LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS AS A STUDY OF MEANING 13
One
Linguistic analysis as a
study of meaningt
The present article arises from the Nice Colloquium on semantics
sponsored by the Societe Liniuistique de Paris, organized and presided
over by Professor Benveniste and supported by the Rockefeller Founda­
tion.
The study of meaning was examined and exemplified from at least as
many angles as there were members of the group, and all the principal
theories of semantics considered in one connection or another. The most
valuable results of such meetings are intangible and the effects will
probably not be recognizable in the subsequent �ork of the participants
even by themselves.
For the present writer this article provides a very welcome oppor­
tunity of making explicit some of the more fundamental issues as they
now appear to him after the colloquium.
All systematic t!iought must start from presuppositions and in
dealing with meaning some scholars have supposed single words listed
in a dictionary and single sente'nces each _bounded by f�ll stops could be
safely examined as to their meaning in complete abstraction from
specific environment. 1 Similarly a sentence as such has been �egarded as
a logical proposition expressed in words, which must have a subject,
that which is not the subject being the predicate, the whole sentence
affirming or denying the predicate. Logicians continue to treat words
and sentences as if they somehow could have meanings in and by
themselves. Some linguists follow this centuries-old method of linguistic
analysis merely because of the weight of philosophical and logico­
grammatical tradition. Both these pre-suppositions are misleading in
t Apparently prepared for publication in 1952 or 1953, but never published.
linguistics and wholly inadequate for the handling of speech events
which is the main object of the discipline.
_'.!'he meaning of any particular instance 2 of everyday speech is inti-
3ately interlocked not only with an environment of particular sights
and sounds, but deeply embedded in the living processes of persons
mamtaining thelJlselves in society. ' Spoken language is immersed in the
immediacy of social intercourse', 3 and 'v01ce- roduced sound is a
natural s mbol for the deep experiences of organic existence. e
sounds of speech are ex intimis. ey are no m r o ecular disturb­
ances of the air. It is not the acoustic disturbances which matter but
the disturbances in the bodies of speakers and listeners. The domin�ting
interest of the immediate situation, the urge to diffuse or communicate
human experience, the intimate sounds, these are the origins of speech.
Since science deals with large average effects and these within certain
modes of observation, 5 it is necessary to generalize typical 'texts' or
pieces of speech in generalized contexts of situation. The basic pre­
suppositions or postulates are from this point of view in three groups:
(n The h �m� be�ng is a fi�ld of experience in which the life process
. _
iWemg mamtamed m the social process. The human being in society is
endowed 6 with an urge to 'diffuse' and 'communicate' his ex£erience
----
Q voice and gesture_
All language text in modern languages has therefore:
(a) � imp1icatiea ef tJtterimec, and must be referred to
(b) participants in
(c) some generalize.d..context.-Of..s.i.tuation. 7
Th e categories must also cover 'talking to oneself'.
(3.� The partic�pants in �uch contexts are social persons in terms of the
spe, eh commumty of which they are members. The key notion is one of
p�rson�ty, the essentials of which are:
(a) Continuity and the maintenance Q[J:he life_process,_the social
P�· In this connection the concepts of context of culture and
context of experience 8 are necessary abstractions in stating the
continuity as well as the change of meanings.
(b) The creative effort and effect of�E_eech, including talking to one-'
self. The preservation of the essentials of life in society from the
point of view of the participants in the situation forms a large part
of the meaning of language as creative activity.
(c) Personal responsibility fo� one's.}Yf>rds.
 SELECTED PAPERS OF J. R. FIRTH
(d) The_ organization of perso�ali�y and of social life depends on the
built-in potentialities of language in the nature of the human
beings and on what is learned in nurture.
In the most general terms, the basic principle is the unity, identity
and continuity of the human personality, bearing constantly in mind
r
that 'we are in the world and the world in us'. 9 As,far as possible the
linguist should. .r.emain in..on.e _w.9rld, resisting all t!_ieories which demand
1 in?s ':hich a�ose between the staffs of the brigade and the U.S. 3rd
\ the· acrobatics of balancing . on two worlds, oscillating between two
worlds or seeking a machine with an escape velocity by means of cyber-
netics.
It is of course true that all language presupposes 'other' events
linguistic and non-linguistic issuing from each other. But this does not
necessarily lead to a dualist theory of the sign, still less to the setting
up of a nai:ve binary opposition based on the two much abused general
words phonetic and semantic.
The contextual theory of meaning 10 employs abstractions which
enable us to handle language in the interrelated processes of personal
and social life in the flux of events. As I emphasized in my little book, 11
published over twenty years ago, 'In common conversation about people
and things present to the senses, the most important "modifiers" and
"qualifiers" of the speech sounds made and heard, are not words at all,
but the perceived context of situation. In other words, "meaning" is a
} property of the mutually relevant people, things, events in the situation.
\ Some of the events are the noises made by the speakers.'
12
The abstractions the linguist makes must always presuppose com­
municativeness or tendency to diffusion of experience as a human
predisposition, but he must never forget converse with oneself which
starts with babbling in infancy, as one of the origins of all speech. 13 It
is on this basis that in further converse two or more articulated memories
become, so to speak, one.
There are many difficulties in dealing with written language, which
may itself be considered as 'an abstraction from insistent surroundings'.
But a great deal can be done with writing which 'is immersed in the
immediacy of social intercourse', and· any remoter text which can be
apprehended in use can be regarded as having such temporary meaning
as is given to it by the reader:
At this point two contemporary journalistic discussions of the meaning
of 'words' will point what I venture to think is the inevitability of the
contextual approach to meaning.
LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS AS A STUDY OF MEANING 15
The Sunday Times correspondent in Korea reports as follows on
7th
October 1951:
One �ital ne��ssity is for the already largely standardised Anglo­
Amencan military vocabulary to be extended to cover tactical
situations as well as equipment, signal procedures and headquarters
nomenclature. A powerful contributory reason for the heavy losses
suffered by 29th Brigade in April was the tactical misunderstand
­
.
D1V1s10n-m1sunderstandings equally inspired by British under­
statement and American over-statement.
It is true that American staff officers are quicker to use such
e:pressions are 'surrounded' and 'cut off', and that those expres­
s10ns do not always apply to situations as Commonwealth staff
officers see them. But the British are no less guilty of misrepresenta
­
tion in a mixed command when they describe imminent disaster as
a 'shaky do'; or assure anxious Americans that 'everything is under
control' when, as the Americans themselves would declare 'all hell
is breaking loose'. '
As an illustration of the contextual theory of analysis, I would point
out that the main categories could be applied to the events referred to in \
l
the above report: the nature as well as the nurture of the participants.,_
the texts or verbal actions, the �n-verbal behaviour of the participants,
-
the relevant objects and the effects of the verbal actions. /
Much more interesting is the recent correspondence14 in the Observer
on what Mr Philip Toynbee called the' wanton privacy' of Edith Sitwell
whom he accuse? . of cheating in using a phrase he quotes as Emily­
coloured hands. His complaint of wanton privacy is based on the fact that
such writers publish material 'which is by its nature inaccessible to all
readers except their personal friends. It is almost equally unjust when
Joyce demands of his readers a detailed acquaintanceship with the
geography of Dublin.' This again reminds him of Mr Ivor Brown's
previous article on the Laziness of readers, which refers failures of
communication to the shortcomings of the reader and the social
situations of our times. A writer should certainly be conscious of his
readers. But o � what readers? 'You cannot broadcast to people who are
_ _
w1�hout rece1vmg sets.' Such discussions show how far such professional
:,vr1ters are from the nai:ve approach to the meanings of words, character­
_
istic �f nineteenth-century semantics, which regarded them as if they
were immanent essences or detachable ideas which we could traffic in.
 --

16 SELECTED PAPERS OF J. R. FIRTH

LINGUISTIC ANAL YSIS AS A STUDY OF MEANING

However, it turned out that it was Dr Edith Sitwell who had been lang uage an d diction are possible subj ects of s tudy. Linguistic analysis
wronged. She graciously accepted an apology and pointed out that must firs t state the structures i t finds both i n the text and in the context
'taking a line out o f i ts contex t help s to obscure the meaning, 15 i n �-t��ements in structural term s then contribute to the statements of
m any cases ', and supplied the three relevant lines : meaning in various m odes.
-I have-'atr�ady me�tioned the structure of the verses in which Emily­
For spring is here, the auriculas c oloure� has its place m the desig _ _
n . This i s a st atement of meaning in the
And the Emily-coloured primulas prosodic m ode. The grammatical mode of meaning will be better
Bob in t heir pinafores on the grass. understo�d if in a ddi tion to a s tatement of syntagmatic structure (i. e. of
eks of the nommal p� rases including Emily-coloured primulas) we set up
She pointed out that the intention was to call to mind 'the pink che ?'ste� o� constttu�ts e ach one of which is a term h aving function or
t i n', w v , i o c c of
'\ young country girls'. Such 'i _
e er s n t the on ern
n ent o ho _
l p p meanmg by mtenor relat10n s with the ot her term s of the system.
th e linguis t. The intention of a p a rtic u ar erson in a articula r in sta n ce
ling is ci c . W udy th fl x of I have not ma de a study of Dr Sitwell' s English , and can only offer
of sp eech is ne ver the concern of u tic s en e e st e u
open system s of collocations in which c o loured is c o mmonly
experience and suppress mos t of the en
vironmental co-ordinat ion of prece ded by
s e i ls as instan ces of the general (1) closely related nominals, a nd (2) closely related a dverbs . M ost of
what we examine, regarding the e s nt a
us are familiar with (1a) rose-coloured, coffee-coloured, choc olate­
categories of the sch ematic const ruc ts se t up. We see structure and
e , and it s essenti al rel ation-
coloured, plum-coloured, perhaps flame-coloured, honey-coloured and
system as well as u niqueness in th e instanc
canary-coloured; ( I b) dark- or light-coloured, and darkish- and lightish­
ship to instan ces o the r than itself.
c orre- coloured, funny-coloured; ( 1 c) phoneticians refer to h-coloured or
But before Dr Sitwell' s explanation had appeared another r-coloured vowels ; and (1d) multi-coloured, parti-coloured. And with
h k ew qui w wha 'Em ily­
sp ondent had written to say that s e n te ell t
h col r of adverbs, (2) brightly-coloured, gairy-coloured an d highly-co
coloured hands' were like. They had t h e t a n g as w e ll as t e ou loured.17 In
at . A d Dr Si well charm g ly terms of the above very te_ntative system, the constituent Emiry is first
'white' pepper. She had n ot been che _
ed n t in
ha of a� not a sect10nal term m (2), nor in (1b, c, d), but h as
accepts thi s approach adding 'the phrase
gave a sens o ry imp ression , t t its value as a
sec tion al term in (ia),
is all that matters'. :"h ich itself has the fun ctional value of not being
(rb, c or d), or (2), which as a section i s a function of a group of given
In a recent study of meaning I have avoided any attempt to app _
16 roach
m i g. In sections or sub-sections.
i ndividual 'reified' words as isolat es o f c on c e p t u a l ean n

, for x mp , l g ge It �ill n ow be clear t�at whatever the 'intention' of the poet, whatever
examining Swinburne' s p oetic dicti .
on e a le the an ua

p m , d i t st dy f p imagined concep ts are mvented for Emily-coloured, such things are n ot

'pieces' are chiefly verses, stanzas and oe s an n he u o rose
, not j ust relevant. In all systematic thought there is a p utting asid e of notions
whole sentences and paragraphs form the quoted m aterial an d f su ggestions , with the prim excuse that of cours
'words'. They were ex amined by applyi n g a set o f m od e s excluding _ � e we are no;
y f Emily- thmkmg about such things .
historical details such as tho se given
i n te ll in g th e st o r o
We have, however, seen Emily-coloured as part of a syntagmatic
col o ured. struct� re, a structure of categories . We have also ver y ten tatively set up
uits the
In the prosodic mode the compound Emily-c o loured certainly s _
paradigmatic systems of which it is a term. And such functions as are
oll ion m i g mig ht be
verses in which it comes. At the level of c ocat so eth n
there given by way o� example can be s tated as meanings at vari ous
nd g ner lly of form
learned from other contexts of c o loured a _
e a such -ed s

tio i wh h p mes �e�-els of a nalysis. Havi�g made a series of abstractions at vari ous levels,
in compounds . Similarly studies of collo ca ns n ic ersona l na

might prove interestin g. Before it 1s necessary to establish renewal of c onnecti on . is If th e context is about
and such flower name s as primulas occur
ci ationist not very ari stocr atic flowers in E nglish country g
briefly exemplifying this approach, all conceptualist and asso _ _
agam t Emzly-c oloured seem to be d ecidedly l ess than t wenty
ardens , the o dds

wit diti al fig ures of � to one. The

psychology must be laid aside together h the tra on
od�� n favour can perhap s be guessed when the collocatio
rheto ric.
! nal impro b­
lity, ab1ht1es of some of the phrases in (r a ) with t he wo rd primulas
We h ave the verbal text, an d Edith Sitwell' s poems, her persona 2
are borne
 18 SELECTED PAPERS OF J. R. FIRTH
LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS AS
A STUDY OF MEANING
in mind. According to my analysis part of the meaning of Emily-c�loured have employed the traditional terms sinc
primulas is collocation with Bob in the£r pi�afores on the grass. This !e:el e here at any rate they can be
formally established in English. Tak
I have termed meaning by collocation, which may be personal and 1d10- e three texts, which can be fully
contextualized :
syncratic, or normal. . .
Proceeding from the three lines of text to fuller . co�textuahzat1on (a) He got-the orders for cement.
, _ (b) He orders cement once a month.
makes it clear that no independent conceptual meanmg can be given
to Emily-coloured. If poetry can be defined as any piece of prose for (c) Have you forgotten the Ancient Ord
er's name?
which another piece of prose cannot be adequately substituted, 19 then First the structure of appropriate cont
. . . Emily-coloured primulas Bob in their pinafores on the grass'. exts of situation must be stated.
Then the syntactical structure of the texts
And though my employment of these controversial lines has been . The criteria of distribution
and collocation should then be applied.
entirely linguistic, I am happy to say that thanks to the poe� I have seen Three formal scatters can be
established:
them bobbing in their pinafores on the grass, the Em1lys and the
primulas. (a) order, order-s;
. . (b) order, order-s, order-ed, order-ing;
There is however, a possibility that a statement of meanmg m the
phonaesthe�ic mode 2° might be made, if the asso�iation of personal and (c) order, order-'s, order-s, order-s'.
social attitudes with certain proper names be considered relevant. There We may consider the categories of
is the trinity of Tom, Dick and Harry, and Mary Ann·, Mary Jane, Polly, noun substantive and verb es­
tablished, since grammatical collocatio
Martha, Rosie, even Emily. And what would English low comedy do n and distribution provide
differentiating criteria. The categories
without Wigan? of singular and plural both in
the noun substantive and the verb pres
The important points for the present purpose ar� ( r) th���deq�cy_ ent indicative are similarly
guaranteed.
of the traditional categories of sem�ics, (2) �� rm?o�s1b1hty � the The simple form of the noun and the
."Zo'nceptualist word:idea approach in descriptive hngmsti:s, and_ (3) the genitive form are also deter­
mined by distribution and collocation.
indication that the time has come to try other abstr�ctl�ns usmg the There is clearly a functional
meaning for the noun substantive and
larger contexts· in which words are embedded,_ necess1tatmg n�w types the present indicative verbal
_ forms in a system of formally established
of ordered series of words and pieces, and new systems of sty�st1�. The context, distribution in collocation, guar
grammatical categories. Text,
conceptualist or psychological approach to words as umts m _the antee the binary opposition of
singular and plural, and also of the zero
linguistic analysis of meaning is already in its �rave, but not yet bune�. form and genitive forms of the
_ noun substantive. At the levels of the situa
The 'one morpheme one meaning ' approach m the Umted States will tion, syntax, and distribution
in collocation, abstractions can be mad
probably follow it. e from the structures and
. systems of word-classes and morphem
Words must not be treated as if they had isolate meanmg an� occurred e-classes set up. Within 'these
systems each term or member function
arict could be used in freedistribution.,_A multiplicity of systems 21 �e�i_ved s and has a clearly determined
meaning.
from carefully co-;;extualized structures would seem to ?e indicated. The linguist must be clearly aware of the
_ levels at which he is making
The structures attributed to 'texts' are not to be given ontological his abstractions and statements and mus
status. They are schematic. Only within such limited systems can t finally prove his theory by
renewal of connection with the processe
commutation provide the basis of a functional or meaning value, and s and patterns of life. Without
this constant reapplication to the flux of
substitution not amounting to commutation, the absence of such experience, abstract linguistics
has no justification.
value. The lexicographer has to face the difficult
Two or three further examples may be useful. The final ass1·b·l 1. at10n· problem of definitions and
. the forms of entry. One of the most valu
of words in English is homophonous for the plura� a�d t�e gemtive of able results of the Nice Collo­
quium was the frank recognition that truly
nouns, and the third person singular of the present md1cat1ve of verbs. I descriptive dictionaries did
not exist, that we are still a long way from
real historical dictionaries,
20 SELECTED PAPERS OF J. R, FIRTH LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS AS A
STUDY OF MEANING 21
that most of the citations we meet were far from satisfactory, and that 3· I� binomial verbs-making the effort
to possess, or putting in
great opportunities awaited the lexicographers of the future. possess10n, movement towards possessio
n.
During the Nice discussions the suggestion was made that a lexico­ (a) Go and get it yourself.
graphical definition of the English verb get might be possible, and I
Come and get it to make sure.
made some sort of statement which turned out to be highly complex, but
Run and get it before it is too late.
at any rate not just nebulous and vague. I shall not repeat it, but suggest (b) I'll try and get one for you.
a schematic summary compiled independently of the N.E.D., giving
some of the structures in which distribution in collocation may be 4· Growing, becoming m ving towards
? having something, arriving
stated. successfully at some destm '.
at10n, securing progress towards some end.
My purpose is to suggest what was in my mind during the discussion, (a) He gets better every day.
namely, that the various formal structures and collocations of which get You'll get dirty.
is a constituent or 'word' can be regarded as criteria for setting up a (b) You'll never get there at this rate.
system of distributed variants, in which each variant is a function of the (c) How do you get to work?
others and of the whole system. Each sectional definition in shifted (d) You'll get lost.
terms is not a statement of a concept or of the 'essential' meaning of the You'll get caught if you are not careful.
word get itself, but a descriptive indication of the relation of the colloca­ You'll get mixed up in intrigue.
tions to generalized contexts of situation. He got married.
1. To have and to hold in secure possession. To be given something 5· Obligation, forcing, forced, making effor
t towards some end.
for certain, perhaps forcibly, or by creative effort. (a) Get it done (-made, -written, -fin
ished).
(b) When I get going, you'll see.
get, gets, got, getting. He's got moving at last.
(a) He has got plenty of money. (c) You've got to go through with it.
He's got the blues. (d) Get rid of it.
She's got the measles.
I've got him. 6. In phrasal verbs or with particles one at
. a time. Various combina­
(b) He has succeeded in getting a house at last. twns of the creative effects suggested
above in situations involving
(c) This music just gets me. becoming, conation, successful effor
t.
He got ten years. (a) He can't get in.
I don't get it. He can't get out.
You'll get it. He can't get through.
He won't get the sack. (b) He knows just enough to get by.
He's got what was coming to him. (c) I got up at six.
(d) When am I going to be able to get down
2. Securing or obtaining possession. ?
(e) You do get about.
get, gets, got, getting. (f) Where do we get out?
(a) Get me one too. (g) He must be getting on.
(b) It's difficult to get.
(c) He got a pass. 7. With following nominals.
(d) Get yourself a wife. (a) This gets me down.
(e) That won't get you anywhere. (b) We got her off.
 LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS AS A STUDY OF MEANING 23
22 SELECTED PAPERS OF J, R, FIRTH

(a) have, hold, possess, grasp, grip, catch;

(c) I can't get it in.
(b) secure, obtain, procure, acquire;
I can't get it out.
(c) earn, profit, gain;
I can't get it through. (Cf. I c an't get through it.)
(d) am, is, etc., grow, become;
(d) They got the fire under. (Cf. They got under the fire.)
(e) progress, advance, arrive, reach;
( e) We'll get it over. (Cf. W e' ll get over it.)
(f) obliged, force, forc ed;
8. With more than on e pa rticle. (g) succeed, surmount, subdue, defeat, overcome, overpow er;
(h) contrive, extricate, insert, apply, escape, avoid;
(a) I've at last got down to it.
U) learn, understand, express.
(b) I can't g et on with him.
(c) The re's no getting away from it. Some of these words may b e substituted for get in collocations the
(d) They'll n ever get away with it. distribution of which may b e marked by formal structure, but by no
means all. The possibility of substitutions not amounting to commuta­
9. With particle and nominal.
tion is an indication of similarity of va lu e or function. There are a
(a) What are you getting at? suffici ent numbe r of such non-commutative cases to suggest that parallel
(b) She g ets on my nerv es. distribution of this kind justifi es the use of the above nin e lists of words
(c) I can't get through it. to summarize the general situational conditions of the use of get.
(d) He's got under your skin. Get is formally involved and widely distribut ed in a large number of
(e) I got up a play. collocations functioning in creative, possessive a nd highly conative
(f) She got in a rejoinder. situations. It is easy to underst and why taboos grew up about this word
(g) He got out a prospectus. of pow er, esp ecially among puritans and schoolmasters.
(h) You'll ge t to it in the end. Th e study of the collocation s in which a word is normally us ed is to
(i) You'II get to like it in time. b e completed by a statement of the int errelations of the syntactical
categories within the collocation. The distribution of the collocations in
10. With more than one particle. 22 larger t exts, and the distribution of the word und er examinatio n in
(a) You can't get out of it now. collocations will probably provid e a basis for functional values or mean­
(b) I shall p erhaps get over to that tomorrow. ings for words of all typ es. The homophones by (two values), bye (two
valu es), buy in English can be dealt with by applying thes e categories,
It must be remembered that the abov e rough scheme is in no sense and definitions ar e possib le for all of them if other words or phrases are
intended as a criticism of any lexicographical method. It is merely a us ed to describe th e generalized situations, as with get.
tentative system of collocations for get, gets, got, getting, bearing in mind Again the notion of substitution in collocation and context of situation
the types of situation in which the collocations as wholes i_n ay be us�d. not amounting to commutation may prove adequate. Such substitutions
The classification is admittedly imp erfect and the generaliz ed descrip­ are not to be r egarded as synonyms, nor need all th e bai homophones be
tions of situational usages are not mutually exclusive. But there are over regarded as homonyms. by, bye and buy are easily distinguished formally.
thirty formal types of collocation in ten sections to provide �ot only an We can even h ave by byes (cricket), by buying, byes by chance, buying by
internal set of determinants for forms of the ve rb to get, with general the State. The distinction between pr epositional and adverbial by is
conditions of use indicate d in general terms, but also a basis for the cl early establ ished by distribution in collocation, by substitutions not
highly complex statement necessary to d�fin e the �orms of get in a a mou nting to commutation, supported by syntactical r elations.
.
dictionary. There is no doubt about its umque pos1t10n nor about the
inadequacy of any so-called synonymous su?stit�tions. However, For example : (a) They go by night.
summary indications may b e given in the followmg list of words. (b) They go by night after night.
 LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS AS A STUDY OF MEANING 25
SELECTED PAPERS OF J, R, FIRTH
3· Wh ite he ad, op . cit. , 55.
amount to commutation wit
4• �tehead, op . cit., 45.
h
The substitution of past in (b) does not
but is impossible in (a). Intonational and
th 5- Whitehead, op. cit. , 123.
6, cf. Nor bert Wiener , The human use of human beings Lo rn do?-, 19_5o 8 4, 85,
o er
reference to the sit uat ion,

93, 94, 103, 104, 108Th . o ugh th is work will inter:st mgu1sts , it doe s not
perhaps be shown by oscillograms.
.
differences in utterance can
show much understanding of th i r k o r �ecent d evelop mentsThr .
som e of the term s I have u
sed
Finally, I submit the bares t summary of
prin cipal notions, howe ver are i:, ta:::iony "."1th t�e pres upposition s p ut
ee

forward in this ar ticle ·. (l) Man's p reoccupation with language ...is built
n of which in collocation
a nd
with technical intention, the distributio
. .
into h im '.' (2) person ality and therefore language h as to do with ' ntmuit .y
conte xt s hou ld be ade quate
definitions for the present stu dy.
of p at te rn ' and 'contin uity of p rocess '; (3) 'I n dividual and soct� a p ro cess
ironment can b e generalize
d in
_Pro_E esses and patterns of life in the env
centers aro und the p ro cess of le arn in' g .T a�p 1Y �hese three valuable
. e se ems to me
the m ain con cer n oflne-lin
gui·st.
con ce pts to human beings and th pr od uc:s o engme er�n g alik
contexts of situation, in which the text is £°
e
nothing more th an metaphor· And l am me lined to thin k th h I b
d after eXaminiiif diitrlbiitf
o!_rin
•
-oi?_er_�s a�een fii° these,an
ca�l; n ly to en ginee rin:, :n� :a;o�r;
::;;� :�r:i:� c o
n
c;;:� :i:� �:� �� f
mes � y_b � n __ � � r �:red
coll�c���s', words a11d mll!p_he
a e rra [
e i

, p
th e terms of wh1cn a r e
i a phy sio ; gis; : �:�:::;�: ::e;:::��:� i��
syste ms a d sets of syste ms,
\ ,
ultin g m n s

�:
senes, res n

:�s�:�. :t·e1?�e��= ��\ cannot b 'b 1 · n ·

g pe rson al1ty m s ociet y
tems . On a prev ious study
I have s
-functions of one another and of the sys
chines e_ven with all t he �eso urces of cy bernet icsTh . e de:elo;�en� ��
f m ni g n t fol lowing

::
as a stud y he

a r ubte dly affect the c ategorie s linguists

n i
outlined linguistic analysis
o ea

e m! ; �
�::: ;�;:e�= �/:�al:��
�� ;
e
terms :

I propose to split up meaning or function

into a series of component 7- See ,Perso nahty and lan guage in socie ty'.
the use of some language 8. See _* The use an d distribution of certain English sound' s ·
functions . Each function will be defined 9- Wh itehead, op. c it., 227.
• ,
as
. Mea ning, that is to say,
10. See *'Teh u se an d di"s tn'but10n of certain English sounds , *' Te chmqu . e of
. .
t x
form or element in relation to some con
.
e t

seman tics '•' *' p erso na1·ity an d 1an guage m so ciety'•· *'M o de s o f me anmg' ·
.
x u l relations, and phonetics ,
Speech· Tongues;if men espec 1_Ialy Chap ter 10;
e x of cont
Malino wski in C. W. Ogde�
is to be regarded as a compl
e t a
han dles its own c��-
�mmar, le xicography and semantic and I ARi h s, T�e m an g of meaning, Lon don ; B. Malinows ki, Coral
s each

garde�s �nd cth:r�ma gzc, on on, 1935; A. L.Gardine r, Theory of speech

i t conte xt. 23
ponents of the comple x in its appropr a e { ;
and language, O x,or d , 1932.
l r. Speech, Chapter 5.
m ade at a series of
actions o r schematic constructs set up are
The abstr
t
_distinc m�tualiy complegg;_ntaryjev__e/s.
RenEEfil._9i con!!_ect{q___n -wi!Ji- the
12. cf, Gordon _ H olmes , op .cit., 65. I ' tis on the multip le n atu re of the impres
odies an d o

oJ:�=�:�=
s final
�:;:e7a�i��� �:��:��:::�::itd:::��!. ��:t�e r sensati_ onf
n stances of e xp erie
processes and patterns of life in the i �h�:;:��:
nce i the

.
e

e xc ite d by a st imulus be domman • t, i.t 1s th total s um of the im ·

nguistic analysis m ust be
poly­
. . e
j ustification -of abstract li g st s. Li
ed that determines o ur re actio ns, not e xclus ive ly those of
n ui ic
is no coherent s y t m (ou tout se
:: ;i;
•;�1::::::
systemic. For any given language the re
e

r m one source on ly.'

s
c

13· r th ones !f' is not in tende d as an equivalent of innere

facts .
tient) which can handle and state all the
:� sp_eec� as use d by ne uro logists. But the basic
this approach to linguistic
. .
I venture to think, eve n p , t hat :: ��jo:s:i
im or tan ce of b blmg t': mfancy a':d_ of c on ve rse with oneself is he avily
to ho e
s of a a
ing m ay be found to offer opportunitie
n

un�er line d bY tte e xperience of chmc al ne uro logists . E

' tex rn al sp ee ch
analysis as a study of mean
.
wron g, it
de pends on m ternal sp ee ch .''Ge st ure and p an tomime or d umb sh
y theories. Science is not prov e d
.
synthesis of conte mp orar
develops. I t is more probable that we are
all in that se ris e

terpretations of de Saussure
r igh t, than

:���r
:;�:�!
1 �p c is isturbed.' I ' ntern�! spee ch may re mai n �:t:�:f�
· ;;e � or :on H o1 mes , op. c1t., 136, 193 141
4· 3o th Sep,te�be;, 7th Octo ber and 14th Octobe r, 1951. '
only gm i in
that we are all wrong, and
do at c

�
about
life for modern scientific schemes is
e p iece under_ e xaminat ion is re ally Emily-coloured.
thirty years.' 24
a re right. 'The sp an of
Jt · ee ;�M
17• �f. N.E
odes of me amng ' .
D. Vol. Il, A comparison of the se entries with e ven the tentative an d
j notes o�er�d a�ove may be t aken as a first in dic at ion of ho w
��; s'::�rt:he be s_t �1ct10n anes o ften are o f be ing e ither tr uly historical o r
o

adequate!Y des cnpt1ve .

Notes
d Gordon
thought, Cambr idge, 1938 , 90; an
x. cf.A. N. Whitehe ad, Modes of Edinburgh , 1947,
18. Whitehead, op. c it., 2,
H olmesM , .D., F.R.S.,Introducti 19· Att ribute d to Paul Valery .
ss relate d to othe r wo rds.'
in gle words are me an in gless unle
neur ology ,
20. See *'Mod e s of me an in',g 195; and Speech, 183-8.
clinic al
138: ' S
on to

ght forw ard as a techn ical te rm.

2. 'I '
nst an ce is brou
 R. FIRTH
26 SELECTED PAPERS OF J. Two
s', 121-2.

�t:� ;! :�
21, See "'Sounds and prosodie hi have been an
tical t
22. [This section �eading is iden e?y r t�o: g�: �hat this was, in
e ;
oversight but 1t seems to me mor . R . .
co\locati�nal and situational term
s, a diffe
19.
rent sect1 0n. F. p ]
The Languages of Linguisticst
Sec "'Technique of semantics',
Whitehead.

In the social sciences and in modern linguistics some of the epistemo­

logical conditions of scholarship are the vehicles in which it is carried;
the general national language. The Scandinavian languages, French,
Russian and English for example all determine certain aspects of linguis­
tics. Even in what is called English, scholarship takes very different
forms in America in English from those we are developing on this side
of the Atlantic in European including British English. Phonemics,
phonemicize, phonemicization, phonemicist are American words and
are rarely used in England. Phonetics and phonetician are not nearly
so frequently used in America as in England, and the modern use of the
word phonology and its derivatives also is not widely current in America.
There are many other discrepancies in the technical language which
stand in the way of mutual interchange and quite obviously reduce
mutual quotations and references to negligible proportions.
Some of this discrepancy is due to the different technical employment
of such ordinary words as environment, frame, juncture, context, con­
textual, situation, sound, segment, by Americans, partly on account of
basic differences of usage and styles in American English.
In British English there are similar developments, for some of which
I am in part responsible-the student reading both languages tends to
equate American supra-segmental phonemes for example with the

t As stated on p. 3 this paper was in a completely unfinished state. It was

typed but with considerable handwritten emendations and additions. I have
omitted some of the typewritten and the handwritten material, but in general
have followed the text as emended with such additions as were clearly intended
to be part of the text. Internal evidence (see note 4) suggests it was written in
1953.