It is one of the aims of linguistics to define itself, to recognise what belongs within its domain. In those cases where it relies upon psychology, it will do so indirectly, remaining independent.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
It is only since linguistics has become more aware of its object of study, i.e. perceives the whole extent of it, that it is evident that this science can make a contribution to a range of studies that will be of interest to almost anyone.
Language is not merely a set of unrelated sounds, clauses, rules, and meanings; it is a total coherent system of these integrating with each other, and with behavior, context, universe of discourse, and observer perspective.
Linguistics is very much a science. It's a human science, one of the human sciences. And it's one of the more interesting human sciences.
Language has no independent existence apart from the people who use it. It is not an end in itself; it is a means to an end of understanding who you are and what society is like.
Language should find itself in the physical world, and not end up locked in an idea in somebody's head.
The idea is that the object has a language unto itself.
In Psychology we deal with minds and their processes, and leave out of account as far as possible the objects that we get to know by means of them.
The development of the meaning attaching to the personal self, the conscious being, is the subject matter of the history of psychology.
Linguistics will have to recognise laws operating universally in language, and in a strictly rational manner, separating general phenomena from those restricted to one branch of languages or another.
Ego, id, and superego are terms familiar to all, but for many years, Freud's psychoanalytic theory has thrived in English departments around the country as a tool for interpreting literary texts but has rarely, if ever, been discussed in science departments.
No opposing quotes found.