The Comparative Method and Me.
February 26, 2007 – 10:14 pmThe comparative method used in historical linguistics to determine direction of sound change/reconstruct a proto-language’s phoneme inventory is a long and laborious pursuit. It is actually pretty fun, though. It’s like working out a big puzzle, though I occasionally run into issues in organizing data properly, leading to my confusion.
I walked into my historical linguistics test today feeling really, really nervous. I was behind from my recent hospital visit, had no time to study, and already had to ask Dr. Campbell to accept my homework a week late. I almost knew with certainty that I was going to fail. It turns out the test was really easy, and the comparative method part wasn’t large enough to confuse me (25 cognates spread across three really, really closely related and geographically isolated languages). I think I nailed it. Now to finish for my other test tomorrow…
2 Responses to “The Comparative Method and Me.”
Sorry to hear about the hospital stay. Yeesh, we just never know. Glad you’re doing better now and enjoying comparative linguistics!
KU, by the way, is no longer even teaching historical/comparative linguistics. Doesn’t fit in with their new theoretical, experimental direction, the main reason I’m jumping ship to Anthro in Fall.
By Dave Kaufman on Mar 3, 2007
I support your switch to anthro. I kind of think that anthropology is the only place linguists who aren’t syntacticians can be safe. In fact, Lyle Campbell got his BA in archaeology and his masters in anthropology, and he is still a linguist.
Despite my rail against pure-theory, I have to say I love phonology and phonetics now!
By Rob on Mar 3, 2007