Classification of grammatical categories.

Classification of grammatical categories.

They can be classified according to several principles:

1. Formal logical (E.g. Tense to express the succession of several actions, Number, etc)

Formal proper (gender in Russian)

1. Fixed (constant) Gender

Changeable (variable) Number

1. Covert (no markers – c. of in/definiteness in Russian)

Overt (there are some markers)

Every grammatical category is based on 3 types of oppositions(Трубецкой и Якобсон):

• Gradual (ступенчатая )
• Equipollent ( эквиполентная)
• Privative (приватная)

Gradual (all levels of language). This type of opposition consists of more than 2 opposemes which differ in the intensity of the same quality. E.g.:( i: - i - e - æ)-degree of opening. Cold-cool-warm-hot (degree of temperature)

Equipollent: +(a) and +(b)

A and B is difference in meanings. This type may consist of any number of opposemes. Each member is characterized by its own feature. E.g.: (b – d - g) several common features, but different places of articulation. Or: Past-Present-Future

Privative: + and –

There are only 2 members in the opposeme. One of them has some feature (+). It’s called the strong member (marked). The second-weak (unmarked). E.g.: consonants vs. vowels, voiced cons. vs. voiceless cons., diphthongs vs. monophthongs.

The 3^rd type of opposition is considered to be of primary importance not only because of frequency of occurrence, but also because the other 2 types can be transformed (reduced) to privative type. E.g. Present (Present) vs. Past Future (Non-Present)

According to Jacobson, there is a definite law that describes relations between opposemes in privative opposition. The strong member as a rule is narrower in meaning. It is more definite and its meaning is denoted by the marker it has. The other member (weak) is not so definite because it can convey a lot of meanings (Все повернули головую Велосипед есть у П. и Р.).

SIMPLE SENTENCE AS A MONOPREDICATIVE STRUCTURE.

The definitions of the sentence

The sent. can be studied from different points of view and more than 200 definitions of sent. are known. This fact proves that sent. is a many-fold phenomenon. All definitions mostly fall into 2 types: logical and structural.

Most definitions in text-books are logical. They are most ancient, they appeared in Classical Grammar. The definition belongs to Aristotel: sent. – is a group of words linked together and expressing a complete thought. The weak point-it does not distinguish the sent. from judgment. Any judgment is always binary in structure (theme-rheme) even in 1-member sent., but the sent. is not always binary. At the same time sent. can contain several themes and rhemes if it is composite, but in any judgment there is only 1 theme and 1 rheme.

All structural definitions try to be more objective and that’s why stress the existence of the so-called subject-predicate structure: sent. is a language unit, possessing subject-predicate structure that makes it possible to use this unit as a minimal utterance.

Nowadays the phonetic side is also taken into consideration. In fact expressing some utterance, the sent. should be phonetically arranged. Francis introduced the notion “the sent. intonation final contour”. The definition is not perfect: 1)it’s applied only to oral sent.; 2)in a composite sent. there are several final contours.

The status of the sentence

The sent. is considered to be the central unit of syntax, because it includes word-groups in its structure and by itself the sentence is a constituent of a text structure. Though sent., word-group and text belong to syntax (same sphere), there are essential differences between them. Word group is a nominative unit (names smth). Sent. in addition to this function acquires a communicative function. Nominative-is not its primary function. Text fulfills communicative function, but structurally it’s more complicated and the expression of predicativity is different. The quantitative criterion also differs the 3 units, but it’s not absolute. Some sent. can be shorter than word groups.

Classification of sentences

I . Structural approach. Sent. are subdivided into:

- simple →one-member: nominal (Fire!) and verbal (Do it!)

→two-member: complete (When are you going?) and incomplete or elliptical (To the cinema.)

- composite → compound and complex ;

II. Acc. to the purpose of utterance;

- declarative→ negative and affirmative (their purpose is that they express a statement giving information);

- interrogative (their purpose is to obtain information, to ask for information)

- imperative (their purpose is to make an addressee perform a certain action = inducement).

- exclamatory (their purpose is to express the speaker’s emotional state).

III. Informative structure of the sent . Every sent. is subjected to a binary division into the Theme and the Rheme, in Eng. – the Topic & the Comment. The topic is the part of the sent. which contains the information already known to the speakers. The Rheme (the comment) is the second part of the sent. which contains a new piece of information.

Types of simple sentences

2-member sent.:

1) Verbal(predicate is a verb)

a) without agreement

-------with preposition of the attribute

In R.- attributes which are Adj., Numerals, Pronouns, Participle I:

Раннее утро, последний звонок, наш лидер, эта программа, летящий самолет

In E.-The young painters worked….

-------with postposition of the attribute

In R. –attributes which are Nouns in indirect cases: дом колхозника, письмо матери.

In E.-The nerves of the stranger….

b) with agreement

In R. agreement in person is clearly observed. In E. we find just several cases of agreement.

R.- person (я работаю -ты работаешь….)

gender in Past tense (Вася работал -Маша работала)

E.-3d person Sg Present Indefinite (he works)

3d person Sg Present Continuous (I am playing – he is playing)

3d person Sg Present Perfect (he has come)

number Past Continuous (I, he was working-they, we were working)

2) Nominal(linking verb + predicative)

a)Agreement in both components of the predicate.

1) Predicative-Noun

R. - Л. был певец. (gender, number).

E.- L. was a singer. (number)

2) Adjective

R.-Погода была хорошая.

3) Noun in instrumental (case)

R.- …был рабочим.

4) Adjective in instrumental (case)

R.-…был хороший.

b)Agreement in 1 component of the predicate.

1) Adjective

E.- …is naughty.

2) Possessive Prn.

E.-…is mine.

3) Adjective (+it)

E.- It is cold.

4) Card. Num

E.-I am 23.)

5) Adv.

E.- The moon is out.

Another classification of 2-member sent. :

1. Personal :

I saw him yesterday –definite personal

They say…-indefinite personal

We/you/one….-generalized personal

2. Impersonal - it’s getting dark /темнеет.

1-member sent:

There is discrepancy between E. and R. 1-member sentences. (2-member sentences are more isomorphic). In R. there are a lot of types, while in E. they are used not so often and the variety of patterns is not so great. This fact is explained by the analytical structure of E. and the fixed word order. The fixed word order demands that all sent. parts should take some fixed position and the position of the subject can’t be empty, that’s why formal or grammatical subjects are used in E..

1)To this type we should refer it-subject: it’s getting dark. In R. the subject is empty-Темнеет.

2)Another type with a grammatical subject: there is, there are. Some say there is no subject here, some think that “there is” = “it is”.

3)In R. there are sent. with an impersonal subject that is expressed by some indirect case (косв.падеж). Его звали…Ему прислали…Such sent. correspond to 2-member sent. in E, in which passive is used: He was sent…

1-member sent..

1) Nominal -Spring. Fine!

Verbal -Светает.

2) Imperative - do it!

3) Infinitive -why not go there? to think of it! /подумать только!

4) Gerundial sent. –no talking.

5) Words-sentences - oh! Alas! Yes. No. Of course.

Connectors

Clauses in a complex sent. can be linked in 2 ways: syndetically (by means of subordinating conjunctions or connectives) and asyndetically.

A conjunction only serves as a formal element connecting separate clauses, whereas a connective serves as a connective link and has a at the same time a syntactic function in the subordinate clause it introduces. Subordinate clauses are: subject clauses, predicative clauses, object c., attributive c., adverbial c. of time, place, condition….

Conjunctions: that, if whether

Connectives: who, which, what, whatever, where, when, how…

Adverbial clauses of Time: when, while, as soon as, as long as, scarcely, no sooner than..

Place: where, wherever

Cause: as, since, because

Purpose: that, in order that, so that, lest

Condition: if, unless, on condition that, provided

Concession: though, although, however, whatever

Result : so that, so, such

Manner: as

Comparison: than, as, as if, as though.

SENTENCE IN THE TEXT: TEXT AS A LANGUAGE UNIT. DISCOURSE AS ITS SPEECH MANIFESTATION. INTER-TEXTUAL STRUCTURE, THEME-RHEME RELATIONS IN THE TEXT, BASIC TEXT CATEGORIES - SEMANTIC (TOPICAL) ENTITY AND LEXICO-GRAMMATICAL COHERENCY. MEANS OF COHESION.

The text is the highest unit of the syntactic level that possesses all features that characterize any other language unit. According to Sossure, any language unit is 2-sided, with the exception of phoneme. All of them have the plane of content and the plane of expression. And the text is not an exception. It has already been proved by textual linguistics (or text grammar): this discipline appeared in the 70s in Russia and abroad ( Москальская, Звегинцев, Michael Halliday, Harris, etc.) The main concept is that the largest unit of language is not the sentence, but the text.

The analysis of each text is compared with the analysis of the sentence. It was noticed that both the sentence and the text contain the same logical structure. A minimal sentence can be divided into 2 logical parts: Theme and Rheme. The theme is smth known. The rheme is some new information (portion of inf.) that is given in a sentence. It was noticed that texts also include portions of already known inf. and some new things. At the same time if most sentences correspond to the linear “theme-rheme’ structure, but the text, that also includes these 2 elements, as a rule, is more complicated. Moskalskaya investigated a lot of real texts and managed to prove that irrespective of their complexity and difference it’s possible to speak about some types of text structure. The types are universal for all languages (see below).

The starting point of development of text grammar was connected with the following:

· Many language facts, such as article determination (the way article determines words). Word-order, structural incompletion of the sentence, peculiarities of theme-rheme division and many others can be adequately interpreted only in some context that is wider than the sentence.

· Any text is not just a succession of isolated and disconnected sentences, but it’s a unity and it possesses a powerful integral potential.

Text and context

The notion of the text is connected with differentiation of types of context(micro- and macro-). A macro-context is the whole book or story. A micro-context is immediate environment.

2 other types are horizontal and vertical contexts. This division presupposes difference of development of the text.

à à à à horizontal (chain of events, that follow 1 another and the time of the action is not stopped. Ну entered the room. He looked at her. Then he said…etc.)

à

:

:

à vertical (interruption in narration. He entered the room(à) His face was pale, he was dressed in…(…..) Then he said(à)

The discourseis text in action. The term “text” mainly denotes the formal aspect. It’s a unit that consists of sentences and is characterized by its inner structure. The text can be represented schematically( Москальская).

chain-like arrangement fan-like arrangement

(logical narration, explanation)

hierarchical structure (long texts)

When the scheme is filled in by some content and this content describes some real situation, we deal with some discourse( written or spoken). Discourse is always situationally bound.

THE WORD AND ITS PROPERTIES

(from Arnold!!!)

The word may be described as the basic unit of language. Uniting meaning and form, it is composed of one or more morphemes, each consisting of one or more spoken sounds or their written representation. Morphemes are also meaningful units but they cannot be used independently, they are always parts of words whereas words can be used as a complete utterance (e. g. Listen!). The combinations of morphemes within words are subject to certain linking conditions. When a derivational affix is added a new word is formed, thus, listen and listener are different words. In fulfilling different grammatical functions words may take functional affixes: listen and listened are different forms of the same word. Different forms of the same word can be also built analytically with the help of auxiliaries. E.g.: The world should listen then as I am listening now (Shelley).

When used in sentences together with other words they are syntactically organised. Their freedom of entering into syntactic constructions is limited by many factors, rules and constraints (e. g.: They told me this story but not *They spoke me this story).

The definition of every basic notion is a very hard task: the definition of a word is one of the most difficult in linguistics because the simplest word has many different aspects.

It has a sound form because it is a certain arrangement of phonemes; it has its morphological structure, being also a certain arrangement of morphemes; when used in actual speech, it may occur in different word forms, different syntactic functions and signal various meanings.

Being the central element of any language system, the word is a sort of focus for the problems of phonology, lexicology, syntax, morphology and also for some other sciences that have to deal with language and speech, such as philosophy and psychology, and probably quite a few other branches of knowledge. All attempts to characterise the word are necessarily specific for each domain of science and are therefore considered one-sided by the representatives of all the other domains and criticised for incompleteness. The variants of definitions were so numerous that some authors (A. Rossetti, D.N. Shmelev) collecting them produced works of impressive scope and bulk.

A few examples will suffice to show that any definition is conditioned by the aims and interests of its author.

(from the lecture!!!)

Irina Arnold defines the word as the basic unit of a given language. She resulted from the association of a particular meaning with the particular group of sound, capable of a particular grammatical employment.

She stated that the word can be studied from several aspects: phonological, semantic and grammatical.

Irina Arnold also pointed out the main important characteristics of the word:

1.The word is the unity of form and meaning.

2.The word is the basic unit of a language.

3.The word is indivisible.

4.The word is composed of1 or more morphemes.

5.The word is internally (внутренне) stable.

6.The word is positionally mobile.

7.The word is separable.

8.The word can enter syntactic structures.

9.The word possesses semantic integrity (целостность).

The famous Russian scholar professor Смирницкий in his theory of the word focused on 2 major problems (related to the integrity of the word). They are: 1) separateness of the word (отдельность);

Types of motivation

Motivationis the relationship, existing between phonetic or morphological composition in the structural pattern of the word, on the one hand, and between its meaning, on the other hand.

Motivation is a highly complex phenomenon, which may work in 3 different ways. Accordingly there are 3 main types of motivation:

1) phonetical motivation;

2) morphological motivation;

3) semantic motivation;

Phonetical motivationdeals with certain similarity between the sounds that make up the word.

E.g. buzz- жужжание

cucoo- ку-ку } onomatopoeic words

quack- ква

Morphological motivationis the way, in which a given meaning is represented in a word.

It reflects the inner word form or the type of nomination process, chosen by the creator in the definite word. The inner form of the word is the feature, chosen as the basis of nomination to compound words.

The motivation is morphological, if the meaning of the whole word is based on the direct meanings of its components.

E.g. typewriter- пишущая машинка

type- печать, шрифт

write- писать

Semantic motivation is the way, based on the co-existence of direct and figurative meanings of the same synchronous system.

E.g. hand

1) a part of a human body- direct meaning;

2) the pointer of a clock- figurative (metaphorical) meaning;

3) a worker- figurative (metonymical) meaning;

E.g. eye-lid

1) that part of movable skin, that serves as a cover of the eye-ball (веко)- direct meaning;

2) a spherical part of the rocket's nozzle (хвостовая часть ракеты)- figurative meaning;

In the latter case we deal with compounds of the exocentric type. Exocentric compounds lack motivation and their lexical meaning can't be derived from the lexical meaning of its components. The semantic centre of such words is outside them and they are products of secondary nomination. But compound words, being of exocentric type, are formed with the help of semantic motivation, because the combination of their components is used figuratively.

Words may be motivated and demotivated. We don’t remember the source, from which a demotivated word was derived. We can't determine the inner form of a demotivated word.

E.g. table from the French word ,,tableau’’ (доска)

Types of linguistic meaning

Speaking of word meaning or linguistic meaning we should differentiatebetween lexicalandgrammaticalmeaning.

Lexical meaning is the material meaning of a word, which reflects the concept or emotion the given word expresses and the basic properties of the thing, object, quality, state and so on the word denotes.

Grammatical meaningis the formal meaning of a word expressed by the word's form. It is the meaning of relationship, manifested not in the word itself but in the dependent element, which is supplementary to its material part.

ROMANIC BORROWINGS

Latinborrowings: they are divided into 3 periods:

1) 5 century, words are connected with trade (pound, inch, kitchen, wall, port);

2) The time of Christianity, words are connected with religion (Latin words: alter, cross, dean; Greek words: church, angel, devil, anthem);

3) Time of renaissance, words were borrowed after great vowel shift (17 century) (item, superior, zoology, memorandum, vice versa, AM, PM).

French: the largest group of borrowings is French borrowings. Most of them came into English during the Norman Conquest. Normans belong to the race of scand. origin but during their residence in Normandy they had given up the native language and adopted the French dialect. During 3 centuries after the Norman Conquest French was the language of the court, of the nobility. There are following semantic groups of French borrowings:

1) words relating to government (administer, empire, state);

2) ~military affairs (army, war, battle);

3) ~jurisprudence (advocate, petition, sentence);

4) ~fashion (luxury, coat, collar);

5)~jewelry (topaz, pearl);

6)~ food and cooking (lunch, cuisine, menu);

7)~literature and music (pirouette, ballet).

Italian: cultural and trade relations between England and Italy in the epoch of renaissance brought in many Italian words:

1) musical terms: concert, solo, opera, piano, trio;

2) political terms: manifesto;

3) geological terms: volcano, lava.

Among the 20th century Italian borrowings, we can mention: incognito, fiasco, and graffiti.

Spanish: a large number of such words was penetrated in English vocabulary in 1588 when Phillip 2 sent a fleet of armed ships against England (armada, ambuscade); trade terms: cargo, embargo; names of dances and musical instruments: tango, rumba, guitar; names of vegetables and fruits: tomato, tobacco, banana, ananas.

GERMANIC BORROWINGS:

Scandinavian: By the end of the Old English period English underwent a strong influence of Scandinavian due to the Scandinavian conquest of the British Isles. As a result of this conquest there are about 700 borrowings from Scandinavian into English (pronouns: they, them, their; verbs: to call, to want, to die; adj: flat, ill, happy; noun: cake, egg, knife, window. ! letter combination “sk”: skin, sky, skirt etc.

German: in the period of Second World War such words were borrowed as: luftwaffe (возд. авиация); bundeswehr (вооруженные силы ФРГ). After the Second World War the following words were borrowed: Volkswagen, berufsverbot (запрет на профессию (в ФРГ)), and some other words (cobalt, wolfram, iceberg, rucksack). Dutch: Holland and England have had constant interrelations for many centuries and more then 2000 Dutch words were borrowed into English. Many of them are nautical terms and were mainly borrowed in the 14th century, such as: skipper, pump, keel, dock; and some words from everyday life: luck, brandy, and boss.

Russian: Among early Russian borrowings there are mainly words connected with trade relations, such as: rubble, kopeck, sterlet, vodka, and words relating to nature: taiga, tundra, steppe. After the October revolution many new words appeared in Russia, connected with the new political system, new culture, and many of them were borrowed into English: collectivization, udarnik, Komsomol and also translation loans: five-year plan, collective farm. One more group of Russian borrowings is connected with perestroika, suck as: glasnost, nomenclature, and apparatchik.

Native words – words of Anglo-Saxon origin or those whose origin can’t be traced. They denote the most important objects and phenomena. They are usually monosyllabic, highly polysemantic and stylistically neutral. They have a high word-building potential and enter lots of set-phrases and idioms. They are divided into 3 basic groups:

1) The words which have cognates (words of the same etymological root, of common origin) in many Indo-European languages. For ex: family relations: father (Vater), mother, daughter, son; parts of human body: foot, heart, nose; wolf, cow, cat; numerous verbs: stand, sit; the numerals from 1 to 100; heavenly bodies: sun, moon, star.

2) The words, which have cognates with words of the language of the Germanic group. Some of the main groups of Germanic words are the same as in the I-E group/ For ex: parts of human body: head, hand, arm, finger; animals: bear, fox; natural phenomena: rain, frost; human dwellings and furniture: house, bench; adj: green, blue, old, good, small, high; verbs: see, hear, tell, say, drink, give.

3) the English element proper. Ex.: bird, boy, girl, woman, lord, always.

Etymological doublets – are pairs of words, which have one and the same original form, but which have acquired different forms and even different meanings during the course of linguistic development. Ex: the words shirt and skirt etymologically descend from the same root. Shirt is a native word, skirt is a Scandinavian borrowings. Their phonetic shape is different, and yet there is a certain resemblance, which reflects their common origin. Their meanings are also different but easily associated: they both denote articles of clothing. Etymological triplets (groups of three words of common root) – hospital (Lat) – hostel (Norm. Fr) – hotel (Par. Fr).

Translation-Loans. This term is equivalent to borrowing. They are not taken into the vocabulary of another language more or less in the same phonetic shape in which they have been functioning in their own language, but undergo the process of translation. It is obvious that it is only compound words, which can be subjected to such an operation, each stem being translated separately. Ex: collective farm (колхоз); wonder child (Wunderkind); five-year plan (пятилетка)

International words. There are some words, the meaning of which is identical in most European languages. These words are called International. They can be traced etymologically. They appear in different languages as a result of simultaneous and successful borrowing from one and the same source. Thus, they are actually national. However, they comprise a special stock, common to many countries and their etymology is a secondary fact.

International words differ from other borrowings in that they reflect the relations of a number of countries and not the relations between 2 countries (as in the case of borrowed words). Neither should they be confused of the common Indo-European stock.

As a rule international words are either of political or scientific- technological nature.

E.g. democracy, party, monarchy, medicine, telephone

International words are often confused with other words, which came from the same source, but have diverged meaning. The notion “misleading words’’ (false friends of a translator) is generally used to denote these words.

E.g. accurate- is not аккуратный

conserves- is not консервы

complexion- is not комплекция

magazine- is not журнал

Neutral words

The quality of neutrality is actually absence of connotation both stylistic and expressive. Neutral words are indispensable in communication. Neutral words in English are for the most part short. They are highly polysemantic and characterized by the high frequency of use. If a word is classified as neutral, it is not to be understood that all of its meanings are neutral. On the contrary, secondary meanings in many cases derive connotations from their connection with the main meaning.

E.g. kid 1) baby goat (primary meaning)

2) child (colloquial meaning)

Neutral words are usually central members of synonymous sets. They are words through which the other members can be identified.

E.g. woman – lady – female

Child – kid

It is important to know that neutrality is the feature of words which have no synonyms.

E.g. spoon, rose – have no synonyms

Non-neutral layer

Literary words

The general impression of literary words is that of big words, complex in their structure and even difficult words. This is largely due to the fact that they are predominantly of foreign language (mainly Greek and Latin).

Literary words are a feature of polished (уточненный) language, concerned with precision and propriety. May be for this reason the domain of literary words is writing. The meaning of literary words are often more precise and sharp than the meanings of their neutral synonyms.

E.g. sojourn “temporary stay”

Pilgrimage “a journey undertaken by a religious devotee, a ritual”

Most literary words are free from emotive connotations. Literariness doesn’t go well with polysemy. That is why literary words usually have one and sometimes 2 meanings and this also limits the possible sphere of their use.

Poetic words

Originally poetic words were used only in poetry. In older times the language of poetry was different from ordinary language and possessed a special vocabulary of its own. Many things which were mentioned both poetry and in ordinary life had their special names in the poetic language.

E.g. steed or charger for horse

Welkin for sky

Vale for valley

Woe for sorrow

Such have survived because poetic texts have been preserved and are still enjoyed in our time. But their status in language has become quite similar to that of archaic words.

Archaic words

Archaisms are words that were once common but are now replaced by synonyms.

Archaic words have practically fallen out of active use, yet they are understood by modern users of the language. They have survived because they are used in recorded texts which are still read.

E.g. damsel – a noble man

Hark – listen

Perchance – perhaps

Scientific terms

Scientific terms denote concepts in various fields of knowledge and their use requires clarity of thought and precision that distinguishes the use of literary words in general. The number of scientific terms is enormous and is rapidly growing because each science develops its vocabulary, as it develops itself discovering new facts about reality. Scientific terms have no synonyms in the neutral vocabulary, but still there are cases when the science uses a special term for something that in ordinary life is denoted by a common neutral word.

E.g. skull (neutral) – cranium (medical)

Cervical (физиология) – related to the neck

Historical terms

Historical terms denote things that now belong to the past and are only mentioned in historical contexts (in books on history etc.)

E.g. yeoman – a farmer who owned and worked on his own land in former times

Serf – someone in former times who lived and worked on land that they did not own

Minstrel – a singer or musician in the Middle ages

Colloquial words

Colloquial words are suitable for spontaneous oral communication, where expression of emotions is sometimes as important as statements of facts and formulation of ideas. That accounts for the fact that colloquial words have a tendency to be shorter, because shorter form of expression can be grasped at a single moment.

E.g. Bicycle – bike

Spectacles – specs

Precision and sharpness are now the virtues of colloquial words. On the contrary, very often their meanings are loose.

Dialectal words

Dialectal words are confined to the speech of people of a definite locality, mainly the less educated. Uneducated speakers usually do not mean to convey any additional information by using dialectal words, whereas educated people may use local dialectal words for special expressive purposes, when they are aware of their connotations.

E.g. Cockney

Up the pole – for “drunk”

Loaf of bread – for “head”

Daisy roots – for “boots”

Slang

Slang is language of a highly colloquial type considered as below the level of educated standard speech and consisting either of new words or of current words employed in some special sense. It shows a complete directness which seems to deliberately challenge the norms of society.

Slang is characterized by:

1) Liveliness

2) Expressiveness

3) Some humorous quality

According to the sphere of usage slang is divided into general slang and special slang.

General slang is used by people with quite different backgrounds.

Special slang is peculiar for some social group (teenagers etc.)

In this case, slang is one of the chief markers of in-group identity. Slang is the most unstable part of the vocabulary, because each new generation tries to assert itself through the use of their own words, distinct from words used by their elders. Very often words of slang are synonyms to neutral words.

E.g. attic, hat peg, nut for “head”.

Slang words suggest a different focus on similar things. There are cases, it should be noted, when words originating as slang become part of a stand vocabulary.

E.g. teenager, boom, hippy, soap opera (originated as slang)

Very often they have no synonyms and their communicative value ensures their stability.

Argot

Argot can be defined as the special language of a secretive group. Its main purpose is to be unintelligible to outsiders. (it is used by criminals)

E.g. rap for “kill”

Shin for “knife”

Argot words do not show their motivation, whereas slang words are clearly motivated.

Jargon

Jargon is associated with professional terminology. It is the technical vocabulary of a special activity of group.

Like slang it is a variety of language used by particular social group, but it doesn’t convey rebellion or informality.

Medical jargon: NAD - no acute distress

A bell ringer – often rings the bell for attention

Computer hacker jargon:

“Lose, lose” – is used as a reply or comment on an undesirable situation

“I suddenly deleted all my files – Lose, lose”

Microsoft – Microsloth (sloth – laziness)

Internet Explorer – Internet Exploiter (эксплуататор)

Vulgarisms

Vulgarisms are words the use of which is restricted by the norms of language behaviour. They are heavy with emotive connotations and cause strong emotional responses partially because their use is felt to be a violation of social propriety. That is a minor linguistic offence. The most offensive of them are described as taboo-words.

Euphemisms

Euphemisms are words in which by a shift of meaning a word of more or less ‘pleasant or at least inoffensive connotation becomes synonymous to one that is harsh, obscene, indelicate or otherwise unpleasant. The effect is achieved, because the periphrastic expression is not so harsh, sometimes jocular and usually motivated according to some secondary feature of the notion.

E.g. naked - in one’s birthday suit

pregnant - in the family way

die - be no more - be gone - lose one’s life - breathe one’s last - join the silent majority - go the way of alt flesh - pass away - be gathered to one’s fathers.

Euphemisms always tend to be a source of new synonymic formations, because after a short period of use the new term becomes so closely connected with the notion that it turns into a word as obnoxious as the earlier synonym.

Neologisms

Neologisms new word expressions are created for new things irrespective of their scale of importance. They may be all important and concern some social relationships (new form/ state) People’s republic. Or smth threatening the very existence of humanity nuclear war or the thing may be short lived. Nis a newly coined word, phrase/ a new meaning for an existing word / a word borrowed from another language.

The development of science and industry technology: black hole, internet, supermarket.

The adaptive lexical system isn’t only adding new units but readjust the ways & means of word formation radio detection and ranging – RADAR

The lex. System may adopt itself by combining several word-building processes face-out (noun) – the radioactive dust descending through the air after an anatomic explosion. This word was coined by composition/ compounding & conversion.

Teach –in (n) –a student conference/ series of seminars on some burning issue of the day, meaning some demonstration on protest. This pattern is very frequent lis–in , due-in means protest demonstration when fluking traffic. Bionies – the combination of bio & electron.

Back formation: air-condion – air-conditioner – air-conditioning

Semi-affixes (могут быть как самостоятельные слова) chairman used to be not numerous and might be treated as exceptions now, evolving into separate set.

Some N abscessed with smth and containing the elements mad & happy: powermad, moneymad, auto-happy.

Conversion, composition, semantic change are in constant use when coining N

The change of meaning rather an introduction of a new additional meaning may be illustrated by the word NETWORK – stations for simultaneous broadcast of the same program.

Once accepted N may become a basis for further word formation. ZIP – to zip – zipper – zippy.

TYPES OF WF

Sound imitation –words are made by imitating different links of sounds that may be produced by animals, birds…bark – лаять, mew – мяукать…some names of animals, birds & insects are made by SI coo-coo – кукушка, crow – ворона.

To glide, to slip are supposed to convey the very sound of the smooth easy movement over a slippery surface.

Back formationa verb is produced from a noun by subtraction (вычитание) bagger – to bag, babysitter – to babysit

Blending -Is blending part of two words to form one word (merging into one word), combining letters/sounds they have in common as a connecting element. Smoke + fog = smog, Breakfast + lunch = brunch, Smoke + haze = smaze (дымка)

- addictive type: they are transformable into a phrase consisting of two words combined by a conjunction “and” smog → smoke & fog

- blending of restrictive type: transformable into an attributive phrase, where the first element serves as modifier of a second. Positron – positive electron, Medicare – medical care

Abbreviation – a new word is formed by combing all the first letters of a phrase. NATO, BBC, SOS.

Some abbreviations are pronounced according to alphabetical reading or as a word.

Acronyms – NATO, LASER, UNESCO – read like words.

Clipping or shortening – reduction of a word to one of its parts (exam, fridge, fan). All these words have their own paradigm.

Shortened words sound more like native ones.

1) Final clipping – ad-advertisement, coke – coca-cola, ed – editor, lab – laboratory.

2) Initial – cute – acute, fend – defend, story – history.

3) Middle part of the word – maths - mathematics

How to distinguish.

2 major criteria:

1. Vinogradov spoke of the semantic change in phr.units as "a meaning resulting from a peculiar chemical combination of words." The semantic shift doesn't consist in a mere change of each separate constituent part. These meanings merge to produce an entirely new one.

E.g. to have a bee in one's bonnet has lost its meaning of being distracted by a bee, it is forgotten, and now we speak so in the sense of "obsessed and eccentric". So that is meant by characterizing by semantic unity. In the traditional approach, phr.units have been defined as word-groups conveying a single concept. As to Russian scholars, they accept the criterion relying on a definition offered by Professor Koonin "phr.units is a stable word-group, characterized by a completely or partially transferred meaning".It shows that the semantic change may vary, and may affect either the whole word-group or only one of its components:

To skate on thin ice, to wear one's heart on one's sleeve, to have one's heart in the right place...

2. Structural. The second type is represented by phr.units in which one of the components preserves its current meaning and the other is used in a transferred meaning. To lose(keep) one's temper, to fly into a temper, fall ill, fall in love, stick to one' sword, etc.

But here we are in a dangerous position, as a borderline is confusing and vague.

Structural invariability finds restrictions in certain restriction.

Restriction in substitution. E.g. to earn," coal to Manchester (Newcastle in the original) makes as little sense as B Xapьков co своим самоваром (B Tулу).

Restriction of grammatical invariability. Typical mistake. E. g. to find fault with smb.-faultS,From head to foot- fEEt. Yet there are exceptions in the rule E.g. to build a castle (castles) in the air.

Classification - semantic. By Vinogradov – acc. to the degree of their motivation of meaning

a. Fusions, where the degree of motivation is very low: apple polishing, to hang up one’s axe

b. Unities, where the meaning can be guessed but is transferred: to play the first fiddle (to be a leader in smth), old salt (experienced sailor),

c. Collocations, where words are combined in their original meaning but their combination in different languages is different: cash and carry (self-service shop), in a big way (in great degree).

12. LANGUAGE AS A SYSTEM OF SIGNS AND AS A STRUCTURE. DE SAUSSURE'S DICHOTOMIES.
THE THEORY OF SIGN

There are many definitions of language, one of them is:

“Language is a system of interdependent signs in which the value of each sign results solely from the simultaneous presence of the others” (F. Saussure)

(besides system of signs, lang. can be also treated as a constant activity of the mind, means of communication and everything mentioned simultaneously)

Such scholars, as Potebnya, Saussure, Benvennist, Stepanov, Pierce and others agreed that lang is a system of signs that has a certain structure. That’s why the whole trend is called structuralism.

Saussure was not the first to put forward the idea that language uses signs to express thoughts. Aristotle defined linguistic signs as means of manifesting the impressions a human being gets when perceiving objects of the outside world.

A. Potebnya wrote that the word as a sign substitutes for the corresponding images or concepts, it represents them in the flow of thoughts and can be called a representation. But it was de Saussure who came up with a well-grounded theory of lang as a system of signs.

Language is a system of mutually defining entities. It is a system of signs, expressing ideas, a result of the human faculty for speech that evolved in society. Language is contingent on social interaction. The individual cannot create the arbitrary system alone. It requires agreement.

According to Saussure’s 1^st dichotomy, language is composed of two aspects: langue(the language system) and parole (the act of speaking). Language is that faculty of human speech present in all normal human beings due to heredity, but which requires the correct environmental stimuli for proper development. It is our faculty to speak to each other. Langue is a storehouse “the sum of word-images stored in the minds of individuals”. But it is also something which the individual speaker can make use of, but cannot affect by himself: it is a corporate, social phenomenon. Langue = grammar + vocabulary + pronunciation.

Parole is the actual, concrete act of speaking on the part of an individual, the controlled psycho-physical activity which is what we hear. It exists at a particular time and place and is opposed to langue, which exists apart from any particular manifestation of speech. Parole is the only object available for direct observation by the linguist, but it is not of primary importance to the linguist. What is of primary importance, it is langue as a vast network of structures and systems.

A system can be regarded as an ordered set of elements or a group of interrelated parts. But the term “system” can be applied only to the state of language at a certain moment of its development, at a certain point in time. In his theory Saussure give emphasis to the synchronic perspective, and later this approach caused a lot of criticism. The dichotomy of the synchronic and the diachronic dimensions helps to avoid some confusion, but neither of them excludes the other completely, there must always be a point of intersection. Language is dynamic and should be explored both from the synchronic and diachronic perspectives.

The third dichotomy of Saussure is the dichotomy of two main types of relations between the units of language: syntagmatic relations (linear relationship between the signs in a sentence) and paradigmatic relationships (systemic relationships between linguistic units within the system of language, relations of substitution).

V. Zvegintsev, e.g., argues that language is not a static system, it exists in development. In his opinion, the term “structure” is more adequate for linguistic research.

E. Benvennist says the term “structure” can be understood at least in two ways. A structure is a whole, which consists of interconnected and interdependent parts. A structure is a certain arrangement of interconnected elements which can substitute for each other. Each element of a structure is defined by the whole, i.e. by all its connections with the other elements. Taken in isolation any element looses its essential characteristics. Change in any part of a structure triggers off a series of changes in other parts, and, as a result, changes the whole.

Yu. Stepanov, on the contrary, is a proponent of the term “system”, which he understands as a whole that consists of elements and relations among these elements. The whole determines each element. The structure of a system is the aggregate of all the relations among the elements.

Charles Pierce identified three types of signs:

ICON is a sign that has a direct link with the object it stands for and has a resemblance with the objects, e.g.: finger prints. Language signs that are icons are onomatopoeic words.

INDEX is a sign which would lose the character which makes it a sign if its object were removed, but would not lose its character if there were no interpretant (a bell in a school). Interjections are indexes in the system of language.

SYMBOL is a sign which would lose the character which renders it as a sign if there were no interpretant. Words are symbols.

Linguistic signs have some peculiarities which differentiate them from signs in other systems.

1. In most semiotic systems signs are not emotionally colored, they are neutral in terms of emotions or evaluation. The word as the central linguistic sign is usually loaded with some connotative meaning.

2. In most semiotic systems each sign can have only one meaning, the majority of words are polysemantic.

3. Being arbitrary by nature, the word can still become motivated as a result of some word formation process (derivatives, compound words, etc.).

4. Unlike signs in other semiotic systems, linguistic signs (words and morphemes) are productive elements because they can be used to create new signs (word formation).

All this leads us to the conclusion that language is a unique and very complex semiotic system.

The most important outcomes of exploring language as a system and as a structure were the theory of the phoneme and the theory of the morpheme (in more detail).

But this approach has its limitations.

Settings

Settings of communicative events provide arenas for action, both in a physical and social sense. They help define events as particular kinds of occasions, invoking certain behaviors and restricting others. Settings for communication can be classified along the continuum of formality or informality. The array of settings in each category differs across cultures. Increased structuring of formal events is reflected in rules of etiquette.

All people have multiple roles or identities: parent, friend, teacher, president of an organization. Formal situations define people by their “positional and public” rather than “personal” identities. Social distance rather than intimacy is stressed. It is often reflected linguistically in forms of address.

Norms for communicative behavior in informal settings are more diffuse and flexible, although participants always assess speech and nonverbal actions according to cultural models of appropriateness. Structuring of informal situations is relatively loose.

People choose ways of speaking after evaluating an entire communicative and social situation.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants in speech events include speakers, addressees, and audience. Individuals usually change roles during a given event. In two party conversations each person is alternatively speaker or addressee as they exchange speaking turns. But even if one person monopolizes the right to speak, audiences have a communicative role.

Choice of topic also depends on the speaker’s awareness of cultural and individual expectations.

Topics or Message content

People choose topics based on combinations of their personal interests and sensitivity of preferences of co-participants, all within boundaries set by cultural norms. Formal contexts such as ceremonies, lectures, or governmental proceedings tend to predetermine a specific range of topics. Informal interactions are less constraining, but cultural values are relevant to choice of topic, too.

Several kinds of speech acts - greetings, parting, apologies, etc. - are frequently expressed by highly predictable and stereotypical linguistic routines.

PURPOSE

All speech events have a purpose.

Gorodetsky distinguishes between a communicative goal and a purpose related to the activity in which the interlocutors are involved (other than communication). Our communication is successful if we achieve the purpose and/or if we penetrate into the goal and motives of our interlocutor.

Background knowledge

It includes encyclopedia and linguistic knowledge. Three types of knowledge which people use to interpret discourse: scripts, world knowledge, adjacency sequences (predictable sequences of utterances).

The main characteristics of communication:

- intentional,

- conventional (routinised),

- jointly negotiated between speakers and hearers,

- varied according to context and language users, according to social relations between participants,

- involves commonsense knowledge,

- sequential (retrospective and prospective),

- accomplished in time and space,

- interpretative.

The largest unit of verbal communication is text or discourse.

There are different approaches to them: 1) synonyms, 2) T is written, D. is oral, 3) ! D. is situationally bound, message content.

Text can be defined in different ways:

1. It’s any utterance which consists of 1 or more sentences and which is complete in terms of meaning and the speaker’s intention. (Москальская)
2. It’s a written result of some creative process which consists of the title and a number of paragraphs united by all kinds of lexical, grammatical, logical, stylistic links. (Гальперин)
3. It’s a means of transmitting and getting information. In the process of transmitting this information is presented by the speaker in some form providing for its adequate understanding (cognitive definition).
4. Text can be defined as a more or less complete fragment of verbal interaction which is structured according to certain rules and which manifests the cognitive, psychological and social aspects of communication. There are two main criteria for identifying this largest unit of communication: it has a structure and it gives information (Колшанский).

In text analysis one of the primary tasks is to explore the linguistic features which characterize texts. One of the most important features of texts is that they have cohesion, the elements of a text are tied together. There are two basic types of cohesion: lexical and grammatical. Repetition of words, use of sense relations, use of words belonging to the same semantic fields, etc. Grammatical cohesion is achieved with the help of conjunctions, grammatical substitution (one, do), co-reference (pronouns).

T.A. Van Dijk looks at text coherence from a cognitive perspective. Discourse is coherent when it has a topic, when its respective sentences are sequentially coherent, and when the adressee is able to imagine a situation in/for which the text could be true., or, in other words, when it has a mental model. Coherence is also based on functional realtions between the sentences (propositions). E.g., sentence B can be a generalization, specification, example, consequence, presupposition of sentence A.

Another important feature of texts is that they are informative. Galperin distinguishes between factual and conceptual information, i.e. information about facts and events and information about the author’s attitude to these events, the causal links, possible consequences, etc. Some information can be implied.

According to Van Dijk, implications or implicatures are propositions that are inferred from the meaning of actually expressed words, phrases, sentences. These inferences are derive from from our socially shared knowledge. Implications can be also our assumptions about the intentions of the speaker/writer.

Texts are continuous and complete. “Continuous” means continuing without interruption, i.e. the sequence of facts and events occurs in time and space. A text is complete if the speaker’s intention is fulfilled.

Types of links: topic – comment relations, thematic nets.

A text is often presented as an aggregate of sentences. In discourse analysis these sentences are transformed into utterances each of which has a certain communicative intention.

Up to the late 60s there were very few books on discourse analysis. It took some time and effort to understand that discourse or text cannot be described in terms of formal grammatical units. Discourse can be used interchangeably with the word “text”, but some scholars insist that “text” can be only written, and discourse is oral. Other scholars point out that the term “discourse” is different because it presupposes on-line processing of a verbally presented message (word by word) within a framework of a certain social domain as a consitutent part of a speech event.

Sinclair proposed the term “discourse” as a new level with its own rank scale of units and its own type of relations among these units.

Discourse presupposes on-line processing of a verbally presented message (word by word) within a framework of a certain social domain as a constituent part of a speech event.

D. is the largest unit of communication.

The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis

The opinions of Sapir and Whorf on relationships among language, thought, and behavior have come to be known as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. The weak version of this hypothesis is that some elements of language, e.g. in vocabulary and grammatical system influence speakers’ perceptions and can affect their attitudes and behavior. The strong version suggests that language is ultimately directive in this process. This strong position is clearly improvable.

Sapir: “We see and hear and otherwise experience very largely as we do because the language the language habits of our community predispose certain choices of interpretation”.

M.M. Bakhtin also believed that language and speakers’ perceptions of experience are intertwined. he wrote: “There is no such thing as experience outside the embodiment in signs…It is not experience that organizes expression, but the other way around – expression organizes experience”. An individual’s thought is guided by possibilities offered by his or her language. We can illustrate his point with the following examples:

English speaker	I must go there.
Navajo speaker	It is only good that I shall go there.
English speaker	I make the horse run.
Navajo speaker	The horse is running for me.

In their use of language English and Navajo express different views of events and experiences. They have different attitudes about people’s rights and obligations. English speakers encode the rights of people to control other beings (people or animal) or to be controlled and compelled themselves. In contrast, Navajo speakers give all beings the ability to decide for themselves, without compulsion or control from others.

Cognitive linguistics emphasizes the idea that culture results from sharing of individuals’ lived experience. Culture provides us with cultural presuppositions. Presuppositions can be defined as background assumptions against which an action, theory, expression or utterance makes sense. The participants in speech interactions have an array of knowledge and understandings (models) of their culture as expressed and transmitted through language.

We can identify the following types of cultural presuppositions:

· Shared knowledge of facts, events, objects that are significant for this culture;

· Culture-specific perception of universal concepts such as time, space, etc. According to B. Whorf, in the language of Hopi they do not use words like “morning” or “evening” that refer to a phase in a cycle of time, but phrases like “while morning-phase is occurring” making this phase continuous.

· Culture-specific understanding of appropriate attitudes, relations between people, goals and wishes, etc. (e.g. joking or insulting).

· Culture-specific ideas of appropriate behavior, including verbal behavior (‘’How are you?”).

· Culture-bound values and evaluations.

· Associations caused by common historical expereince, way of life, everyday routine, etc.

These presuppositions are manifested with the help of an array of verbal means:

▪Semantic fields: degree of specification in designated this or that sphere of reality

▪Prototypical