Oral History Towards Linguistic and Cultural Studies

Bend inė kalba / S anda d Language 2025, N . 98, p. 1–13 Con en s link / Tu inio nuo oda ISSN 2351-7204 (elek oninis / online) Copy igh © 2025 Damian Gocół. Published by he Ins i u e o he Li huanian Language. This is an Open Access a icle dis ibu ed unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion Licence, which pe mi s un es ic ed use, dis ibu ion, and ep oduc ion in any medium, p o ided he o iginal au ho and sou ce a e c edi ed. // Išleido Lie u ių kalbos ins i u as. Šis s aipsnis y a a i os p ieigos, pla inamas pagal „C ea i e Commons“ p isky imo licencijos sąlygas, leidžiančias ne ibo ai naudo i, pla in i i a ku i u inį be kokioje laikmenoje, nu odan au o ių i šal inį. Recei ed: / Gau a: 2025-10-24. Accep ed: / P iim a: 2025-12-30. 1 ORAL HISTORY TOWARDS LINGUISTIC AND CULTURAL STUDIES Žodinė is o ija kalbos i kul ū os s udijose DAMIAN GOCÓŁ Ma ia Cu ie-Skłodowska Uni e si y in Lublin E-mail: [email p o ec ed] ORCID ID: h ps://o cid.o g/0000-0003-1176-0067 Fields o esea ch: linguis ics, o al his o y, media s udies, cul u al s udies. h ps://doi.o g/10.35321/bkalba.2025.98.08 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ABSTRACT This a icle discusses he ela ionship be ween o al his o y and linguis ic and cul u al s udies. The au ho begins by p esen ing a ious de ini ions and app oaches o o al his o y wi hin hese ields o knowledge. He ocuses on he de ini ional and me hodological p oposals pu o wa d by, among o he s, Je zy Ba miński, Linda Wa s, Ga y Okihi o, Dawid Dunaway, Donald Ri chie, Richa d Do son, Alessand o Po elli, Ka ja Rol- le , Na alie B abe , Diane Da ies, Anisa Pu i, Ma hew F. Simmons, and Da id Ca . He hen explo es he in e sec ion o a ious esea ch me hods, si ua ing linguis ic and cul u al s udies wi hin an an h opological app oach o o al his o y. He iden i ies key hemes connec ing o al his o y wi h hese disciplines: ex uali y, na a i i y, subjec i i y, ela ionship wi h memo y, and pe o ma i i y. KEYWORDS: o al his o y, linguis ics, cul u al s udies, na a i e, o ali y, ex uali y, subjec i i y. ANOTACIJA S aipsnyje ap a iamas žodinės (saky inės) is o ijos i ling is inių bei kul ū inių s udijų yšys. P adžioje au o ius p is a o į ai ias žodinės is o ijos apib ėž is i požiū ius į jas į ai iose žinių s i yse. Daugiausia dėmesio ski iama apib ėžčių i me odologiniams siūlymams, ku iuos pa eikė, be ki a ko, Je zy Ba miński, Linda Wa s, Ga y Okihi o, Dawidas Dunaway, Donaldas Ri chie, Richa das Do sonas, Alessand o Po elli, Ka ja Rolle , Na alie B abe , Diane Da ies, Anisa Pu i, Ma hew F. Simmonsas i Da idas Ca as. Toliau an opologiniu požiū iu i žodinės is o ijos kon eks e nag inėjama į ai ių y imo me odų sanki a bei ling is iniai i kul ū os y imai. Išski iamos pag indinės emos, jungiančios žodinę is o iją su šiomis disciplinomis: eks ualumu, na a y umu, subjek y umu, san ykiu su a min imi, pe o ma y umu. ESMINIAI ŽODŽIAI: žodinė is o ija, ling is ika, kul ū os s udijos, pasakojimas, saky inė kalba, eks ualumas, subjek y umas. 1. INTRODUCTION This a icle is de o ed o a e lec ion on he ela ionship be ween o al his o y and he s udy o language and cul u e as heo e ical wo k. This ela ionship has been ho ly deba ed in o al his o y s udies (c . Po elli 2003; Dunaway 1996; Danielson 1996). The o e unne s o esea ch on o al ex s among linguis s and cul u al schola s can be aced back o he ea lies collec o s o o al ex s, pa icula ly om so-called common olk (c . Bu ke 2004). Dialec ology has made a pa icula con ibu ion o his ield (c . Pelcowa 2014), he e o e 2 linguis ic and an h opological ieldwo k has o en been seen as a p ecu so o o al his o y (Je zy Ba miński e en called o al his o y "a new name o he old p ac ices o dialec ologis s and olklo is s [...] o eco ding spoken ex s om so-called simple people" (Ba miński 2008a: 9). Howe e , i would be an exagge a ion o assume ha o al his o y can be conside ed only a a ie y o linguis ic and cul u al esea ch. Undoub edly, echniques o eco ding o al ex s exis ed be o e o malised o al his o y. S ill, i is di icul o speak o i as a sepa a e end be o e he c ea ion o sound eco de s – o al his o y is inex icably linked o audio o ideo eco ding (c . Po elli 2003; Rolle 2015) and audio/ ideo eco ding a chi es (c . Rolle 2015; B abe and Da ies 2016; Simmons e al. 2025). I is he la e place ha is pa icula ly impo an o iden i ying simila i ies be ween o al his o y and linguis ic and cul u al s udies. An example o his app oach in he o ma i e pe iod o o al his o y is Benjamin Bo kin's wo k Lay My Bu den Down: A Folk His o y o Sla e y (Bo kin ed. 1945). The esea che wo ked on a collec ion o o me sla e accoun s ( eco ded as pa o he Fede al W i e s' P ojec in he USA in he 1930s). He he e o e used collec ions ypical o o al his o y o econs uc he ision o he wo ld and he language o a speci ic excluded social g oup. His wo k was consequen ly in e es ing om a sociolinguis ic pe spec i e. We can speak o ins i u ionalised o al his o y since he 1940s (I discuss his in mo e de ail in Gocół 2023). Howe e , an appa en app ochemen wi h linguis ic and cul u al s udies has been isible since he 1960s (see Do son 1996). The con empo a y de elopmen o co pus esea ch has led o inc eased in e es in o al his o y a chi es, especially in dialec ology and sociolinguis ics (Rolle 2025; B abe and Da ies 2016; Simmons e al. 2025). In his a icle, based on ea ly and ecen li e a u e on esea ch a he in e sec ion o language and cul u e, I will a emp o iden i y he mos impo an poin s o con ac , hemes connec ing o al his o y wi h linguis ic and cul u al s udies. I will begin my e iew o he s a e o esea ch on o al his o y wi hin linguis ic and cul u al s udies by examining how he e m is unde s ood by ep esen a i es o hese disciplines. This will allow me o de e mine, acco ding o esea che s, he ela ionship be ween hem. Nex , by analysing he common esea ch hemes, I will iden i y indi idual esea ch ields de i ed om hese ields o knowledge and used in o al his o y, and I will de e mine whe he he de ini ions de eloped wi hin linguis ic and cul u al s udies e lec he ac ual s a e o esea ch. Since join esea ch has a long adi ion, he a icle is o a heo e ical-summa y na u e and, as such, aims o p o ide he eade wi h a syn he ic pic u e o he key poin s connec ing linguis ic and cul u al s udies wi h o al his o y. 2. DEFINITION OF ORAL HISTORY AND ITS METHODOLOGICAL IM- PLICATIONS Ame ican olklo is Linda S. Wa s desc ibed o al his o y as a ieldwo k echnique o me hod. This me hod in ol es eco ding in e iews ha cap u e in o man s' memo ies. This allows he olklo is o gain b oade access o desc ip ions o old adi ions, i uals, c a s, and ac i i ies. In e iews o en con ain da a ha was ansmi ed only o ally – pa icula ly in socie ies ha did no p oduce w i en documen s hemsel es. Among such "his o yless" g oups, Wa s lis ed ensla ed people, sha ec oppe s, mill wo ke s, and homemake s. Thanks o he eco dings, knowledge abou hei pas could be supplemen ed wi h new in o ma ion no eco ded in w i ing and wi h a new poin o iew (Wa s 2007: 293–294). E hnohis o ian Ga y Y. Okihi o w o e abou o al his o y somewha di e en ly han Wa s. In his wo ks, he e e ed o o al his o y in e changeably as a me hod o a heo y. By ca ego ising o al his o y as a me hod, he mean he en i e esea ch p ocess, which includes: 3 concei ing he p og am/choosing he linguis ic communi y 1 , in e iewing, ansc ibing/edi ing, inal edi ing 2 , using documen s, and end-p oduc de i a ion. Rega ding he ela ionship be ween his o y and olklo is ics, e hnolinguis ics, o dialec ology, Okihi o emphasised he need o unco e ce ain meanings ha we e p esen in he consciousness o speci ic g oups bu had no become he subjec o esea ch econs uc ion due o hei absence in w i en sou ces. In his iew, his si ua ion p ima ily applies o communi ies ha did no p oduce such documen s a all o had only a negligible ole in hei c ea ion, such as women, membe s o he wo king class, e hnic and acial mino i ies, and p eli e a e communi ies. They we e p esen ed solely om he pe spec i e o o he communi ies, ex e nal o hem, and we e in ended o i hem in o hei own wo ld iew. Fo his eason, e en s wi hin hei cul u al sphe e we e o en o e looked, conside ed i ele an o ma ginal, and hese g oups we e nega i ely alued. The e o e, Okihi o saw g ea po en ial in s udying hei o al his o ies o he pas . Resea ch echniques d awn om e hnog aphy and ela ed disciplines play a c ucial ole in he o al his o y esea ch p ocess. Acco ding o Okihi o, desc ibing o al accoun s o he pas should ocus on cap u ing social changes, and on how he social consciousness o he g oups s udied was o med (Okihi o 1981: 43). In he li e a u e, we also ind de ini ions ocused mo e on he o m o communica ion. In one o his a icles, Alessand o Po elli analysed o al his o y as a speci ic gen e o discou se, essen ially a clus e o di e en speech gen es. In e es ingly, he au ho did no ea he gen e ca ego y abs ac ly, bu a he in close connec ion wi h he communica i e si ua ion. Acco ding o him, he essence o o al his o y is de e mined by wha is said, o whom, h ough wha channel, and wi h wha e ec . De ining o al his o y he e is closely linked o he si ua ion o he con e sa ion ini ia ed by he esea che , embedded in a social and cul u al con ex and wi hin a communi y o speci ic communica ion and knowledge abou he wo ld (Po elli 1997). In con empo a y sociolinguis ic and dialec ological e lec ion, o al his o y is o en concep ualised as a s andalone esea ch discipline. Simmons and o he s a gue ha i sha es wi h linguis ics he abili y o econs uc knowledge abou human communi ies, a common goal o o al his o y and linguis ics. The s a ing poin o his econs uc ion is he s udy o geog aphical, his o ical, social, and linguis ic simila i ies e lec ed in language and ex . Fo his eason, o al his o y a chi es ake on pa icula signi icance in linguis ic and cul u al econs uc ions (Simmons e al. 2025: 273–275). Acco ding o Ka ja Rolle , he ex o o al his o y i sel , especially in la ge co po a se ing as esea ch ma e ial, is c ucial o bo h he linguis and he cul u al esea che (since cul u e canno be econs uc ed wi hou language and ice e sa). These co po a allow o he iden i ica ion o local, geog aphic, and his o ical a ia ions in language and hei cul u al implica ions (Rolle 2015). Na alie B abe and Diane Da ies no ed ha o al his o y a chi es can be eused by sociolinguis s. Big da a: "welcome he oppo uni y ha a chi al o al his o y gi es us o map changes in dialec h ough ime by compa ing olde and younge oices om he same a eas, [...] gi en he cen ali y o spoken language and he in luence o speech s yles wi hin he o al his o y ield, a ocus on dialec can be o bene i o o al his o ians as well as linguis s" (B abe and Da ies 2016: 98). 1 The e m linguis ic communi y was used by he esea che o e e o " hose who sha e linguis ic symbols and pa e ns o a icula ion, and a common wo ld wie and expe iences" (Okihi o 1981: 35). 2 Okihi o clea ly dis inguished be ween edi ing and inal edi ing. The o me is limi ed o c ea ing a ansc ip- ion, which is a e ba im eco d o he in e locu o 's u e ances – conside ing e o s, pauses, ges u es accom- panying speech, e c. Du ing inal edi ing, his " aw" e sion o he ansc ip ion is subjec ed o edi o ial p o- cessing, esul ing in an en i ely new documen – s anda dized and close o he w i en language (c . Okihi o 1981: 40–41). 4 Je zy Ba miński ini ially de ined o al his o y as "an in e disciplina y ac i i y o a scien i ic and, mo e b oadly, social na u e" (Ba miński 2008a: 11). The e m "ac i i y" was oo gene al, so he de ini ion was e ined o e ime. Acco ding o Ba miński, o al his o y is "an o ganized ac i i y o a scien i ic, social, and cul u al na u e, which in ol es eco ding, collec ing, and edi ing pe sonal s a emen s (accoun s) – by esea che s, documen a ians, jou nalis s, egionalis s, e c. – and, in sequence, making hem a ailable o a wide ci cle o in e es ed pa ies" (2014: 10). Ba miński, like Okihi o, ecognized he p ocessual na u e o o al his o y ( eco ding, a chi ing, edi ing). In his 2014 a icle, howe e , he Lublin-based schola in oduced a new dis inc ion ha had no p e iously appea ed in his wo k. He a gued ha we can speak o wo di e en unde s andings o o al his o y. The i s is cap u ed by he de ini ion ci ed abo e. In his app oach, Ba miński called i o ganised o al his o y. Alongside i , he e is spon aneous o al his o y. Acco ding o he esea che , i is a spon aneous p ac ice o s o y elling ha leads o he c ea ion o a communi y's memo y o i s his o y (Ba miński 2014: 10–11). These wo e ms, coined by Ba miński, e e o comple ely di e en concep s. The e is no common denomina o be ween hem; he esea che did no assign hem o any common ca ego y. This is a p e iously unhea d-o app oach – o al his o y had no p e iously unc ioned as a name o spon aneous human u e ances, bu as a name o he p ac ice o collec ing and analysing hem. The ques ion emains whe he Ba miński's dis inc ion o i s spon aneous a ie y can be jus i ied. In my opinion, his is mul iplying en i ies beyond necessi y. Assuming he exis ence o spon aneous o al his o y, we would ha e o conside i a na u al human cogni i e abili y and ex end i s eme gence e en o he beginnings o humani y. Meanwhile, many disciplines ha e long used e ms ha can success ully eplace spon aneous o al his o y – unde s ood as bo h he p ac ice o s o y elling and a cogni i e skill – e.g., na a i e ( o mo e on he use o his e m in o al his o y, see Gocół 2013; 2014). Fu he mo e, he e is a dange ha , by using bo h de ini ions simul aneously, we will e e o he esea ch ma e ial and i s analysis in he same way. The iden i y o o al his o y is p ima ily de e mined by i s speci ic esea ch ma e ial: o al ex s abou he pas , which a e s udied by ep esen a i es o e y di e se backg ounds. Fo his eason, i should be de ined b oadly – as esea ch, social, and cul u al ends based on eco ding, a chi ing, and analysing o p ocessing o al ex s abou he pas (c . Gocół 2016; 2023). 3. HISTORICAL AND ANTHROPOLOGICAL APPROACHES Ba miński (2014) also emphasised he in e disciplina y na u e o o al his o y. In desc ibing his aspec , he elied p ima ily on ea lie s udies by Da id Dunaway (1996), Richa d Do son (1996), and Donald Ri chie (2003). Ri chie emphasised ha memo y is he co e o o al his o y 3 (2003: 19), while Dunaway and Do son emphasised he o ali y o ansmission as a link be ween a ious esea ch app oaches (Dunaway 1996: 9–10; Do son 1996: 287). The hi d schola , in pa icula , as a olklo is , de o ed conside able a en ion o o ali y and i s ole in in e p e ing accoun s o he pas . He emphasised ha he i s con ac be ween olklo is ics and o al his o y occu ed only in he 1960s (Do son 1996: 287). 3 I 's wo h no ing ha Ri chie explici ly a oided a clea ca ego iza ion o o al his o y. He belie ed ha he esea ch p ocess was complex, and he esea ch me hods used we e clea ly dependen on he esea ch goals o a gi en discipline. The e o e, Ri chie explici ly s a ed ha , in his opinion, no de ini ion o o al his o y would uly cap u e wha o al his o y ac ually is. I s connec ion o memo y was impo an o he esea che , as he belie ed ha a sys em o meanings could be ex ac ed om ex s. Fo him, o al his o y accoun s we e he e o e ma e ial enabling he econs uc ion o he concep ual sphe e (Ri chie 2003: 19). 5 Acco ding o Dunaway, o al his o y gained i s con empo a y in e disciplina y o m e y slowly – a p ocess comple ed only in he 1990s (Dunaway 1996: 10). W i ing abou he de elopmen o o al his o y, Do son (1996) highligh ed se e al signi ican p oblems ha a ose om he g ea e han be o e in e pene a ion o he concep s o collec ing, a chi ing, and analysing o al accoun s o he pas wi h a ious esea ch disciplines, pa icula ly olklo is ics. He no ed ha in he six ies, o al his o y was iewed p ima ily h ough he lens o his o y and ela ed disciplines. Howe e , olklo is ics employed di e en esea ch me hods and pu sued goals dis inc om hose o his o iog aphy. The e o e, he schola dis inguished be ween wo esea ch app oaches. The i s app oach, o al eli is his o y, is based on me hods de i ed om adi ionally unde s ood his o y. Resea che s choosing his app oach ocus p ima ily on analysing he con en o he message, seeking con i ma ion o his o ical ac s, om which hey econs uc a na a i e abou he pas . O al eli is his o y ended owa d "eli e" his o y and g and na a i es, hus aligning wi h he mos adi ionalis end in o al his o y (Do son 1996: 287–291). We can now call his app oach his o ical, as i s goal is a ela i ely objec i e econs uc ion o his o ical ac s (c . Gocół 2016; 2023). In ac , i is oday ypical no only o posi i is - o ien ed his o iog aphy bu also, among o he s, o jou nalis s s i ing o ill in he "blank spo s" o his o y (c . Bo owik 2008). The second app oach, o al olk his o y, ended owa d small na a i es, s o ies abou local his o y and adi ion. I s ocus was he accoun s o he "people". Adop ing his app oach, o alis s end o analyse he s uc u e and language o he message, as well as he accompanying ges u es and emo ions (Do son 1996: 287–291). La y Danielson (1996) p esen ed a simila pe spec i e on o al his o y, wi h a pa icula ocus on local his o y. This app oach can be called an h opological, because i does no place his o ical ac s in he cen e o in e es , bu he human being, he cognizan subjec , and he goal o o al his o y ac i i ies is no he objec i e econs uc ion o he pas , bu he econs uc ion o memo y, ways o emembe ing and alking abou one's own memo y and ha o one's own social g oup (c . Gocół 2016). This app oach is close o con empo a y me hods o linguis ics and cul u al sciences, especially e hnolinguis ics and linguis ic memo y s udies (c . Nide la 2010; Wójcicka 2014a; Czachu 2017). In Poland, Pio Filipkowski (2010) d ew on Do son's di ision. Dunaway, Do son and Danielson emphasised he in e disciplina i y o o al his o y, while Ba miński poin ed ou ha some o al his o y p ojec s a e si ua ed a ound ans- o mul idisciplina i y, bu he did no de elop his idea (Ba miński 2014: 11). Con empo a y dialec ological and sociolinguis ic esea ch based on la ge da a se s has a dis inc an h opological slan . Thei ocus is always on he human communi y, whose unique cha ac e is ics can be econs uc ed h ough he s udy o i s language and cul u e, as e lec ed in o al his o ies. Well-desc ibed ex co po a, accompanied by linguis ically ele an me ada a, allow o he econs uc ion o he egional and empo al di e si y o a communi y, on he one hand, and he wo ld iew o ha communi y, on he o he . Such da ase s o di e se na i e speake s o dialec al and egional o ms a e impo an in pedagogy and he popula isa ion o knowledge, as well as in he in e nal communica ion o a ious social g oups, di e en ia ed by ac o s such as age, place o esidence, o igin, language, social s a us, gende , and so on (Rolle 2015: 81–82). Due o empo al changes in linguis ic and cul u al da a, da ase s de eloped by linguis s may se e as be e seconda y sou ce o unde s anding his o y (c . B abe and Da ies 2016: 106, c . Pu i 2025: 122–123). In hei desc ip ions, sociolinguis s pay mo e a en ion o wha he in e locu o says, as well as how he o she says i . This di e ence in app oach makes o al his o y sou ces in e es ing o sociolinguis ics, bu a ex de eloped by a sociolinguis may become a new quali y his o ical sou ce (B abe and Da ies 2016: 106). A new goal combining hese wo app oaches may be he econs uc ion no only o his o y bu , abo e all, o he memo y i sel e lec ed in 6 linguis ic and ex ual da a (B abe 2025). This means ha he ocus o bo h disciplines is no so much on his o y, bu on man and he human communi y. The ques ion emains: wha was hei p io ela ionship like, and wha did o al his o y d aw om olklo is ics, e hnolinguis ics, and dialec ology? The esea che s' obse a ions ha e led o se e al poin s o in e sec ion wi h linguis ic and cul u al s udies. I lis he mos impo an o hese below. 4. TEXTUALITY The esea ch ma e ial o an o alis is an o al ex abou he pas , which has many speci ic ea u es. Many o hese we e desc ibed in he ex s o Ba miński (2008) and he I alian cul u al s udies schola Alessand o Po elli (c . 1997; 2003; 2005). Resea che s emphasised, among o he s, he audibili y, ges u ali y, si ua ionali y, dialogici y, a iabili y, and ansience o such ex s. O al ex s always a ise in he p ocess o in e ac ion. O al communica ion is adap ed o he dialogic si ua ion. We always speak o someone – in dialogue, an I-YOU ela ionship is o med. Fo his eason, he oles o he sende and ecei e al e na e in o al ex s. Al hough he u e ance may ake he o m o a monologue (as o al his o y ex s o en do), i is always add essed o someone (Ba miński 2008b: 15). The dialogic na u e o o al his o y ex s was also emphasised by Po elli. He no ed ha one o he ela ionships o med wi hin an o al his o y in e iew is he dialogue be ween he in o man and he esea che . Po elli, howe e , did no s op emphasising he ole o in e pe sonal communica ion in cons uc ing o al his o y ex s. He also d ew a en ion o o he ela ionships ha in luence he inal o m o he s a emen . This includes in ape sonal communica ion (I-I) and social communica ion (I-THEM). The inal o m o he ex is he e o e in luenced no only by dialogue wi h he esea che bu also by memo y and he socio-cul u al con ex (Po elli 2003: 72–73; 2005: 2–6). Fo his eason, o al his o y ex s can be subjec ed o con e sa ional analysis (I-YOU ela ionship) bu also se e o econs uc he subjec i e pe spec i e o he indi idual (I-I) and he collec i e (I-THEM) (c . Wójcicka 2016). These ex ual ma ke s a e also e lec ed in la ge ex co po a and allow o he econs uc ion o linguis ic and men al cha ac e is ics o communi ies (Rolle 2015; B abe 2025). This is e ealed in he me a-desc ip ion o ex s and in he econs uc ion o communi y ea u es e lec ed in language (B abe and Da ies 2016: 99), some imes wi h he help o a i icial in elligence models (Simmons e al. 2025: 274). Tex , he e o e, emains he ocus o new esea ch. 5. NARRATIVITY Na a i e is one o he mos equen ly used e ms in con empo a y humani ies s udies. I omi a e iew o i s de ini ions in he ield o indi idual disciplines, which I ha e al eady conduc ed in ano he wo k (Gocół 2013: 10–18; see also Fila 2014: 13–34), assuming ha na a i e is a closed whole in he o m o a meaning ul desc ip i e sequence, o ganized in e ms o plo and ime, capable o ul illing a cogni i e unc ion and eaching in o cogni i e schemas and sc ip s in which he subjec is e ealed (Gocół 2016: 17–18, c . Ba ke 2005: 32–33). This unde s anding o his e m is he esul o many yea s o analysis in he ields o linguis ics, li e a y s udies, philosophy, sociology, and psychology. Alessand o Po elli (2003), Ma zena Ma czewska (2014), and Anna Nide la (2010) iden i ied na a i e as one o he mos impo an ea u es o o al his o y ex s. His o ian Da id Ca (1991) ocused no only on na a i e pa e ns bu , abo e all, on he cogni i e and social unc ion o s o ies. This led o his o ical esea ch u ning in o linguis ics in wo 7 a eas. Fi s , no only he con en bu also he s uc u e o ex s was examined. Consequen ly, his o ical analyses began o d aw on he indings o s ylis ics, ex ology, and linguis ics. Second, his o y ceased o be unde s ood solely as he s udy o he pas , and he emphasis shi ed o ex ual analysis. His o ians, in addi ion o econs uc ing he o de o ac ual pas e en s, became in e es ed in econs uc ing he concep ual sphe e, he concep sphe e o na a o s, whose ans o ma ions p o ed equally in e es ing om a his o iog aphical pe spec i e (c . Ca 1991). This b ough his o ical esea ch close o linguis ic analyses (and an an h opological app oach o o al his o y), ocused on econs uc ing elemen s o he concep ual sphe e based on ex s, o example, examining he linguis ic wo ld iew. Anisa Pu i no ed ha sociolinguis ic esea ch does no ocus solely on ex ; a he , h ough he analysis o ex ual da a, i s i es o econs uc he pe sonal expe ience o he indi idual and he communi y. The desc ip i e ca ego y ha connec s ex wi h he li e cou se is p ecisely na a i e, which allows o he empo al o ganisa ion o knowledge abou li e h ough linguis ic o ms (Pu i 2025: 113). Acco ding o Ka ja Rolle , ci ing, among o he s, he p e iously men ioned esea ch by Bo kin, na a i e esea ch allows o he econs uc ion no only o he linguis ic means used by a speci ic communi y bu also o i s expe ience, which his speci ic language was used o exp ess. As a esul , o al his o y na a i es a e a aluable sou ce o knowledge o sociolinguis ics, and when de eloped by a dialec ologis o sociolinguis , hey can also become a ool o social educa ion (Rolle 2015: 74, 78). Acco ding o B abe and Da ies, he ela ionship be ween eminiscence, na a i e, and iden i y is c ucial o con empo a y esea che s o language and cul u e. The na a i i y o sou ces is, in his app oach, he key o econs uc ing he memo y and subjec i e expe ience o an indi idual and he b oade social expe ience o g oups using common a ie ies o he en i onmen al language and common speech pa e ns, de eloped in a his o ical con ex , e lec ed in memo y (B abe and Da ies 2016: 99, c . B abe 2025). 6. SUBJECTIVITY Ba miński (2008), Po elli (2003), Nide la (2010), and Ma czewska (2014) emphasised he subjec i i y o o al his o y ex s. A na u al consequence o ecognising he na a i e na u e o his o ical sou ces and s udies was he exposi ion o he subjec as a supe io ca ego y, o ganising he na a i e while simul aneously anscending he ex and language i sel . Ca (1991) conside ed he subjec who shaped hei own na a i e o pas e en s o be he decisi e ac o in de e mining he speci ici y o sou ces abou he pas . This subjec has i s own in en ions and assigns desi ed unc ions o na a i e elemen s. They unc ion wi hin a speci ic ime and social en i onmen , which con ibu es o he con ex o hei na a i e, de e mining hei poin o iew and he sys em o alues p esen ed in he ex . Thei s a emen s a e shaped by he na a i e pa e ns hey selec and modi y. Mo eo e , his o ical na a i e was ea ed as p ede ined o a ce ain ex en by he empi ical expe ience o he subjec (Ca 1991). This iew o his o ical na a i e is close o he linguis ic-cul u al and an h opological app oach. The subjec , unde s ood ei he as homo na ans o homo loquens, o as a ca ego y anscending language, became he cen al ca ego y in e hnolinguis ics – as indeed in he en i e humani ies. I is he subjec who con eys a ce ain wo ld iew (o a linguis ic o linguis ic-cul u al na u e), and based on he ex c ea ed by i , he concep ual sphe e is econs uc ed (Fila 2013: 95–104; Ba miński 2008b: 168; o he linguis ic-cul u al app oach, see Anusiewicz e al. 2000). Bo h in he sciences o language and cul u e and in his o iog aphy, he cons uc i is app oach p e ailed. Acco ding o i , he subjec no only cons uc s a na a i e abou he pas , bu also i s own iden i y (some imes called iden i y na a i e) o , mo e b oadly, subjec i i y. The e y unde s anding o he subjec has also changed in linguis ics wi h he 8 so-called second cogni i e e olu ion. The ision o he ep esen a ional subjec (a symbolic sys em, subjec -mind) is being eplaced by an ecological-phenomenal app oach, he e m "subjec " also encompassing he en i onmen ha hese subjec s expe ience and in which hey ope a e (Muszyński 2008: 80–84). Acco ding o Ch is Ba ke , linguis ic-cul u al esea ch on he subjec ocuses on how we become who we a e, how we c ea e a ision o ou sel es as a subjec , how we iden i y (and emo ionally bond) wi h he desc ip ion o ou sel es as a ep esen a i e o a gi en g oup o ca ego y (gende , ace, age g oup) (Ba ke 2005: 11–12). In his app oach, he subjec is no an isola ed ca ego y, bu a membe o a g oup ha c ea es i s na a i e abou li e wi hin a b oade discou se o discou ses. Simila ly o Ca 's concep , he e is a e lexi e ela ionship be ween an indi idual who c ea es a na a i e abou hemsel es and he g oup, and he g oup om whose discou se and iden i y hey d aw, and which hey co-c ea e. 7. THE RELATIONSHIP WITH MEMORY Linguis ic and cul u al analyses o o al his o y ex s inc easingly o e lap wi h he de elopmen o linguis ic memo y s udies (c . Chlebda 2019; Wójcicka 2014a; Czachu 2017). Since na a i es a e inhe en ly subjec i e and a ise wi hin social discou se, i has become c ucial o de e mine hei ela ionship o indi idual and collec i e memo y. Ma a Wójcicka di ided hese app oaches in o disin eg a ing and in eg a ing ones. The i s app oach assumes ha memo y and his o y a e sepa a e ca ego ies, ha ing no hing in common. This iew was g adually displaced by in eg a ing posi ions, ad oca ed by, among o he s, ep esen a i es o he "new his o y". P oponen s o his app oach opposed ea ing memo y and his o y as a single ca ego y o as sepa a e. Ins ead, hey assumed ha memo y and his o y a e linked by complex, mul idimensional ela ionships (Wójcicka 2014a: 89–96; 2014b: 24–33, c . Woźniak 2008). Acco ding o Ka ja Rolle , he goal o esea ch om a linguis 's pe spec i e is no o econs uc his o ical e en s, bu a he o econs uc indi idual and communi y memo y – a poin e lec ed in he Millennium Memo y Bank co pus she examined (Rolle 2015: 78). Acco ding o B abe and Da ies, memo y is e lec ed in he na a i e s yle and gen e elemen s, such as he sa u a ion o he ex wi h anecdo es, and he sha ed knowledge and language o he sende and ecipien . This allows o he econs uc ion o indi idual and collec i e memo y (B abe and Da ies 2016: 100, 103). Because memo y is no di ec ly accessible o us, i s analysis is educed o examining ex s c ea ed based on memo ies. This opens ano he a ea o join esea ch be ween linguis ics and o al his o y. 8. PERFORMATIVITY Gi en he na a i e's con ex ual and subjec i e na u e, i became necessa y o pay a en ion o i s execu ion. His o ians ceased o s udy he message's con en ; he way i was shaped also became impo an . The mos dynamic de elopmen in esea ch in his a ea was associa ed wi h he emancipa ion o o al sou ces, in which he need a ose o desc ibe he non e bal elemen s o he communica i e si ua ion and hei impac on he na a i e, necessi a ing he use o linguis ic s udies (c . Mo issey 2003; Rolle 2015; Ma czewska 2014). 9. CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION As can be easily seen, a ce ain ange o opics ela ed o o al his o y has eme ged, in e es ing om he pe spec i e o linguis ic and cul u al s udies, which can be analysed 9 h ough ex ological, e hnolinguis ic, na a i e, con e sa ional, concep ual, o memo y s udies. All hese opics a e mo e closely connec ed o he cha ac e is ics o o al ex s abou he pas han hey a e o any p ecisely de ined amewo k o o al his o y. One could hypo hesise ha wha uly uni es hese a ious app oaches is he esea ch ma e ial i sel —a much mo e ho oughly cha ac e ized ield han o al his o y i sel . Cul u al s udies aim o an objec i e desc ip ion o a gi en communi y's cul u e, while linguis ic s udies aim o a mul i ace ed desc ip ion o language. They a e in e nally di e en ia ed by hei a ious pe spec i es. Thei common in e es lies in he men al sphe e, e lec ing he sha ed knowledge o he wo ld among membe s o a linguis ic communi y. Linguis ic and ex ual da a allow o i s econs uc ion. This is whe e he in e es o hese disciplines o e laps wi h o al his o y. Thei i s and undamen al link is he ex i sel . All de ini ions o o al his o y ocus on o al ex —i s c ea ion, eco ding, and p ocessing. This unique esea ch ma e ial is a sou ce o linguis ic da a ha allows he econs uc ion o a gi en communi y's wo ld iew. Subdisciplines pa icula ly ocused on his ea u e include ex ology ( he s udy o ex s om a linguis ic pe spec i e), ollowed by hose ha econs uc a speci ic wo ld iew and he cha ac e is ics o a gi en communi y om ex s. Na a i i y o ganises linguis ic and ex ual da a, connec s hem o a empo al o de , and p o ides hem wi h a his o ical con ex . I is he e o e key o econs uc ing sha ed knowledge and g oup iden i y. Fo his eason, subdisciplines ha econs uc speci ic g oup cha ac e is ics will d aw on i : social (sociolinguis ics), egional (dialec ology), o g oup ( olklo is ics). A he cen e o in e es in he sciences o language and cul u e is he subjec , bo h indi idual (a speaking pe son) and collec i e (a g oup sha ing cha ac e is ics). Thei image can be econs uc ed based on linguis ic and ex ual da a, which is o pa icula in e es o an h opology, bo h linguis ically and cul u ally. Based on o al his o y ex s, he memo ies o indi iduals and g oups a e econs uc ed. This may be impo an no only o memo y s udies bu also o he subdiscipline a he in e sec ion o linguis ic and cul u al s udies, namely e hnolinguis ics, which aims o econs uc a g oup's wo ld iew. All hese disciplines a e in e es ed in pe o mance and he speci ic communica i e si ua ion in which an o al ex is c ea ed. Pe o mance comple es he se o cha ac e is ics ypical o o al his o y, as he dialogue p oduces he ex i sel , which se es as esea ch ma e ial. Pe o mance is ela ed o speci ic ieldwo k echniques ypical o linguis ic and cul u al s udies. The key hemes connec ing o al his o y wi h hese disciplines and hei subdisciplines a e shown in he diag am.