4

I'm trying to gather information about current and historical attitudes towards the study of language as a field of endeavour. I am particularly interested in self-deprecating attitudes that those doing research in linguistics (and allied disciplines such as lexicography) have taken towards their own field, either in earnest or as a reflection/mockery of how they believe that society in general perceives their work.

Perhaps the most notable example I'm aware of is Samuel Johnson, in his own dictionary, wryly defining lexicographer as "a harmless drudge". Have any notable linguists made similar comments that (perhaps jokingly) characterize the field at large as uninteresting, unimportant, overly esoteric, etc.?

2
  • 1
    I remember two cor three citations about historical linguistics, not exactly self-deprecating nor joking. E.g. Weiss' Latin Grammar chapter Etruscan says it attracts quacks and that the books "fill up the space" of libraries. As a quackery quack myself I do think it funny.
    – vectory
    Commented Aug 19 at 12:11
  • 1
    Speculative Grammarian is a linguistics parody journal
    – b a
    Commented Aug 20 at 12:17

0

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.