.



Stachurski, Edward. 1989. "Listy Jana Baudouina de Courtenay [Jan Baudouin de Courtenay's letters]". Rieger & Szymczak 1989.625-646. Stankiewicz, Edward. 1972. "Baudouin de Courtenay: His life and work". Baudouin 1972:3-47. Stone, Gerald. 1989. "Jan Baudouin de Courtenay's View of Free Variation". Rieger & Szymczak 1989.301-305. Szober, Stanislaw. 1930. "Jan, Ignacy, Niecislaw Baudouin de Courtenay (1845-1929)". Pracefilologiczne15:l.vii-xxiii. Trubetzkoy, Nikolai S. 1929. "Zur allgemeinen Theorie der phonologischen Vokalsysteme". Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague 1.39-67. . 1933. "La phonologie actuelle". Journal de psychologie normale et pathologique 30.227-246. . 1939. Grundzge der Phonologie. (= Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague, 7.) Prague. Ulaszyn, Henryk. 1934. "Jan Baudouin de Courtenay: Charakterystyka oglna uczonego i czlowieka [Jan Baudouin de Courtenay: A general profile of the scholar and the man]". Poznan: Gebethner & Wolff. Urbanczyk, Stanislaw. 1989. "Zycie i naukowa droga Jana Baudouina de Courtenay [The life and scholarly path of Jan Baudouin de Courtenay]". Rieger & Szymczak 1989.515-522. Vasmer, Max. 1947. "J. Baudouin de Courtenay: Zur 100. Wiederkehr seines Geburtstages". Zeitschrift fr Phonetik 4/5.71-77. Vengerov, S[emen] A., ed. 1897. Kritiko-biografieskijslovar' russkix pisatelej i ucenyx [A critical-biographical dictionary of Russian writers and scholars]. Vol.V. St. Petersburg: Tipografija M. M. Stasjulevia. Vinogradov, Viktor V. 1963. "I. A. Bodun de Kurten". Baudouin 1963 I, 620. Wagner, Ph[ilipp]. 1896. Review of Baudouin de Courtenay (1895). Zeitschrift fr franzsische Sprache und Litteratur 18.106-109. Wundt, Wilhelm. 1901. Sprachgeschichte und Sprachpsychologie mit Rcksicht auf B. Delbrcks "Grundfragen der Sprachforschung". Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann. SUMMARY The extent of Jan Baudouin de Courtenay's (1845-1929) contribution to general linguistic theory is still hard to assess. He never wrote a major synthetic work, nor has the bulk of his production been translated into English. Thanks primarily to Jakobson, at least his formative influence on modern phonology is generally acknowledged. Fewer linguists are aware of the relevance of Baudouin's teaching for the study of language change. His conceptualisation of the nature of change, its causes and goals, and the role played in it by the language system, all seem of more than merely historical interest to the theoretically-minded diachronic linguist.



RSUM L'apport de Jan Baudouin de Courtenay (1845-1929) la linguistique gnrale reste difficile valuer. Il n'a jamais produit d'ouvrage de synthse et la majorit de ses travaux n'a jamais t traduite en anglais. Malgr cela, son influence sur le dveloppement de la phonologie est universellement connue, surtout grce Jakobson. Cependant, les linguistes n'ont souvent pas pris conscience de l'importance des travaux de Baudouin de Courtenay consacrs au changement linguistique. Ses opinions sur l'essence du changement, ses causes et ses buts, aussi bien que ses ides sur le rle qu'y jouait le systme linguistique ne devraient pas avoir, pour le linguiste d'aujourd'hui, qu'une importance exclusivement historique. ZUSAMMENFASSUNG Der Beitrag, den Jan Baudouin de Courtenay (1845-1929) zur theoretischen Sprachwissenschaft geleistet hat, ist schwer einzuschtzen. Er hat nie eine Synthese seines sprachwissenschaftlichen Denkens vorgelegt, und die meisten seiner Werke wurden niemals ins Englische bersetzt. Dennoch ist sein Einflu auf die Entwicklung der Phonologie allgemein bekannt, was hauptschlich Jakobson zu verdanken ist. Viel weniger bekannt sind Baudouins Arbeiten zum Sprachwandel. Fr den heutigen Sprachwissenschaftler sollte seine Auffassung vom Wesen des Sprachwandels, seiner Ursachen und Zwecke und der Rolle, die fr ihn das Sprachsystem spielt, jedoch keinesfalls nur historische Bedeutung haben. STRESZCZENIE Wklad Jana Baudouina de Courtenay (1845-1929) do jezykoznawstwa teoretycznego pozostaje trudny do oszacowania. Nie stworzyl on nigdy syntetycznego dziela, a wiekszosci jego prac nie przetlumaczono dotad na jezyk angielski. Mimo to, glwnie za sprawa Jakobsona, jego wplyw na rozwj fonologii jest oglnie znany. Zdecydowanie mniejsza jest wsrd jezykoznawcw swiadomo wagi prac Baudouina poswieconych zmianie jezykowej. Jego poglady na istote zmiany, jej przyczyny i cele oraz na role, jaka odgrywa w niej system jezyka, maja dla dzisiejszego jezykoznawcy bynajmniej nie tylko historyczne znaczenie.