clearly untrue for the great majority of wonls found in all languages Of coune to assume the "natural" the most valid and accurate position e, there are view for language in general For the most part, then, t
he instances of apparent connections between sound and meaning, but in insufficient number convention" view that the relationship berwees nound and meaning is arbitrary provides A second matter of philosophical concern in Greek linguistica that is still of interest today revolves around the issue of regularity in language. Some scholars maintained that language was basically systematic and regular and set about demonstrating their view by describing the consistent patterns found in Greek word formation Examples of such patterns in English are the plural forms, such as maps. characteristics
, interests, and ffects, in which the plural is created by adding s to the singular form. Other Greek philosophers, while not denying that regularity was present in language, emphasized that there were many aspects of Greek that appeared to be irteyular In English, words that do not follow the general pattern for plural formation include men, sheep and child Those who stressed the regularity in language were known as analogists, while those who emphasized the presence of irregularity were called anomalists. It is clear today that language is essentially systematic and regular. If it were not, there wo
uld be no way in which hun:an beings could learn such a complex system. The Greek interest in regulanty and irregularity led grammarians to describe both aspects of the Greek languaxe, thereby establishing a form of language desbription which survives today. Modem linguists seek to describe the regularities in language and account for the irregularities. It is often the case that what initially appears to be irregular is, upon careful investigation, actually a regular, systematic form Not all Greek interest in language centered on philosophical matters. The Alexan drians of the third and second centuries B.C, were interested in the literature of the past Since all languages change over a period of time, the literature written in the fifth cent
ury B. C contained words and expressions that differed from those used by the Alexandrians themselves. It was necessary, then, for literary scholars to produce commentaries on the differences between the language of literature and the language spokien by the people These commentaries served as guides for understanding the literature, much as do explanatory notes often found in moden publications of Shakespeare's plays. An unfor tunate side effect of the Alexandrian study of language in relation to literature has to our own times
Admiration for the literature led to the totally unwar ranted assumption that the use of language in great literature is somehow "better" rupt form of language. From an objoctive point of view, there is no truth to such claims communic ive needs of its users. If the fifth century B.C. witers of Athens had lived instead in third and second century B.C. Alcxan
dria, they woxuld have used the language writvn form of the Greek language influenced the study of language for many centuries 'more pure" than everyday language use. Common speech was assumed to be a A language is a system for the communication of meaning, and c of Aletandria in their works. Yet, the Alexandrian scholars' emphasis on an older, The most influential and well-known Roman grammarians followed the Alexandrian taditioo. Writing about Latin, rather than Greek, they nevertheless concentrated on the language of literature instead of describing the Latin used by their contemporaries. Al