The Correlation of Linguistic Patterning and Societal Structures in Systemic Typology

Abstract

The article discusses the premises of the systemic typology of Gennadij Prokop'evič Mel'nikov in comparison with the precepts of the sociolinguistic typology of Peter Trudgill. The author, in particular, looks into the correlation of linguistic patterning and societal structures as presented in the two theories, and offers a detailed synopsis of the societal factors and their valuables (external determinants) used in the respective disciplines. Detailed discussion of the societal factors as presented in the systemic and social typologies is offered. Major differences between their classifications in Mel'nikov and Trudgill are substantiated. Finally, based on the postulates of Mel'nikov's typology, the paper dwells on the concept of internal determinant or, the communicative scope which optimizes all the levels of language system, while co-varying types of social structures with types of linguistic patterning. * I would like to thank Peter Trudgill for his valuable comments on an earlier version of this paper as well as the participants in a session, entitled The Life, Growth and Death of Languages, at the International Congress of Linguists, 21-27 July 2013, Geneva, for their insightful queries. Needless to say, all the shortcomings in the proposed discussion are mine.

Linguistic system and sociolinguistic environment as competing factors in linguistic variation: A typological approach

“…The relative effect of the sociolinguistic factors is compared to one another in the spirit of Sinnemäki and Di Garbo (2018) and their effects are also compared to word order to evaluate the relative effect of language internal vs. language external effects (cf. Danylenko 2018). I assess the relative strength of these factors on the number of cases in negative binomial models and on the presence of cases in binary models.…”

“…Peter Trudgill) at bridging typology with sociolinguistics. Danylenko (2018) has criticized these attempts for being overly mechanistic and for overlooking language-internal causes. This worry about overlooking language-internal causes is justified in that if we focus only on testing the possible effect of sociolinguistic factors on linguistic patterns, we are in danger of producing spurious results by not having accounted for how linguistic patterns may interact among themselves across languages.…”

Comparative sociolinguistic perspectives on the rate of linguistic change

“…Sociolinguistic typologies have been criticized by Danylenko (2018) and other systemic typologists for being too mechanical in that they concentrate on social determinants of linguistic patterning and overlook the role of language-internal determination in linguistic developments and change. This internal tendency is seen as a mediator between types of societal structures and conditions, and types of linguistic patterning.…”

Complexity Development and Simplification in Systemic Typology: Types of Changes in the Internal Determinant

“…In the first article (Danylenko 2018) dealing with the postulates of the systemic typology of Mel'nikov (1971Mel'nikov ( , 1973Mel'nikov ( , 1986Mel'nikov ( , 2003 I discussed the correlation of linguistic patterning and societal structures. In particular, I outlined a system of societal factors and their variables which, according to both Mel'nikov and and Trudgill, correlate with different patterning in the inflecting languages in comparison with other language systems.…”