Dear ATEGers
 
Johanna R. just wrote:
 
> ... there seems to be a general
> belief abroad among the population that you can explain stuff about
> language by just thinking about it and coming up with something off the
> top of your head. My students do this in their papers all the time.
That's
> not how science works. You need to be able to generalize, and you need
> support from the real world.
 
Others have also talked and debated the idea of linguistics as a science.
I know the debate is old, but it seems that the uncertainties in
linguistics can be equated to those of another science which is not ONLY a
science: medicine.  Medicine is often refered to as an art, and I wonder if
the same notion applies to linguistics.  Where do we leave off using
inductive reasoning (scientific method) and apply intuitive or creative
approaches to studying the nature of language?
 
Curiously yours,
 
Paul E. Doniger