|
The notion of a scientific paradigm
The term “paradigm” is one of the essential notions in modern linguistics. However, very few people actually understand what a paradigm is, how it functions, or where the theory came from. This entry is an attempt to explain the concept of a paradigm.
The word paradigm (pærədaɪm) comes from Greek "παράδειγμα" (paradeigma), “pattern, example, sample” and "παραδείκνυμι" (paradeiknumi), “exhibit, represent, expose”. The Oxford English Dictionary Online defines a paradigm as “a pattern, example, or model” (www.en.oxforddictionaries.com). Later, there appeared additional senses in the definition of this term, for example, Ferdinand de Saussure used “paradigm” to refer to a class of similar elements. Nowadays, the term has come to refer to a thought pattern in any scientific discipline. Accordingly, the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines it as “a philosophical and theoretical framework of a scientific school or discipline within which theories, laws, and generalizations and the experiments performed in support of them are formulated; broadly: a philosophical or theoretical framework of any kind” (www.merriam-webster.com).
The term “paradigm” in its contemporary meaning as “universally recognized scientific achievements that, for a time, provide model problems and solutions for a community of researchers” was used firstly by historian of science Thomas Kuhn in his book “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions” (Kuhn, 1970, 1996). In his work, T. Kuhn paid attention to the fact that the history of science is not a linear process; it is characterized by “paradigm shifts” that determine the choice of scientific problems and methods of its solution for a definite period of time. In other words, a paradigm sets the standard of the way in which scientists 'do' science.
According to Kuhn’s theory there are several cycles in the development of science: 1) the predominance of a scientific theory according to which all researches are done, discoveries are made and explained; 2) a scientific crisis: at this stage the existing theory comes to a deadlock, being unable to explain many phenomena. As a result, alternative theories, new approaches and methods are searched for. At this stage different irreconcilable theories coexist and compete with each other; 3) the emergence of a new scientific paradigm.
It should be noted that not always are new theories successful; but in case they are, there are large scale changes in the scientific worldview. Being accepted by the majority of scholars, new scientific ideas make basis for a new paradigm. As Kuhn noticed in “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions” “Successive transition from one paradigm to another via revolution is the usual developmental pattern of mature science” (Kuhn, 1970, p. 12).
One of the important assumptions of Kuhn's theory is that paradigms radically differ. They are incompatible and irreconcilable because each new paradigm requires fundamental modifications and ideas. Another aspect of Kuhn’s original thesis, supported by some other scholars (Dogan, 2001; Ohman, 2004) is the irrelevance of paradigms to the social and humanitarian sciences. These scholars consider the notion of a paradigm to be relevant only to the natural sciences whereas the social and humanitarian sciences are polytheoretical, polysemic and characterized by the absence of one common paradigm. The social and the humanitarian sciences, as many scholars claim (Handa, 1986), are oriented to the study of very complex phenomena, such as a human-being, language, society, culture, etc., which cannot be explained within one framework and require multiple approaches. In other words, different paradigms, methodological and conceptual frameworks coexist within one discipline because in contrast to the natural sciences, the humanitarian sciences are characterized by a multiparadigmatical character.
A paradigm in the humanities, particularly in linguistics, may combine the features of several scientific trends, correlating with each other, so that the results obtained in one paradigm can be utilized and developed in other paradigms. Accordingly, Makarov M. notices that the paradigm shift in linguistics doesn’t necessarily suppose the radical change; It is realized in the transformation of scientific methods, linguistic views, new priorities and perspectives. Berezin V. regards linguistics as a poliparadigmatic science. This status of linguistics can be backed by the philosophic theory of synergy, characterized by a non-linear interpretation of the world, variability, alternative ways and rates of evolution. These arguments reject the above-mentioned assumptions of Kuhn’s theory and prove the polyparadigmatic status of linguistics.
Nevertheless, the notion of the “paradigm shift” is relevant to linguistics. It has become apparent that linguistics in the course of its development is characterized by the change of certain paradigms which either coexist for some time or replace one another. There is a diversity of opinions among the scholars as far as the name and number of paradigms are concerned.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
