Harris, Roy (1998) “The Integrational Critique of Orthodox Linguistics” in Integrational Linguistics: A First Reader (eds.) Roy Harris & George Wolf: 15-26. Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd.

Introduction

if language is viewed not as an activity at all but as a faculty or ability which underlies the activity and makes it possible, the dilemma of conflicting definitions simply reappears at one remove. For there is no way of identifying the language faculty without reference to the activity which it is alleged to sponsor. – 15-16

Let segregational linguistics treat language as autonomous system, examine their interval relations, and perhaps speculate at a very abstract level about how such systems might be represented in the human brain, while integrational linguistics will concentrate on the external relations between languages and the individuals and communities using them. – 17

The philosophical basis of the integrationist position is the thesis that the linguistic universe is populated not by mysteriously unobservable objects called ‘language’ but by observable human beings who somehow and sometimes manage to communicate with one another. – 19

A sign is any observable feature or complex of features which, by virtue of its integrational function, plays role in our diverse but continuous practices of making sense. The sole necessary and sufficient condition for the constitution of a sign is our recognition of this role. – 19

From an integrational point of view, language arises from the creative use of communicational space in which we live, and speaking and writing are only two of the many human activities which articulate this space. – 19

The segregationist response

Three misconception of indeterminacy

The indeterminacy of linguistic sign