Immanence is Volatile! a critique on reading Hjelmslev’s Theory of Language as “Critique of Pure Linguistic Reason”

In his critical reading of the book Prolegomena to a Theory of Language, Safaie (2021), referring to a Kantian epistemology and several other approaches, considers Hjelmslev’s theory of language a priori, non-empirical, pure, rationalist, and transcendent. In our study, after presenting the relation...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Pizhūhishʹhā-yi falsafī (Tabrīz.) 2023-08, Vol.17 (43), p.66-88
1. Verfasser: Mohammad Amin Shakeri
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:In his critical reading of the book Prolegomena to a Theory of Language, Safaie (2021), referring to a Kantian epistemology and several other approaches, considers Hjelmslev’s theory of language a priori, non-empirical, pure, rationalist, and transcendent. In our study, after presenting the relationship between the Prolegomena and the theory of language as a whole, as well as pointing out some issues regarding the Persian translation of this book, we assess the main problems raised in Safaie's critique by referring to a wider range of Hjelmslev’s works. Looking from a Kantian viewpoint, we conclude that the knowledge and propositions provided in this theory, are “analytical a posteriori”. Examining the problem of “immanence”, we find that “Holuli” (“entering from outside”) and “transcendent” cannot be attributed to Glossematics. Under the issue of “structure”, we state that this theory is “constructive” and that no “a priori necessity” is imposed on the structure. In general, we describe Hjelmslev’s theory of language in terms of methodology and epistemology as empirical, a posteriori, reflexive, deductive, constructivist, and immanent, and therefore we don’t agree with the idea of putting this theory among "objectivist" theories criticized by Lakoff. Finally, by pointing to the possibility of dialogues with other linguistic theories (including cognitive approaches), we underline the potential importance of Glossematics in the field of language theorization today.
ISSN:2251-7960
2423-4419
DOI:10.22034/jpiut.2022.50430.3138