Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Response to Elder-Vass: “seven ways to be a rea...
View graph of relations

Response to Elder-Vass: “seven ways to be a realist about language”

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineComment/debatepeer-review

Published

Standard

Response to Elder-Vass: “seven ways to be a realist about language”. / Sealey, Alison; Carter, Bob.
In: Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, Vol. 44, No. 3, 09.2014, p. 268-281.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineComment/debatepeer-review

Harvard

Sealey, A & Carter, B 2014, 'Response to Elder-Vass: “seven ways to be a realist about language”', Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 268-281. https://doi.org/10.1111/jtsb.12041

APA

Sealey, A., & Carter, B. (2014). Response to Elder-Vass: “seven ways to be a realist about language”. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 44(3), 268-281. https://doi.org/10.1111/jtsb.12041

Vancouver

Sealey A, Carter B. Response to Elder-Vass: “seven ways to be a realist about language”. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour. 2014 Sept;44(3):268-281. Epub 2013 Oct 25. doi: 10.1111/jtsb.12041

Author

Sealey, Alison ; Carter, Bob. / Response to Elder-Vass: “seven ways to be a realist about language”. In: Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour. 2014 ; Vol. 44, No. 3. pp. 268-281.

Bibtex

@article{c52ba262dbc64a1bb7e75ce152df805a,
title = "Response to Elder-Vass: “seven ways to be a realist about language”",
abstract = "Given that explicitly realist perspectives are currently quite unfashionable in applied linguistics, we very much welcome your thorough and careful discussion of the various forms they might take. We find the various categories you identify quite persuasive, and we find much to agree with in your characterisation of several of the positions you outline, particularly in the earlier part of the paper. However, we do take issue with aspects of your characterisation of both “social” and “linguistic systems” realism, and with some of the arguments you adduce particularly against the latter and in favour of your seventh way (“linguistic norm circles realism”). Our response, then, concentrates particularly on the challenges arising from these parts of your paper, and addresses: (1) the ways in which we may define language itself, for the purposes of this debate; (2) the distinction between social and linguistic norms; (3) the properties of language; (4) the role of empirical evidence; and (5) the methodological problems we find with the norm circle approach",
keywords = "realist social theory, morphogenesis, linguistics, realism",
author = "Alison Sealey and Bob Carter",
year = "2014",
month = sep,
doi = "10.1111/jtsb.12041",
language = "English",
volume = "44",
pages = "268--281",
journal = "Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour",
issn = "0021-8308",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Response to Elder-Vass: “seven ways to be a realist about language”

AU - Sealey, Alison

AU - Carter, Bob

PY - 2014/9

Y1 - 2014/9

N2 - Given that explicitly realist perspectives are currently quite unfashionable in applied linguistics, we very much welcome your thorough and careful discussion of the various forms they might take. We find the various categories you identify quite persuasive, and we find much to agree with in your characterisation of several of the positions you outline, particularly in the earlier part of the paper. However, we do take issue with aspects of your characterisation of both “social” and “linguistic systems” realism, and with some of the arguments you adduce particularly against the latter and in favour of your seventh way (“linguistic norm circles realism”). Our response, then, concentrates particularly on the challenges arising from these parts of your paper, and addresses: (1) the ways in which we may define language itself, for the purposes of this debate; (2) the distinction between social and linguistic norms; (3) the properties of language; (4) the role of empirical evidence; and (5) the methodological problems we find with the norm circle approach

AB - Given that explicitly realist perspectives are currently quite unfashionable in applied linguistics, we very much welcome your thorough and careful discussion of the various forms they might take. We find the various categories you identify quite persuasive, and we find much to agree with in your characterisation of several of the positions you outline, particularly in the earlier part of the paper. However, we do take issue with aspects of your characterisation of both “social” and “linguistic systems” realism, and with some of the arguments you adduce particularly against the latter and in favour of your seventh way (“linguistic norm circles realism”). Our response, then, concentrates particularly on the challenges arising from these parts of your paper, and addresses: (1) the ways in which we may define language itself, for the purposes of this debate; (2) the distinction between social and linguistic norms; (3) the properties of language; (4) the role of empirical evidence; and (5) the methodological problems we find with the norm circle approach

KW - realist social theory

KW - morphogenesis

KW - linguistics

KW - realism

U2 - 10.1111/jtsb.12041

DO - 10.1111/jtsb.12041

M3 - Comment/debate

VL - 44

SP - 268

EP - 281

JO - Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour

JF - Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour

SN - 0021-8308

IS - 3

ER -