Charting the anatomy of linguistic reality

Abstract

Living dangerously (Q1) represents the kind of question that should be addressed in the opening paper of a conference with the theme 'Linguistics for the language professions'. (Q1) Has linguistics got ~nything to offer that can be of value to all language professions? But (Q1 ~ is a question that invites responses with potentially disastrous consequences. Obviously~ nothing would be gained by saying in response to (Q1) things that were at once trivially and boringly true. Equally obviously, it would be counterproductive to respond to (Q1) by saying things that stretched people's credulity to the point of outraged disbelief. Part of the problem with (Q1) is that the label the language professions covers so much: all professions whose practitioners, on the basis of specialized knowledge, do something to one or more components of linguistic reality in order to achieve institutionalized ends. Indeed, the various language professions appear to differ so greatly in their specific aims and practices that one may question the sensibility of even raising (Q1). A further part of the problem with (Q1) is that the term linguistics. used in its 'macro' sense, is likewise an umbrella label. In this sense, linguistics covers, amongst other things, theories of linguistic structure, theories of language use, psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics, diachronic linguistics, clinical linguistics, text linguistics and much else besides. http://spilplus.journals.ac.za/ Pero. mi study ever body more time. no? The schedule. the school. everybody mas long. no? The engineer. the doctor. muy good, no? Ver good for me. No money. no school. (School takes a long time. It would be very good to be a doctor or an engineer. But without money you can't go to school.) http://spilplus.journals.ac.za/