this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2025
22 points (92.3% liked)
Linguistics
1728 readers
1 users here now
Welcome to the community about the science of human Language!
Everyone is welcome here: from laypeople to professionals, Historical linguists to discourse analysts, structuralists to generativists.
Rules:
- Instance rules apply.
- Be reasonable, constructive, and conductive to discussion.
- Stay on-topic, specially for more divisive subjects. And avoid unnecessary mentioning topics and individuals prone to derail the discussion.
- Post sources when reasonable to do so. And when sharing links to paywalled content, provide either a short summary of the content or a freely accessible archive link.
- Avoid crack theories and pseudoscientific claims.
- Have fun!
Related communities:
- !linguistics_humor@sh.itjust.works
- !languagelearning@sopuli.xyz
- !conlangs@mander.xyz
- !esperanto@sopuli.xyz
- !japaneselanguage@sopuli.xyz
- !latin@piefed.social
Resources:
Grammar Watch - contains descriptions of the grammars of multiple languages, from the whole world.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Language existed without linguistics though.
Physics existed before we studied physics
Someone, let the historians know that they aren't creating history by studying it, too. History is already still going to have existed anyway, so its a total waste of time.
Same for economists... and chemists... and biologists... and geologists... Well, all sciences, really. Good news for engineers, though.
I didn't say studying things was a waste of time. I agree that language itself is one of the most important and impactful inventions in human history. Linguistics though... not nearly as important, as language will continue to exist and evolve without it being explicitly studied. Your post didn't answer the OP at all. Why is linguistics important other than for seeking knowledge?
Side note: Lemmy is a small community. You can try not immediately responding with a personal attack, it might encourage more discussion.
I think you and @rigatti@lemmy.world got caught in the words.
"History" can refer to the past events or their study. "Economy", to the system of production and consumption or its study. "Chemistry", to a set of properties of the matter or their study. And so goes on.
The same does not apply to "language". The word refers to a bunch* of phenomena, but not their study. Their study gets a different name, Linguistics. So when OP is asking "what is linguistics for", they're clearly referring to the study; they are not asking "what are the phenomena called «language» good for?"
*at least three: a human faculty, a communication system relying on that faculty, and concrete instances of the usage of that system.
Side note, Linguistics is great to catch this sort of hidden polysemy.
Yes, this exactly. And thank you for being polite about it.