The code model of communication: a powerful - SIL International

1. ‘Communication’: A Fundamental Concept in
Linguistic Metatheory
1.1. Introductory comments
Most studies conducted within the field of linguistics are justly described as
linguistic studies. They offer analyses or discussion of some element of language. While
conducted from within the field of linguistics, this study is not so much a linguistic study
as it is a study of linguistics. In general terms, it is an examination of how linguists go
about their trade. And, importantly, it is an examination conducted by an insider—by a
participant—rather than simply a collection of observations made by an outsider. Specifically,
the study is a review of the history of a particular idealized model of communication,
which has been employed within the discipline for nearly fifty years. It is an
examination of how that model developed, spread, and gained influence within the
discipline, and how, on some fronts, that influence has begun to wane.
The model in question has been called the code model of communication. 1 It is a
basic model of communication and expresses the idea that communication is the
transmission and reception of information between a human source (encoder) and
receiver (decoder) using a signaling system. David Crystal, in the standard reference
work, A Dictionary of Linguistics & Phonetics, even employs the model in defining
communication, noting that “in theory, communication is said to have taken place if the
information received is the same as that sent” (Crystal 2003:85). Edmondson and
Burquest (1998:95–96) comment that, as proposed in this view, “language is a kind of
code, and communicating is the process of encoding concepts and its inverse decoding.
The notion is quite familiar and so intuitive that the question may be asked whether there
is any conceivable alternative to it.” This study asserts that the code model concept of
communication has been fundamental to the metatheory of contemporary linguistics (see
Crystal 2003:85).
The notion of metatheory itself bears some discussion, for in some circles, metatheory
is taken to signify theory-free or theory-neutral elements in a research tradition.
On philosophical grounds this study must reject the assertion that any element of a
research tradition could be theory-free or theory-neutral. Obviously then, this is not the
sense of metatheory employed here. Rather, by metatheory is meant the “underlying
beliefs that generate a particular approach.” This use of the term metatheory is analogous
to “ideology” or “theoretical presupposition” (Figueroa 1994:4).
In exploring similarities and differences between schools of thought within linguistics,
this study goes beyond the means of analysis or description employed by various
1 The neologism seems to have originated with Sperber and Wilson (1986:2).
1