Читайте также:
|
a classification system based on similarities and differences in linguistic structure, as opposed to the genealogical classification.
While linguistic typology undertook to create a typological classification of languages, all typological classifications were almost exclusively morphological, since morphology was for a long time the most developed field of linguistics. However, morphological classification was originally not regarded as relating exclusively to the morphological level of language, but was so called because those who created the classification were concerned largely with the formal aspect of language.The basic concepts in the morphological classification of languages are the morpheme and the word. The basic criteria for classification are the nature of the morphemes (lexical and grammatical) combined in a word; the method of their combination, such as pre- or postpositioning of grammatical morphemes (which has a direct relation to syntax) and agglutination, or fusion (related to the field of morphophonemics); and the syntactically related connection between the morpheme and the word (such as isolation, when morpheme = word, or the analytic or synthetic character of word formation and inflection).Morphological classification seeks to describe not specific languages (in which several morphological types are always present), but basic structural phenomena and trends in languages. Morphological classification was founded and developed in the course of the 19th century by such German linguists as A. Schlegel, H. Steinthal, W. Humboldt, and A. Schleicher.The American linguist E. Sapir attempted to systematize the criteria of morphological classification; he introduced the concept of the degree of quality, based on the fact that one or another type may be present to a greater or lesser degree in a given language (for example, a language may be almost amorphous or agglutinative to the highest degree). Sapir invented a flexible classification scale and compared the data of morphological classification with actual data provided by specific languages.Since the early 20th century, that is, since the marked increase in linguistic knowledge about the structure of languages of different types and families, the creation of a general typological classification has ceased to be either the main or the most pressing task of typology. It has become obvious that a classification free from the shortcomings of the traditional morphological classification of languages—imprecision of basic concepts, lack of demarcation between classificational criteria of different types, vagueness of concepts about essential and adequate criteria, and lack of relatedness to real language structures—and also containing phonological, syntactic, and semantic characteristics of the structure of language, cannot be created at the present time.However, there are certain trends in typology that make fruitful use of the data of morphological classification. For example, the American linguist J. Greenberg introduced a number of new criteria, as well as the principle of quantitative evaluation of language characteristics, into Sapir’s classification. The Czech linguist V. Skalidka and other representatives of descriptive typology are studying the infrastructural laws by which certain typological features are combined in a given language; that is, they are working out a system for characterizing language types. The Soviet linguist B. A. Uspenskii classifies linguistic features and groups of features according to systematized criteria. He then classifies languages according to the presence or absence of various groups of features; the languages are compared with a certain model language structured in accord with the general principles of morphological classification interpreted according to this model language.
37. The notion of Contrastive-historical linguistics Contrastive linguistics is a practice-oriented linguistic approach that seeks to describe the differences and similarities between a pair of languages (hence it is occasionally called " differential linguistics"). While traditional linguistic studies had developed comparative methods (comparative linguistics), chiefly to demonstrate family relations between cognate languages, or to illustrate the historical developments of one or more languages, modern contrastive linguistics intends to show in what ways the two respective languages differ, in order to help in the solution of practical problems. (Sometimes the terms diachronic linguistics and synchronic linguistics are used to refer to these two perspectives.)
Contrastive linguistics, since its inception by Robert Lado in the 1950s, has often been linked to aspects of applied linguistics, e.g., to avoidinterference errors in foreign-language learning, as advocated by Di Pietro (1971)[1] (see also contrastive analysis), to assist interlingual transfer in the process of translating texts from one language into another, as demonstrated by Vinay & Darbelnet (1958)[2] and more recently by Hatim (1997)[3] (see translation), and to find lexical equivalents in the process of compiling bilingual dictionaries, as illustrated by Heltai (1988)[4] and Hartmann (1991)[5] (see bilingual lexicography).
Contrastive descriptions can occur at every level of linguistic structure: speech sounds (phonology), written symbols (graphology), word-formation (morphology), word meaning (lexicology), collocation (phraseology), sentence structure (syntax) and complete discourse (textology). Various techniques used in corpus linguistics have been shown to be relevant in intralingual and interlingual contrastive studies, e.g. by 'parallel-text' analysis (Hartmann 1997).[6]
Contrastive linguistic studies can also be applied to the differential description of one or more varieties within a language, such as styles (contrastive rhetoric), dialects, registers or terminologies of technical genres.
38. Levels of typological researches The first researches in typology began in XVII-XVII centuries. German scientist F. Shlegel has allocated distinction in structure of languages. He allocated two groups of languages: languages with affixe, there are Turkic, Polynesian, Chinese languages; flexional languages, there are Semitic, Georgian, French. A.V. Isachenko has established two types of languages on a material of slavic languages, using criteria of quantity of vowels and a musical accent, and also the phenomenon of hardness and softness of consonants:
1) type vocalic for which are characteristic:) the tendency to vocalization of consonants; compare.:
2) consonant type for which are characteristic:) correlation of consonants on hardness - softness; liquidation of syllabic consonants; preservation of the double consonants. Russian by these criteria concerns to number consonant languages. Phonologic typology many scientists and among them T.Milevsky who have developed typology of languages of the American Indians, K.Vegelin developed methods of the typological analysis of phonologic systems on a material of two groups of languages of the American Indians successfully developed, and also C.Hokkett in the grant on phonology.
The big contribution to the theory of typology has been brought by works акад. I.I.Meshchaninova (1883-1967).
As basis for its typological researches syntactic attitudes - predicative, connecting the subject with a predicate, and their grammatic expression have served; objective, that is attitudes of a transitive verb and the object receiving in various languages special grammatic expression, and attributive in which communication of definition with defined is expressed.
. As a result of the researches I.I.Meshchaninov has developed syntactic typology of languages which develops of three types:
1. Languages passive building - Chukchi and some languages of Indians of Northern America. As typological characteristics of it building it put forward incorporation, that is such syntactic construction when neither the subject, nor object have no grammatic registration, being united in one complex, subordinated to a leading word. Verbs in languages of it building do not share on transitive and intransitive.
2. Languages ergative buildin.
Ergative building I.I.Meshchaninov has carried languages of Caucasus to languages - avarian, laksk, dargin, partly Georgian, and also language of Basques in Pyrenees.
3. Languages nominative building for which as the basic characteristic the use of the Nominative case (nominative) of the subject irrespective of serves, whether the verb-predicate transitive or intransitive is. Nominative building it has carried to languages Indoeuropeen, Turkic, Mongolian, Finno-Ugric and many other things languages.
According to this classification, interesting us in the given work languages - Russian and English - concern to languages of the same building - nominative.
Summing up to consideration of brief history of development of typology, we can draw following conclusions:
1) the Typology of languages as one of sections of linguistics arose and developed as the doctrine about morphological types of languages - amorphous (isolating), agglutitating, incorporating (polysynthetic) and inflectional. As a starting point for classification one attribute - ability of a word to attach affixal morphemes of various type served only or to not attach them absolutely. Classification had estimated character.
2) Expansion of knowledge of linguists about languages of the world and development of a theoretical idea on language in XX century have led to allocation of several directions in modern typology - to step typology, quantitative to typology, a caracterology, typology of separate language systems, typology universals, contrastive to typology.
3) directions were outlined In domestic typology - structurally-typological and historic-typological.
4) principles of typological research of related and unrelated languages Are developed and the technique of studying of typological properties of various levels of languages is developed.
39. A method of typological indexes. ERROR method in linguistics Linguistic typology is a subfield of linguistics that studies and classifies languages according to their structural and functional features. Its aim is to describe and explain the common properties and the structural diversity of the world's languages. It includes three subdisciplines: qualitative typology, which deals with the issue of comparing languages and within-language variance; quantitative typology, which deals with the distribution of structural patterns in the world’s languages; and theoretical typology, which explains these distributions.
In second language acquisition, error analysis studies the types and causes of language errors. Errors are classified[1] according to:
modality (i.e., level of proficiency in speaking, writing, reading, listening)
linguistic levels (i.e., pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, style)
form (e.g., omission, insertion, substitution)
type (systematic errors/errors in competence vs. occasional errors/errors in performance)
cause (e.g., interference, interlanguage)
norm vs. system
Error analysis in SLA was established in the 1960s by Stephen Pit Corder and colleagues. Error analysis (EA) was an alternative to contrastive analysis, an approach influenced by behaviorism through which applied linguists sought to use the formal distinctions between the learners' first and second languages to predict errors. Error analysis showed that contrastive analysis was unable to predict a great majority of errors, although its more valuable aspects have been incorporated into the study of language transfer. A key finding of error analysis has been that many learner errors are produced by learners making faulty inferences about the rules of the new language.
Error analysts distinguish between errors, which are systematic, and mistakes, which are not. They often seek to develop a typology of errors. Error can be classified according to basic type: omissive, additive, substitutive or related to word order. Error analysis is closely related to the study of error treatment in language teaching. Today, the study of errors is particularly relevant for focus on form teaching methodology.
According to linguist Corder,the following are the steps in any typical EA research:[3]
1. collecting samples of learner language
2. identifying the errors
3. describing the errors
4. explaining the errors
5. evaluating/correcting the errors
collection of errors: the nature and quantity of errors is likely to vary depending on whether the data consist of natural, spontaneous language use or careful, elicited language use.Corder(1973) distinguished two kinds of elicitation: clinical and experimental elicitation. clinical elicitation involves getting the informant to produce data of any sort, for example by means of general interview or writing a composition. experimental elicitation involves the use of special instrument to elicit data containing the linguistic features such as a series of pictures which had been designed to elicit specific features.
40. The history review of typological researches. W. Humboldt. F. Bopp. A. Schleicher. The first researches in typology began in XVII-XVII centuries. German scientist F. Shlegel has allocated distinction in structure of languages. He allocated two groups of languages: languages with affixe, there are Turkic, Polynesian, Chinese languages; flexional languages, there are Semitic, Georgian, French. A.V. Isachenko has established two types of languages on a material of slavic languages, using criteria of quantity of vowels and a musical accent, and also the phenomenon of hardness and softness of consonants:
1) type vocalic for which are characteristic:) the tendency to vocalization of consonants; compare.:
2) consonant type for which are characteristic:) correlation of consonants on hardness - softness; liquidation of syllabic consonants; preservation of the double consonants. Russian by these criteria concerns to number consonant languages. Phonologic typology many scientists and among them T.Milevsky who have developed typology of languages of the American Indians, K.Vegelin developed methods of the typological analysis of phonologic systems on a material of two groups of languages of the American Indians successfully developed, and also C.Hokkett in the grant on phonology.
Wilhelm von Humboldt was an adept linguist and studied the Basque language. He translated Pindar and Aeschylus into German. He is credited with being the first European linguist to identify human language as a rule-governed system, rather than just a collection of words and phrases paired with meanings. This idea is one of the foundations of Noam Chomsky's theory of language. Chomsky frequently quotes Humboldt's description of language as a system which "makes infinite use of finite means", meaning that an infinite number of sentences can be created using a finite number of grammatical rules. More recently Humboldt has also been credited as an originator of the linguistic relativity hypothesis (more commonly known as the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis), developed by linguists Edward Sapir or Benjamin Whorf a century later. Indeed, although encyclopédias often cite Humboldt as being the founder of the term 'worldview', a confusion is invariably made by citing the German term Weltanschauung, which is rightly associated with ideologies and cultural mindsets in both German and English. Humboldt's work was concerned more with what he called Weltansicht, the linguistic worldview. This distinction was cleared up by one of the leading contemporary German Humboldt scholars, Jürgen Trabant, in his works in both German and French. Polish linguists,working in the Lublin School (see Jerzy Bartmiński) preserve this distinction between worldviews of a personal or political kind and the worldview implicit in the language as a conceptual system, in their reading of Humboldt and in their research into the Polish-speaker's worldview.
Franz Bopp (14 September 1791 – 23 October 1867) was a German linguist known for extensive comparative work on Indo-European languages.Bopp gained, on the recommendation of Humboldt, appointment to the chair of Sanskrit and comparative grammar at Berlin in 1821, which he occupied for the rest of his life. He also became a member of the Royal Prussian Academy the following year.In 1827, he published his Ausführliches Lehrgebäude der Sanskritsprache, on which he had worked since 1821. Bopp started work on a new edition in Latin, for the following year, completed in 1832; a shorter grammar appeared in 1834. At the same time he compiled a Sanskrit and Latin glossary (1830) in which, more especially in the second and third editions (1847 and 1868–71), he also took account of the cognate languages. His chief activity, however, centred on the elaboration of his Comparative Grammar, which appeared in six parts at considerable intervals (Berlin, 1833, 1835, 1842, 1847, 1849, 1852), under the title Vergleichende Grammatik des Sanskrit, Zend, Griechischen, Lateinischen, Litthauischen, Altslawischen, Gotischen und Deutschen (Comparative Grammar of Sanskrit, Zend (Avestan), Greek, Latin, Lithuanian, Old Slavonic, Gothic and German).How carefully Bopp matured this work emerges from the series of monographs printed in the Transactions of the Berlin Academy (1824–1831), which preceded it. They bear the general title, Vergleichende Zergliederung des Sanskrits und der mit ihm verwandten Sprachen (Comparative Analysis of Sanskrit and its related Languages). Two other essays (on the "Numerals", 1835) followed the publication of the first part of the Comparative Grammar. Old Slavonian[ disambiguation needed ] began to take its stand among the languages compared from the second part onwards. E. B. Eastwick translated the work into English in 1845. A second German edition, thoroughly revised (1856–1861), also covered OldArmenian.In his Comparative Grammar Bopp set himself a threefold task:
1. to give a description of the original grammatical structure of the languages as deduced from their intercomparison,
2. to trace their phonetic laws, and
3. to investigate the origin of their grammatical forms.
The first and second points remained dependent upon the third. As Bopp based his research on the best available sources and incorporated every new item of information that came to light, his work continued to widen and deepen in the making. Witness his monographs on the vowel system in the Teutonic languages (1836), on the Celtic languages(1839), on the Old Prussian (1853) and Albanian languages (Über das Albanesische in seinen verwandtschaftlichen Beziehungen, Vienna, 1854), on the accent in Sanskrit and Greek (1854), on the relationship of the Malayo-Polynesian with the Indo-European languages (1840), and on the Caucasian languages (1846). In the two latter, the impetus of his genius led him on a wrong track. He is the first philologist to prove Albanian as a separate branch of Indo-European, an analysis never challenged later.
August Schleicher (19 February 1821 – 6 December 1868) was a German linguist. His great work was A Compendium of the Comparative Grammar of the Indo-European Languages, in which he attempted to reconstruct the Proto-Indo-European language. Schleicher claimed that he himself had been convinced of the natural descent and competition of languages before he had readDarwin’s Origin of Species. He invented a system of language classification that resembled a botanical taxonomy, tracing groups of related languages and arranging them in a genealogical tree. His model, the Stammbaumtheorie (family-tree theory), was a major development in the study of Indo-European languages. He first introduced a graphic representation of a Stammbaum in articles published in 1853. By the time of the publication of his Deutsche Sprache (German language) (1860) he had begun to use trees to illustrate language descent. Schleicher is commonly recognized as the first linguist to portray language development using the figure of a tree. Largely in reaction to this, Johannes Schmidt later proposed his 'Wave Theory' as an alternative model.Schleicher believed that languages pass through a life cycle, similar to that of living beings. To begin with, they were simpler than they would become. Schleicher was an advocate of the polygenesis of languages. Since languages are continually dying out, whilst no new ones practically arise, there must have been originally many more languages than at present. The number of original languages was therefore certainly far larger than has been supposed from the still-existing languages.Schleicher's ideas on polygenesis had long-lasting influence, both directly and via their adoption by the biologist Ernst Haeckel.
41. Typological classification of languages. Inflectional, agglutinative, isolating, polysynthetic types of languages Linguistic typology is a subfield of linguistics that studies and classifies languages according to their structural features. Its aim is to describe and explain the common properties and the structural diversity of the world's languages. It includes three subdisciplines: qualitative typology, which deals with the issue of comparing languages and within-language variance; quantitative typology, which deals with the distribution of structural patterns in the world’s languages; theoretical typology, which explains these distributions
Typological researches considerably expand borders linguistic research, deducing them for frameworks of genetically related languages, enable to involve the broad audience sometimes rare languages, enriching with it a material of little-known languages involved for research and by that allow to solve wide nontechnical problems.
In the phrase inflecting language (inflectional or inflected languages), the term characterizes a type of language established by comparative linguistics using structural (as opposed to diachronic) criteria, and focusing on the characteristics of the word. In this kind of language, words display grammatical relationships morphologically: they typically contain more than one morpheme but, unlike agglutinative languages, there is no one-to-one correspondence between these morphemes and the linear sequence of morphs. In languages such as Latin, Greek and Arabic, the inflectional forms of words may repres-ent several morphological oppositions, e.g. in Latin amo (‘I love’), the form simultaneously represents tense, active, first person singular, indicative. This ‘fusing’ of properties has led to such languages being called fusional, and has motivated the word-and-paradigm model of analysis. As always in such classifications, the categories are not clear-cut: different languages will display the characteristic of inflection to a greater or lesser degree.
In agglutinative or agglutinating languages, words typically contain a linear sequence of morphs –as seen in English dis/establish/ment – and thus contrast with isolating and inflectional languages. As always in such classifications, the categories are not clear-cut: different languages will display the characteristic of agglutination to a greater or lesser degree. Languages which display agglutination to a major extent include Turkish and Japanese.
In isolating languages, all the words are invariable (and syntactic relationships are primarily shown by word-order). Vietnamese, Chinese and many South-East Asian languages are often cited as good instances of isolating languages. As always with such general classifications, the categories are not clear-cut: different languages will display the characteristics of isolation to a greater or lesser degree. An alternative term is analytic, seen as opposed to synthetic types of language (agglutinative and inflecting), where words contain more than one morpheme.
‘polysynthetic’ or ‘incorporating’ languages demonstrate morphologically complex, long word forms, as in the constructions typical of many American Indian languages, and encountered occasionally in English, in coinages such as anti/dis/establish/ment/arian/ism/s. The term is opposed to synthetic and ana-lytic type languages. Some linguists, however, prefer to see such constructions handled as a complex of agglutinative and fusional characteristics, and do not regard this category of language as typologically distinct. As always in such classifications, the categories are not clear-cut: different languages will display the characteristic of polysynthesis to a greater or lesser degree. The polysynthesis parameter represents the analysis of polysynthetic forms as a system of predicate–argument relationships.
42. Concept about language-standard. Standard language - language which is most suitable for communication in majority social sphere (science, culture, diplomacy, law, business communication, education, daily communication and ect).
Unlike fiction language (in which elements of any not codified Forms of existence of language – colloquial, slangy can be used, dialect, etc.), LL. it is strictly codified,, it is multifunctional, socially prestigious. Л.я. seek to seize as the most important and basic component of culture.
Standard languages commonly feature:
• Arecognized dictionary (standardized spelling and vocabulary)
• A recognized grammar
• A standard pronunciation (educated speech)
• A linguistic institution defining usage norms, e.g. Constitutional status (frequently as an official language)
• Effective public use (court, legislature, schools)
• A literary canon
• Convenience speaking
• Popularity and acceptance in the community
• Population
The language or style does not follow the rules of standard language called- Nonstandard language is never appropriate in writing unless it is a deliberate direct quotation of a nonstandard speaker. It usually reflects poorly on the speaker when spoken.
A nonstandard dialect is a dialect that does not have the institutional support or sanction that a standardized dialect has.
Like any dialect, a nonstandard dialect has its own vocabulary and an internally consistent grammar and syntax; and it may be spoken using a variety of accents. Describing a dialect as "nonstandard" is not to imply that the dialect is incorrect or inferior. Also prestige dialects may be non-standard, if the dialect has a lower prestige.
Дата добавления: 2015-02-16; просмотров: 160 | Поможем написать вашу работу | Нарушение авторских прав |