Editing Functional linguistics (section)

===1980s onward: name controversy===
The term 'functionalism' or 'functional linguistics' became controversial in the 1980s with the rise of a new wave of [[evolutionary linguistics]]. [[Johanna Nichols]] argued that the meaning of 'functionalism' had changed, and the terms formalism and functionalism should be taken as referring to [[generative grammar]], and the [[Interactional linguistics|emergent linguistics]] of [[Paul J. Hopper|Paul Hopper]] and [[Sandra Thompson (linguist)|Sandra Thompson]], respectively; and that the term ''structuralism'' should be reserved for frameworks derived from the [[Prague linguistic circle]].<ref name="Nichols_1984">{{cite journal |last=Nichols |first=Johanna |date=1984 |title=Functional theories of grammar |journal=Annual Review of Anthropology  |volume=13 |issue=1 |pages=97–117 |doi=10.1146/annurev.an.13.100184.000525 }}</ref> [[William Croft (linguist)|William Croft]] argued subsequently that it is a fact to be agreed by all linguists that form does not follow from function. He proposed that functionalism should be understood as autonomous linguistics, opposing the idea that language arises functionally from the need to express meaning:

<blockquote>"The notion of autonomy emerges from an undeniable fact of all languages, 'the curious lack of accord ... between form and function'"<ref name="Croft_19953">{{cite journal|last=Croft|first=William|date=1995|title=Autonomy and functionalist linguistics|journal=Language|volume=71|issue=3|pages=490–532|doi=10.2307/416218|jstor=416218}}</ref></blockquote>

Croft explains that, until the 1970s, functionalism related to semantics and pragmatics, or the '[[Semiotics|semiotic]] function'. But around 1980s the notion of function changed from semiotics to "external function",<ref name="Croft_19953"/> proposing a [[Neo-Darwinism|neo-Darwinian]] view of language change as based on [[natural selection]].<ref name="Croft_2006">{{cite book|last=Croft|first=William|title=Competing Models of Linguistic Change: Evolution and Beyond|publisher=John Benjamins|year=2006|editor-last=Nedergaard Thomsen|editor-first=Ole|pages=91–132|chapter=The relevance of an evolutionary model to historical linguistics|series=Current Issues in Linguistic Theory|volume=279|doi=10.1075/cilt.279.08cro|isbn=978-90-272-4794-0}}</ref> Croft proposes that 'structuralism' and 'formalism' should both be taken as referring to generative grammar; and 'functionalism' to [[Usage-based models of language|usage-based]] and [[cognitive linguistics]]; while neither [[André Martinet]], [[Systemic functional linguistics]] nor [[Functional discourse grammar]] properly represents any of the three concepts.<ref name="Croft_1995">{{cite journal |last=Croft |first=William |date=1995 |title=Autonomy and functionalist linguistics |journal=Language |volume=71 |issue=3 |pages=490–532 |doi=10.2307/416218 |jstor=416218 }}</ref><ref name="Croft_2015">{{cite book |last=Croft|first=William |editor-last=Wright |editor-first=James|year=2015| title=International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences | chapter=Functional approaches to grammar |publisher=Elsevier |isbn= 9780080970875 }}</ref>

The situation was further complicated by the arrival of [[Evolutionary psychology|evolutionary psychological]] thinking in linguistics, with [[Steven Pinker]], [[Ray Jackendoff]] and others hypothesising that the human [[language faculty]], or [[universal grammar]], could have developed through normal [[evolution]]ary processes, thus defending an [[adaptation]]al explanation of the [[Origin of language|origin]] and evolution of the [[language faculty]]. This brought about a functionalism versus formalism debate, with [[Frederick Newmeyer]] arguing that the evolutionary psychological approach to linguistics should also be considered functionalist.<ref name="Newmeyer_1999">{{cite book |year=1999|author-last=Newmeyer | author-first=Frederick | editor-last1=Darnell|editor-last2=Moravcsik| editor-last3=Noonan | editor-last4=Newmeyer | editor-last5=Wheatley| title=Functionalism and Formalism in Linguistics, Vol. 1| publisher=John Benjamins  | chapter=Some remarks on the functionalist–formalist controversy in linguistics|pages=469–486 |isbn=9789027298799 }}</ref>

The terms functionalism and functional linguistics nonetheless continue to be used by the Prague linguistic circle and its derivatives, including [[Société internationale de linguistique fonctionnelle|SILF]], [[Copenhagen School (linguistics)#Danish functional school|Danish functional school]], Systemic functional linguistics and Functional discourse grammar; and the American framework [[Role and reference grammar]] which sees itself as the midway between [[Formal linguistics|formal]] and functional linguistics.<ref name="VanValin_1992">{{cite book |last=Van Valin|first=Robert D. Jr. |year=1992| title=Advances in Role and Reference Grammar |publisher=John Benjamins |isbn=9789027277510 }}</ref>