What Distinguishes Cognitive Linguistics From Conventional Linguistics?

Cognitive linguistics is a relatively new subfield of linguistics that emerged in the late 1970s and early 1980s as a response to the limitations of conventional linguistics. While both cognitive linguistics and conventional linguistics are concerned with the study of language, they differ in their underlying assumptions, methods, and areas of focus.

Conventional Linguistics

Conventional linguistics, also known as structural linguistics, is based on the assumption that language is a system of arbitrary signs that are governed by a set of rules or grammar. This approach focuses on the analysis of language as a static, formal system and is primarily concerned with the description of the phonological, syntactic, and semantic structures of language. Conventional linguistics is often associated with the work of scholars like Ferdinand de Saussure, Noam Chomsky, and Leonard Bloomfield.

Cognitive Linguistics

Cognitive linguistics, on the other hand, is based on the assumption that language is a cognitive phenomenon that is deeply intertwined with our perception, thought, and experience. This approach focuses on the analysis of language as a dynamic, embodied system and is primarily concerned with the cognitive processes that underlie language production and comprehension. Cognitive linguistics is often associated with the work of scholars like George Lakoff, Ronald Langacker, and Mark Johnson.

Differences between Cognitive Linguistics and Conventional Linguistics

The main differences between cognitive linguistics and conventional linguistics can be summarized as follows:

Focus on meaning: Cognitive linguistics places a greater emphasis on the study of meaning than conventional linguistics, which is primarily concerned with the formal structures of language.

Embodied cognition: Cognitive linguistics emphasizes the embodied nature of language and the role of perception, thought, and experience in shaping our linguistic expressions, whereas conventional linguistics often abstracts language from the human body and experience.

Usage-based approach: Cognitive linguistics takes a usage-based approach to language, meaning that it views language as a system that emerges from the way that people use it in communicative situations. Conventional linguistics, on the other hand, often assumes that language is an innate, pre-existing system.

Non-modularity: Cognitive linguistics rejects the modularity assumption that has been central to conventional linguistics, which claims that language is a domain-specific mental module that is separate from other cognitive processes. Instead, cognitive linguistics views language as an integral part of human cognition and experience.

Conclusion

In conclusion, cognitive linguistics and conventional linguistics represent two different approaches to the study of language. While conventional linguistics focuses on the formal structures of language, cognitive linguistics emphasizes the role of cognition, perception, and experience in shaping our linguistic expressions. The differences between these two approaches reflect broader debates within linguistics and cognitive science about the nature of language and cognition.