I am a philologist.
But let me explain what I mean by that, because we’re not all in
agreement. Dictionary.com has three
definitions, one that is first and “current,” a second it marks as older, which actually means quite another thing, and the third, which it lists as “obsolete” and is
the one that I claim. Of course.
The word comes from the Greek roots meaning “lover of
words.” Philo-logos. This means in
its oldest form, it could refer to people who study (and love) language or those
who study (and love) literature, that which we make from words.
The current definition falls on the side of literary, but
not in the sense we think of; it means literature scholars who act as sleuths,
trying to place and date texts given the raw data of what appears in a
manuscript or other text. The “older”
and therefore outdated meaning is the other side of that coin—historical
linguistics, essentially, or the study of ancient sound systems and grammars
and theories about how language changes.
Linguistics and literature go hand in hand for me and always
have. One must understand the language
in order to read the literature, of course.
When I graduated from my undergrad institution, it was with a double
major in English literature and French language. I knew I wanted to focus on
the medieval period, and I looked everywhere for a graduate program that would
let me do both literary and linguistic study (by which I meant historical
linguistics and language study). I
didn’t find one.
Instead I found a wonderful linguistics program in a
department with four medievalists, and I started in linguistics (for two
reasons, really: 1- I was still laboring under the notion that the more
scientific-sounding the degree, the better, and 2- I wanted to learn the
languages and how they changed, so I could really dig in to the
literature). “Historical Linguistics” as
a field, I was told on my very first visit, was dwindling, but I could
certainly pump up my linguistics degree with medieval language classes.
Everyone felt my ill-fit.
In linguistics classes I brought up literary considerations, and in
literature classes, I asked about the translation and original language. My thesis for my MA in linguistics was really
very literary, and I had to add one long, discursive, decidedly linguistic footnote
to demonstrate my skills before one member of my committee would sign off on
it.
One of my German professors laughed and told me I was born a
century too late; I really belonged in the glorious 19th century
tradition of German philologists, with the Grimms and others, who studied
language and literature together. That’s
where that “older” definition comes from.
It used to be a thing. But in the
modern academy, we have specialized far more, and now it’s tricky to do
both.
Tricky, but not impossible.
Some programs allow one to choose two specializations. Comparative Literature programs always
include instruction in multiple languages.
Or you can choose my way. Get a
degree in linguistics, and then get another in literature. My way is not time- or cost-effective, but I
wouldn’t change a thing.
(The image is of the first page of Beowulf in the Cotton Vitelius A.xv manuscript, now housed in London's British Museum.)
No comments:
Post a Comment