On the demarcation of ecolinguistics

This article discusses the demarcation of contemporary ecolinguistics. It takes a starting point in different conceptualisations of the field, including (1) the claim that ecolinguistics is an umbrella term for work that attends to interconnections and dynamics in multiple contexts, (2) the claim that ecolinguistics comprises two traditions, a Haugenian tradition and a Hallidayan tradition, and (3) the claim that ecolinguistics consists of four strands that orient to the symbolic, sociocultural, natural, and cognitive ecology of language, respectively. Using bibliometric methods, the article concludes that there is currently no unity in ecolinguistics that warrants the first claim. Further, it concludes that there is no bibliometric or empirical evidence for the second claim, as there is virtually no connection between the two traditions, and hence they are two separate research areas, rather than two traditions within one field. Finally, it is shown that while there do indeed exist four ecological frameworks in linguistics, they are not subfields within ecolinguistics. It is concluded that contemporary ecolinguistics is defined by its preoccupation with natural ecologies. Based on this conclusion, it is suggested that the ecolinguistic preoccupation with natural ecologies presupposes treating language as integral to living and the ecology.