Exploring the evolution of functional linguistics: linking Arabic theoretical linguistics with modern linguistics

Abstract

The objective of this research is to establish a connection between Arabic theoretical linguistics and modern linguistics, taking a different approach from the common assumption that later theories are solely attributed to Arab grammarians and rhetoricians. To achieve this, the study will examine Arab linguistic achievements from a modern perspective and highlight commonalities and differences between past and present linguistic theories. Additionally, the research will delve into the Arab understanding of functional grammar and the significant contributions made by ancient grammarians in this area, while also reviewing the evolution of functional theory in the West from its inception until its final formulation . Furthermore, this study will undertake an analytical review of the most significant theories that emerged after Jakobson, to identify gaps and opportunities for further development. The research findings reveal that modern linguists continue to evolve their theories, in contrast to the stunted evolution of Arab heritage due to a reverence for tradition and fear of change. As a result, the research calls for the development of early Arab linguists, whose contributions served as the foundation for language theories in general and linguistics in particular.

Keywords:

• Functional linguistics, grammar
• linguistic message, sentence
• syntax
• literature review, meta-analysis, identity

1. Introduction: The functions of language in the Arab linguistic heritage

Linguistics is a discipline that has undergone significant evolution throughout history. Despite this, there is a common misconception that modern linguistic theories are solely attributed to Western linguists, while Arab linguists are disregarded. This misconception stems from a lack of linkage between Arabic theoretical linguistics and modern linguistics. Therefore, the context of this research is to establish this linkage by exploring Arab linguistic achievements from a modern perspective and highlighting commonalities and differences between past and present linguistic theories.

Additionally, this research aims to focus on the Arab understanding of the concept of functional grammar and review the most important statements of ancient grammarians in this field. It will also analyze the evolution of functional theory in the West from its inception until its final formulation . The rationale for this research is to address gaps in knowledge and understanding of the development of linguistics and to acknowledge the contributions of Arab linguists to the field.

This study does not claim that ancient Arabs preceded Western linguists, addressed their theories, and presented their ideas. This work does not attribute the views of Saussure (1916) to Ibn Jinni (2003), 2000 but rather, through defining language in the books of tradition, one finds an understanding and knowledge of its role. Although the ancient Arab linguists did not hassle to define language and establish comprehensive definitions in this field, it is possible to trace some of the definitions with a very advanced linguistic view for their time, and not less important than the linguistic views currently prevalent in the field of linguistics.

Ibn Jinni (2003, p. 6) defined language as “the sounds through which every nation expresses their purposes”. As for Al-Jahiz (2000, p. 6), he defined language in the following way: “Language is an instrument of expression because the matter revolves around expression, clarification, understanding, and comprehension.” It is consistent with André Martinet’s definition of language: “Language is a system of signs that allows a community of speakers to communicate with each other. It is a symbolic, arbitrary, and conventional communication system, and it consists of a set of rules that govern the use of sounds, words, and grammar to produce and understand meaningful utterances (1960 p.9).”

In fact, the Arabs have taken a great interest in linguistic studies, and no one can deny the effort they have made in this field, including a great deal of research, investigation, and care in collecting language words, classifying them, interpreting them, studying the structure of words and their functions within the system, and setting the foundations of language and deducing general rules (Visonà & Plensky, 2020). However, it can be observed that they did not often stop at researching meticulously how to define language rather it came smoothly through their study of some linguistic issues.

Following Al-Farabi, Ibn Khaldun (n.d..) defined language as the expression of the speaker’s intent. This expression is a linguistic act arising from the intention to produce speech. Therefore, it must become an established possession in the active organ for it, which is the tongue. And it is different in every nation according to its terminology. Ibn Khaldun continues: “The speaker intends, through speech, to fully inform the listener of what is in his mind and to indicate it to him (p.118).” If one looks closely at this definition, one can notice a modern linguistic element. The hearer’s understanding of what is in the speaker’s mind is nothing, but the expressive function of language in modern times. That is, language is a medium possessed by the language speaker and through which he expresses his views, requirements, and sensations. The claim of Ibn Khaldun “the speaker’s statement about his intended meaning” is simply what the speaker intends to convey to the hearer. This is the referential function in modern linguistics, while the speaker’s understanding is nothing, but the information and news conveyed by the speaker to the hearer (cited in Hébert & Tabler, 2019). That is the basic function of the communicative linguistic process.

After displaying the definitions of language according to ancient Arab linguists and originating the linguistic principles related to the function of language and its role in human society, this work will expose a topic that combines the heritage of original Arabic grammar with the discussions of important contemporary linguists. That meets with the main contemporary linguists, which forms the first image of research in the linguistic function of grammar, especially according to Ibn Jinni, and Abdulqahir al-Jurjani.

This research does not aim to ride the current wave of research on Arabic linguistic and rhetorical heritage by attributing any modern linguistic school or philosophical theory to an old Arabic grammar or linguistics, but rather the issue goes beyond that to prove that the ancient Arabs did not only develop a linguistic thought but also possessed linguistic thinking tools that surpassed those of other nations and peoples in their study of language beyond its descriptive and standard aspects. They had a linguistic understanding of the literary meaning of language, its intellectual and social functions, and its communicative role. This research does not seek to prove that modern linguists have benefited from the efforts of the Arabs, but rather to show that Western linguistic work came independently of the efforts of the ancient ones, especially the Arabs, and that modern linguists have developed new linguistic thinking tools that are distinguished by their focus on language not only in terms of its form but also in terms of its functional structure, which is what the ancient Arabs and rhetoricians perceived.

This study raises several questions, the chief of which are: What is the theory of functional grammar? What are its most important elements? To what extent does the Arabic heritage of linguistics intersect with modern linguistics in the era of language function?

2. Literature review

2.1. Exploring the intersection of Arab and modern linguists in the context of functional linguistics

The Arabic heritage of linguistics intersects with modern linguistics in the era of language function to a significant extent, reflecting the dynamic and evolving nature of linguistic research and theory. Despite the differences between the two traditions, both the Arabic heritage of linguistics and modern linguistics have been highly influential in shaping the development of linguistic theory and have had a lasting impact on the study of language.

2.2. Ibn Jinni

Although Ibn Jinni lived in the Islamic Golden Age, over a thousand years ago, his ideas on grammar and syntax, as well as his functional approach to the study of language, have had a lasting impact on the development of the modern linguistic theory (Ryding, 2014).

One of the key ways in which the Arabic heritage of linguistics intersects with modern linguistics is through its emphasis on the study of grammar and syntax. The Arab linguistic tradition, of which Ibn Jinni was a part, placed a high value on the study of grammar and syntax, and his ideas on these subjects have influenced the development of modern linguistic theories of grammar and syntax.

Another way in which the Arabic heritage of linguistics intersects with modern linguistics is through its functional approach to the study of language. Like modern linguistics, Ibn Jinni emphasized the importance of understanding how language is used in context, and his functional approach to the study of language has been highly influential in shaping the development of functional approaches to the study of language in modern linguistics.

It is worth noting that Ibn Jinni (2003) approached the concept of the functions of language by explaining the relationship between the word and its meaning, the relationship between words, and the relationship between letters, and he dedicated chapters to their characteristics (Sak, 2019). He emphasized that Arabs pay attention to the structure and order of their words because this is their way of expressing their purposes and meanings.

In the context of Arab bravery, Ibn Jinni believes that writing according to the Arab system leads to a clear message, and he also asserts that the Arabic language relies on presentation, delay, separation, connection, and the conveyance of meaning. He also mentions that Arabs may resort to the quirky style to convey a specific meaning (Othman et al., 2022). Many verbal debates were registered between some poets and grammarians on this issue, as the grammarians accused these poets of weakness in language and prosody, while these poets considered the grammarians to be pedantic and unable to understand the meanings of poetry.

In this way, Ibn Jinni connects inflection with the functional meanings of the parts of the speech context. Thus, one understands that inflection is at the service of language and speech, understanding and communication, and its function is nothing but to reveal the hidden content of the Arab’s speech. Ibn Jinni (2003) asserts: “It is the speaker himself who raises, lowers, and connects, as he clarifies the meanings he wants with words (p.140).” Therefore, inflection is a means among the means used by the sender to convey his message to the recipients, specifying the linguistic functions that express the intentions of the speaker.

Overall, the encounter and mutual influences between Ibn Jinni’s functional linguistic theory and modern linguistic theory in the West reflect the dynamic and evolving nature of linguistic research and theory. Despite their differences, both traditions have been highly influential in shaping the development of linguistic theory and have had a lasting impact on the study of language.

2.3 Abdulqahar al-jurjani

Grammarians viewed “grammar” as a science with a function and purpose, which is to facilitate communication between the sender and the recipient, and therefore the basic function of grammar is to create understanding and comprehension between the interlocutors (Wahba, 2022). In this way, the grammarians of the past viewed grammar as a small part of the whole which is language.

Imam Abdulqahar al-Jurjani viewed grammar from a comprehensive wholistic angle, linking the agent to the norm, and viewed the speech as a whole entity that is not divisible but rather the grammar serves the communication process, he emphasized that speech context does not come from about except through knowledge of the inflectional signs in the structure, which are nothing but factors for the sender’s language to be understood by the recipients. He composed (2002, p.353):

And know that what you see as the necessity of ordering words and their succession on specific systems, is not what you intended by thinking, but rather it is something that occurs due to the first necessity in terms of words if they are capable of meaning, they necessarily follow the meanings in their places.

Jurjani determined the meaning of grammar and gave it the communicative property. Likewise, Abdul Salam Al-Msadi (n.d..) emphasized the approach that the Jurjani followed in determining the absorptive capacity of grammar and placing it in the first rank for nothing but because it expresses the speaker’s goals, the sender’s objectives, and the communication process. As for the verbal concern, Wahba (2022) asserts that Al-Jurjani foregrounded the importance of the speaker knowing the content of the speech for it to be beneficial, for the understanding to reach the recipient quickly and easily, and for the law of proportionality between the energy of the statement in speech and the knowledge of the listener about the content of the message.

This is in line with the energy of speech, as both the sender and the recipient respond for the communication process to be successful. Speech can be transmitted from the speaker’s mind to the listener’s thoughts and become as successful as possible. Al-Jurjani (2002, p. 180) emphasizes all of this through his explanation of the energy incorporated in speech and its capacity to expand or contract, affirming:

The listener cannot be free of being knowledgeable about the language and the meanings of the words he hears, either by being aware or ignorant. If he is knowledgeable, he does not imagine that the words differ from him, the meaning of the word is faster to his heart than the meaning of another word, and if he is ignorant, it is described as farther away.

The structure of language, according to Al-Jurjani, is that which helps in understanding the content of its messages through systems and the well-organized composition of words that serve meanings, therefore good composition and adherence to grammatical meanings and rules make understanding easier and more effective (cited in Wahba, 2022).

Besides, since communication is a continuous process, Al-Jurjani (2002) declares: “If composition is correct and straight, the meaning reaches your heart before the word reaches your ear, and if it is contrary to what is desired, the word reaches the ear, so you are left out to struggle in the meaning you seek (p.184)”. In determining the informative function, Al-Jurjani also deals with the referential relationship, whereby the meaning of speech during the communication process refers to an external factor to language, which is the intention of the speaker or sender to inform the recipient of his speech, “so the referential load of speech depends on the intention of the speaker (p. 186)”. Al-Jurjani also gave the sender a central role in the communication process, the occurrence of understanding, and the determination of the linguistic function used to express his purposes, claiming: “Consideration should be given to the situation of the speaker and the hearer, and the composer of it, and it is mandatory to understand the meanings he carries, not with the listener (p. 201)”.

Furthermore, Al-Jurjani approached the study of language from a descriptive perspective, focusing on the structure and form of the Persian language. Despite the differences in perspective, Al-Jurjani’s work holds relevance for functional linguistics. For example, Al-Jurjani’s analysis of Persian phonetics and phonology provides valuable insights into the sounds of the language, which are important for functional linguistics’ goal of identifying the functional roles of different linguistic elements. Additionally, Al-Jurjani’s categorization of words and phrases and his focus on the form and structure of language provide a valuable foundation for functional linguistics, which seeks to understand the functional roles of different linguistic elements.

In this sense, Al-Jurjani’s work and functional linguistics complement each other, with Al-Jurjani’s descriptive approach providing the basis for understanding the structure and form of the language, while functional linguistics adds a deeper understanding of the social and communicative context in which language is used.

In conclusion, the intersection of Al-Jurjani and modern linguistics in the context of functional linguistics provides a rich and diverse perspective on the study of language. Al-Jurjani’s work continues to provide valuable insights into the structure and form of the Persian language, while functional linguistics adds a deeper understanding of the functional roles of linguistic elements in communicative situations.

3. Methodology

The utilization of rapid reviews has grown in significance in providing policymakers with evidence-based information for making time-sensitive decisions. The reason for adopting this methodology is to improve transparency in the generation of conclusions by preventing any misrepresentation of knowledge. This is achieved by assessing the quality and relevance of each research study, thus ensuring an explicit and systematic approach is taken to avoid any potential misrepresentations of knowledge. A protocol is employed to establish the procedures for conducting the systematic review and minimize bias to ensure procedures are not influenced by results. Extensive searches are carried out to verify that the conclusions are not based solely on easily accessible information (Khangura et al., 2012). The ultimate aim of this methodology is to provide a reliable and transparent synthesis of evidence that can aid in making prompt decisions.

Furthermore, this systematic review made a deliberate effort to narrow down the research to studies that are directly relevant to the research questions, with a particular focus on the primary research question: To what extent does the Arabic heritage of linguistics intersect with modern linguistics in the era of language function? By restricting the scope of the review to studies that are closely related to the research question, the conclusions are not influenced by studies that are readily accessible to researchers.

To ensure that the main research question was adequately addressed, only studies that underwent a thorough assessment were included in this research. Studies that did not meet this criterion were excluded. The review question and methodology restricted the identification of selected evidence examples, but the systematic review was still conducted with a high level of transparency, coherence, and rigor in the approach.

Moreover, to avoid duplicating research, the data collection method of this study involved searching databases, conducting manual searches of relevant journals, exploring specialist bibliographies, and scrutinizing unpublished research. The primary purpose of selecting reputable primary and secondary sources was to ensure that the information obtained was accurate, trustworthy, and authoritative.

The development of the systematic review protocol followed the Khangura et al. (2012) rapid survey protocol, which outlines eight specific steps: assessment needs, question development & refinement, and article development. Systematic literature search, screening, and selection of studies, a narrative synthesis of included studies, and article production.

4. Findings and discussions

4.1. Comparing the views and methods of Arab linguists and contemporary linguists

Ibn Jinni’s views and methods in the linguistic analysis have similarities and differences with those of contemporary linguists as well. Some of these include systematic analysis, focus on grammar, and interest in language history.

Both Ibn Jinni and contemporary linguists systematically approach the study of language, seeking to understand the structure and function of language in a systematic and organized way. Moreover, they place a great deal of importance on the study of grammar and have made significant contributions to the understanding of grammar and syntax. They are, furthermore, interested in the history of language and how it has evolved, and both have made important contributions to the field of historical linguistics.

One of the main differences is the approach to the study of language. Ibn Jinni was primarily concerned with the study of the Arabic language and its correct usage, while functional linguistics is a more general approach to the study of language that is concerned with the functions of language in a wide range of contexts. Another difference is the focus on the speaker’s intent and the listener’s interpretation. Ibn Jinni was primarily concerned with the correct usage of language, while functional linguistics focuses on how speakers use language to convey meaning and how listeners interpret that meaning.

Thus, while Ibn Jinni’s views and methods are still significant in the era of functionalism, contemporary functional linguistics takes a broader and more context-sensitive approach to the study of language. The focus on the functions of language in specific contexts and the importance of the speaker’s intent and the listener’s interpretation are central to contemporary functional linguistics.

In the era of functional linguistics, Al-Jurjani’s views and methods are still significant, as his focus on the importance of context in language usage is a fundamental aspect of functional linguistics. However, some important differences exist between Al-Jurjani’s views and contemporary functional linguistics.

One of the main differences is the approach to the study of language. Al-Jurjani was primarily concerned with the study of the Arabic language and its correct usage, while functional linguistics is a more general approach to the study of language that is concerned with the functions of language in a wide range of contexts. Another difference is the focus on the speaker’s intent and the listener’s interpretation. Al-Jurjani was primarily concerned with the correct usage of language, while functional linguistics focuses on how speakers use language to convey meaning and how listeners interpret that meaning.

In conclusion, while Al-Jurjani’s views and methods are still significant in the era of functional linguistics, contemporary functional linguistics takes a broader and more context-sensitive approach to the study of language. The focus on the functions of language in specific contexts and the importance of the speaker’s intent and the listener’s interpretation are central to contemporary functional linguistics.

Despite the differences in approach and method, there are also similarities between the views and methods of Arab linguists and contemporary linguists. Both groups are concerned with understanding the structure and form of language, and both use observation and analysis to do so. Additionally, both groups have made significant contributions to our understanding of language and continue to shape the field of linguistics.

In conclusion, the views and methods of Arab linguists and contemporary linguists have evolved, reflecting advances in our understanding of language and changes in the field of linguistics. However, both groups continue to make important contributions to our understanding of language, and their work remains relevant to the study of language today.

4.2. Evaluating the significance of Arab work in the context of contemporary linguistic perspectives

in terms of functional linguistics, Ibn Jinni is notable for his focus on understanding how language is used in context. He believed that the study of language should not just be concerned with its form, but also with its use and meaning. This focus on the functional aspects of language aligns well with the principles of functional linguistics, which seeks to understand how language serves a communicative purpose in a given context. He laid the foundation for the development of functional linguistic theory and his ideas continue to shape the way that linguists understand and study language today. Overall, Ibn Jinni’s work on the Arabic language fits into the larger context of linguistic research as a pioneering and influential contribution to the study of language. His work reflects the cultural and historical context in which he lived, as well as the linguistic traditions and intellectual currents of his time. Despite this, his ideas and insights continue to be highly relevant and valuable for contemporary linguistic research and theory.

Moreover, Al Jurjani was known for his functional approach to the study of language, which emphasized the importance of understanding how language is used in context. He believed that language should not only be studied in terms of its form, but also in terms of its use and meaning and that the study of language should consider the social and cultural context in which it is used. This approach aligns well with the principles of functional linguistics, which seeks to understand how language serves a communicative purpose. In short, Al Jurjani’s work fits into the larger context of linguistic research both as part of the rich tradition of linguistic inquiry in the Islamic world and as a precursor to the functionalist approaches that have become more prominent in modern linguistic research. His ideas have had a lasting impact on the field of linguistics and continue to shape the way that linguists understand and study language today.

4.3. The continued relevance of Arab’s contributions to linguistics: Debunking criticisms

Ibn Jinni’s work in linguistics has been the subject of criticism for centuries, with some scholars challenging his views and methods. One of the key limitations of Ibn Jinni’s work is its cultural and historical context. As a linguist working in the Arab world, he was heavily influenced by the cultural and historical context in which he lived, and his linguistic theories are therefore coloured by his cultural and historical background. Contemporary linguists, on the other hand, often strive to be objective and free from cultural and historical biases in their work, recognizing the importance of an impartial and scientific approach to linguistic study.

Another limitation of Ibn Jinni’s work is its theoretical approach. While he made significant contributions to linguistic theory, his theories are not as developed or comprehensive as those of contemporary linguists, who have access to more sophisticated theoretical frameworks and methods. This has allowed contemporary linguists to build upon and refine the theories of their predecessors, leading to a more nuanced and sophisticated understanding of language and its structure and function.

Finally, it is important to note that contemporary linguists place a greater emphasis on linguistic description, while Ibn Jinni was more focused on linguistic analysis and the development of linguistic theories. This difference in approach is reflective of the broader changes and developments in the field of linguistics over time and highlights the need for continued reflection and refinement of linguistic theories in light of new evidence and research.

While al-Jurjani’s work was innovative for its time and helped lay the foundations for the study of Arabic grammar, his theories have limitations that prevent them from being fully compatible with contemporary linguistic perspectives. One of the main criticisms of al-Jurjani’s work is that it is too focused on form rather than function, and does not take into account the context in which language is used or the intended purpose of the speaker. In contrast, contemporary linguistics is more concerned with the functional aspects of language and how it is used to convey meaning in specific situations. In this light, al-Jurjani’s work is seen as limited in its ability to provide a complete and nuanced understanding of language and its role in human communication.

In conclusion, the contributions of Arab linguists to the field of functional linguistics have been significant and have played a crucial role in shaping contemporary linguistic perspectives. Their work has provided important insights into the functions of language and has helped to establish a framework for the study of language as a means of communication.

Contemporary linguistic perspectives have built upon and expanded upon their ideas, leading to a more nuanced and sophisticated understanding of language and its structure and function.

So far, this study accentuated the functional aspects of language study offered by prominent Arab grammarians in the field of linguistics. Briefly, their interpretations featured grammar in its functional role in achieving communication and revealing the intentions of the speaker who, through his commitment to the rules of system and composition in Arabic, strives to declare and explain his purposes and determines the function of his message to serve his purposes.

At this point, it became fundamental to question the origin of this theory in the West, its most important figures, how it reached out to Bühler, what the latter did to build upon it, and to what extent.

4.4. The functions of language in the west linguistic heritage

Wahba (2022) posits that the communicative model was formulated by the German linguist and well-known psychologist and member of the Vienna Circle, Karl Bühler (1879–1963) under the title Organon-Modell in his book Sprach Theorie. This model itself was a development of a model previously presented in 1918. In his new model, Bühler referred to the fact that the sender uses language in a certain context as a tool to inform others about certain things.

4.4.1 Karl Bühler

He focuses in his theory on the speaker, the listener, and the elements that the speech embodies. Therefore, his model is limited to three functions produced by focusing on one of the elements of the communication process, which are the following: (1) expressive function: related to the speaker; (2) conative function: related to the listener and (3) representative function: related to the elements that speech contains. The aesthetic or poetic function is excluded from Bühler’s model, despite his recognition of its existence, as he referred to it in other places (Hochmuth, 2020).

The development of Bühler’s theory was carried out by the Prague and Brug Schools (Quammic-Wallen, 2020). They adopted the Bühlerian theory and many of its members contributed to its development by presenting their modern theories in linguistics at the First General Conference on Linguistics (held in the Dutch city of Den Haag between April 10–15, 1928) and used for the first time the terms “linguistic structure” and “linguistic function”.

Members of the Brug School became familiar with this theory in the early 1930s when Bühler was a member of the Vienna Circle and a friend of Trubetzkoy, who was invited to offer a lecture to the members of the Brug School. The first attempt to develop the Bühler model came through Mukarovsky. In his speech at the 1938 Koniggratz Linguistics Conference, he pointed out that there is a fourth central function that must be added to the Bühler model, the “aesthetic or poetic function of language”, which is the main concern of Mukarovsky. In 1952, during the climax of the communicative theory, Jakobson spoke of the “semiotic function” as a fifth function represented through the code. In 1956, Malinowski presented the “phatic function” as the sixth.

Hence, the Prague school gradually developed the functional theory of Bühler. Even until 1956, this theory remained scattered and fragmented, with any statement about it being a collection of articles and speeches published or delivered by members of the Prague Circle in various places (Haydar, 2001).

4.4.2 Siegfried Schmidt

Schmidt’s (cited in Al-Tajdity, 2007) study of language is “open to conventional models of social and psychological sciences and his numerous research brings together in a communication perspective between philosophy of language, linguistic ethnicity, psychology, cognition, education and teaching, artificial intelligence and machine translation, aesthetic biology, and cultural theory (p.305).” Thus, Schmidt’s study of language is not disconnected from the factors surrounding it, unlike Jakobson’s.

Schmidt’s theory began with an attempt to find a comprehensive classification of all human texts, and this ambitious classification was based on the informative purpose that the author intends to achieve through the creation of some linguistic texts (Hébert & Tabler, 2019). This difficult classification distinguished- within the linguistic texts produced in various communication contexts- between three main theoretical patterns: informative, directive, and literary text. Schmidt derived this general typological classification of texts and speeches from the six functions of human language as Jakobson defined them in his communication model (Al-Tajdity, 2007). He selected three fundamental linguistic functions from Jakobson’s: expressive, illocutionary, and poetic.

The affective or expressive function: It expresses the speaker’s attitude towards what they are saying. According to Schmidt, it corresponds to news or media texts, which serve to inform and explain the current news and available information and their implications in a specific communicative context reflected in the communicator’s words, actions, and deeds (questions or answers, agreement or disagreement, stimulation, or inhibition, etc.).

The illocutionary function: Human language, as is well known, has the basic function of achieving the communicative goals of the speakers (comprehension, interaction, argumentation, sharing, exchange, mediation, etc.), and therefore, the illocutionary function relies on the speaker during the practice of language based on its illocutionary function in the communicative context, with attention focused on the achievement of speech acts that are embodied in the communicative path. While with Saussure et al. (1966), this function is opposed to the directive text, which carries specific orders and instructions. The effects of this should be visible to the recipient in a linguistic interaction situation.

The poetic function: When natural language is considered from the perspective of its inherent autonomy and the density of its internal interactions without necessarily being subject to its informative dimensions or the pressure of its illocutionary devices, the high property of literary language is revealed, which is also called the poetic function (Manar, 2022). This multifaceted function of language is widely realized in literary texts in particular and in artistic and technical texts in general, because in this type of creative texts—which are few compared to other cultural texts that are widely circulated—a network of expressive and evocative meanings is woven that is not subject to the rules of logic or the conventions of communication, but rather exceed them through a certain aesthetic appeal (Hoang, 2021). This function is also present to a more or less degree in various forms of non-literary texts, where it contributes to the enrichment and stylistic diversity of language.

As for the philosophy of Anglo-Saxon language and its analytical statements, it can be said that R. Schmidt (2001) borrowed two fundamental creative concepts on a specialized basis:

(1) The evidentiary function: This linguistic role is manifested during human communication activity when it includes several reports and affirmations about a specific issue or matter. For Schmidt, this corresponds to the fundamental role of the news text, with its clear or implicit explanations and affirmations about various cultural topics that it presents briefly or in detail; and (2) the directive function: This linguistic role appears during social interaction, when the speaker, through the informative text, presents several orders and instructions directed to the audience for their accomplishment. For Schmidt, this function corresponds to the tasks of the directive text, with its clear or implicit instructions that the audience is required to carry out promptly or later.

Indeed, A. Schmidt’s (1985) reliance on the communicative model of Jakobson is considered a theoretical equilibrium towards what can be called “extremist” technical models of communication, especially those advanced news models that considered human communication as purely factual information that do not recognize emotion or persuasion, almost like machine communication, and do not include any artistic, aesthetic, or poetic dimensions. . This linguist distinguished between three main foundations of the human communicative situation: “organon”, “telos”, and code. The organon is necessary for producing the sounds or gestures that make up a language, the telos is crucial for defining the purpose or goal of communication, and the code is significant for conveying meaning with symbols or signs (Grant, 2003). Together, these three foundations form the basis for human communication and language use.

Therefore, Schmidt’s reliance on the communicative model can be considered an expansion, on his part, of the technical model of communication to include an important aspect of linguistic activity (placing the linguistic message in terms of its materiality and self-expression) and a fundamental aspect of cultural presence and contribution (art, literature, aesthetics). Thus, this stance reflects a broader understanding of the communication process, a greater integration of its textual and rhetorical patterns, in addition to its varied social interactions.

4.5 Language functions through a philosophical perspective

Some linguists believe that the primary function of language is communication, as Ferdinand de Saussure argues in his book Cours de Linguistique Générale (Saussure, 1916): “Language is a system of signs and signals, its goal is communication when the signifier (the sound) meets the signified (the concept)” (p.98). This concept is similar to what Ibn Jinni (2003) referred to in his book The Properties when he defined language as “sounds that all people use to express their needs”(p.87). Martinet (1960) also defines language as “a double articulation, whose function is communication (p.12)”. This implies that language can be divided into morphemes and phonemes. However, the sounds cannot be divided into further linguistic units, as phonemes are already at the smallest level of abstraction that is used to represent meaning.

When individuals combine phonemes, they create words. In addition to creating words, they can also combine phonemes to create phrases and sentences. These larger units of language are made up of words, which are in turn made up of phonemes. By combining phonemes in different ways, they can create an almost limitless number of words and sentences (Glaspey et al., 2022). Moreover, when they combine sentences, they create paragraphs and sequences. Paragraphs, in turn, become what is called a text, which is coherent and cohesive. Therefore, the text, through the processes of composition and substitution, becomes what is called language whose prominent goal is the function of communication.

Nevertheless, if functionalists view that language as clear and serve the purpose of effective communication between the speaker and the listener, Ducrot (1980) believes that language is not always an unambiguous means of communication as it appears, but rather a language of coercion, ambiguity, and concealment. This entails that the individual may use language as a social game for deception, and disguising intentions for different purposes. This linguistic coercion may be due to religious, political, social, economic, psychological, and ethical reasons.

On the other hand, Barthes (1957) considered language as a system of signs that is used to communicate meaning and it is also a way of constructing and representing reality. According to him, language serves both a denotative and connotative function. The denotative function is the literal, dictionary definition of a word or phrase, while the connotative function is the cultural or emotional associations that a word or phrase carries with it. He believed that language is not neutral and that the connotative meanings of words and phrases are just as important as their denotative meanings. He also believed that language is inherently ideological and that it can be used to reinforce power structures in society.

Thus, one concludes that language can be a tool for transparent communication, as it can also be a language of coercion, deception, and concealment, and it can be a tool for power on the one hand, and an actual oppressive power on the other hand.

4.5.1 The functions of language according to Louis Hebert

The semiotician Hébert (2022) developed a model of language functions based on the work of Ferdinand de Saussure and Roman Jakobson. According to Hebert, language has six main functions: expressive, conative, referential, phatic, metalinguistic, and poetic. Hebert’s model emphasizes the role of language in communication and interaction and how different functions can be combined and used in different ways in different contexts.

The expressive function refers to the use of language to convey the speaker’s emotions, attitudes, or feelings. The conative function refers to the use of language to influence or persuade the listener or reader to take a certain action or adopt a particular attitude. The referential function refers to the use of language to convey information about the world or to refer to specific objects, events, or concepts (Hébert, 2022). The phatic function refers to the use of language to establish or maintain social bonds or to establish a common ground for communication. The metalinguistic function refers to the use of language to reflect on or comment on language itself, or the use of language in a particular context. The poetic function refers to the use of language to create an artistic or literary effect or to evoke an emotional response in the listener or reader.

Herbert theories of language functions attempts to explain how language can be used to convey different types of meaning, and they both rely on the idea that language is not just a means of conveying literal meaning, but also a means of conveying meaning indirectly.

4.5.2 Gerard genette narrative discourse function

Genette (1988) did not focus on the functions of language, but rather on the functions of narrative discourse, as discussed in his book Figures III. He identified five main functions of discourse: (1) narrative: This refers to how a narrative is structured, including the order of events, the choice of perspective, and the use of time. Genette believed that the narrative function is the most fundamental aspect of discourse; (2) configurational function: This refers to how the roles of narrators and characters are distributed within a narrative. For example, the configurational function can determine whether a narrator is a character within the story or an external observer; (3) the informative or communicative function, which ensures communication between the narrator and the narrated; (4) organizational function: This refers to how the discourse is organized, including the use of dialogue, and how events are described. The organizational function is concerned with how the elements of the narrative are put together, and (5) the focalization function: This refers to the point of view of the narrative. It could be external (from a narrator) or internal (from a character’s perspective). It is how the events of the narrative are presented to the audience, and the level of access the audience has to the thoughts, feelings, and perceptions of the characters.

Genette’s model of discourse functions has significantly impacted the study of narrative and literary theory, and it continues to be widely cited and used in literary criticism and analysis (Stevani et al., 2023).

5. Conclusions and implications for further research

The starting point of functional theories of language among linguists began with the convergence of efforts of several rhetoricians and linguistics, each in their respective fields. This convergence allowed the scholars to go beyond the boundaries of merely describing language, its rules, and nature, to understand its function in the larger social context.

Before the development of functional theories of language, linguistics was primarily concerned with the structure of language and its grammatical rules. However, functional theories arose in response to the realization that language serves a communicative purpose beyond its structural properties. Scholars from different fields, such as linguistics, sociology, and anthropology, began to collaborate and examine language as a tool for social interaction and communication.

One of the key figures in the development of functional theories of language was the linguist, Ferdinand de Saussure. He argued that language is not just a collection of isolated words and structures but rather a system of signs that function within a larger social context. Other scholars, such as the anthropologist Bronislaw Malinowski and the sociologist Émile Durkheim, also contributed to the development of functional theories of language by emphasizing the social functions of language.

Yet, the interplay between Arabic linguistics heritage and functional linguistics as a modern trend is an interesting and important area of study that has received increasing attention in recent years. On one hand, Arabic linguistics heritage is rich and varied, with a long history of contributions to the field of linguistics. Arab grammarians and rhetoricians made significant contributions to linguistic theories and concepts that continue to be studied and used today. For example, Arab grammarians developed a comprehensive system of Arabic grammar, which has been used as a model for other languages.

On the other hand, functional linguistics is a modern trend in linguistic theory that emphasizes the study of language in use, rather than simply analyzing its structure. Functional linguistics emphasizes the role of language in communication and emphasizes the importance of understanding the communicative function of language. This approach has led to the development of new concepts and theories, such as Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), which has gained increasing popularity in recent years.

The interplay between Arabic linguistics heritage and functional linguistics is complex and multifaceted. On the one hand, there is a great deal of overlap between the two areas, with many of the concepts and theories developed by Arab grammarians and rhetoricians having relevance to modern functional linguistics. For example, the concept of speech acts, which was first introduced by Arab rhetoricians, is now a key concept in functional linguistics.

At the same time, there are also significant differences between the two areas. For example, while Arab linguistics heritage tends to be more prescriptive in its approach, emphasizing the rules and structure of language, functional linguistics is more descriptive, focusing on the actual use of language in context. Additionally, Arab linguistics heritage tends to be more focused on the Arabic language, while functional linguistics has a broader focus that includes the study of all languages.

In recent years, there has been increasing interest in exploring the connections between Arabic linguistics heritage and functional linguistics, with researchers seeking to identify areas of overlap and potential for collaboration. Some researchers have suggested that there may be opportunities for integrating concepts and theories from both areas, to develop a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of language and its use. However, further research is needed to fully explore the interplay between these two areas and to identify the most promising areas for collaboration and integration.

This research also showed that the efforts and theories of linguists did not stop at the contributions of scholars or linguistic schools, but rather continued to evolve. One example of this is the development of systemic functional linguistics (SFL) by Michael Halliday in the 1960s. SFL builds on the idea that language serves a communicative function and explores the relationship between language, context, and social structures. This approach has had a significant impact on fields such as education and language teaching.

In the following years, Michael Halliday’s systemic functional linguistics (SFL) emerged as a further development of the functional theory of language. SFL focused on the relationship between language and social context, and sought to explore how language functions to achieve social goals. This approach has been influential in many fields, including education and language teaching.

In the Arab world, linguists need to continue to develop their research and build on the work of the ancients. This is because linguistic research in the Arab world has traditionally been focused on the study of classical Arabic and its grammar, with less attention paid to the social and functional aspects of language. To develop new and independent linguistic theories, Arab linguists must engage with the work of their predecessors, but also critically evaluate and build on their theories.

This research reviewed significant linguistic theories that have been presented by Arab linguists and rhetoricians of the past. These theories are significant because they represented a departure from traditional linguistic studies, which had focused on the standard educational context of language. Instead, Arab linguists and rhetoricians sought to understand language as a whole entity and the Arabic language in particular.

One of the key contributions of these Arab linguists and rhetoricians was their emphasis on the human, social, and psychological aspects of language use. They recognized that language is not just a set of rules and structures, but a tool that is used by individuals to communicate and interact with others. They explored how language is shaped by social and cultural factors, and how it reflects the psychology and worldview of its users.

For example, the linguist Ibn Khaldun emphasized the role of social and cultural factors in shaping language use. He argued that language reflects the culture and social organization of a community and that linguistic change is often driven by social and cultural changes. Similarly, the rhetorician al-Jurjani emphasized the importance of context in understanding language use and argued that language must be studied in relation to the social, cultural, and historical context in which it is used.

In conclusion, the linguistic theories presented by Arab linguists and rhetoricians of the past were significant because they recognized the human, social, and psychological aspects of language use. They sought to understand language as a whole entity and the Arabic language and explored how language is shaped by social and cultural factors. These contributions are still relevant today, as linguists continue to explore the relationship between language, culture, and society.

Correction

This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

Researchers would like to thank the Deanship of Scientific Research, Qassim University for funding publication of this project.

Notes on contributors

Albatool Abalkheel

Albatool Abalkheel is an Associate Professor of Linguistics at the Department of English Language and Translation, College of Arabic Language and Social Studies, Qassim University, Buraydah, Qassim, Saudi Arabia. She received her MA degree in English from Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO., USA. She then received her Ph.D. from Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, USA. She published several papers related to linguistics and presented some papers in conferences.

Maha Sourani

Maha Sourani is a Professor of applied linguistics and educational technology with 10+ years of experience in higher education at the Lebanese University. Examiner of paper rank promotions, mentor, and reviewer for Ph.D. and MA dissertations. Coordinator and curriculum developer for under/graduate courses in the field. Editor and reviewer for many local and international peer-reviewed journals. Interested in MOOC, educational foundation and administration, artificial intelligence, curriculum and instruction, computational/socio/psycho/applied linguistics, language acquisition, morphology, language assessment, CALL, TEFL, EAP, and TESOL.