The American variant of the English language
STRONG VERBS
The changes which occurred since the OE period are these. Both the infinitive ending -an and the past plural ending -on were weakened to -en (-n).
WEAK VERBS
The three OE classes of weak verbs had a different development in different ME dialects.
In the Midland and Northern dialects class I weak verbs which had an -i- in the infinitive (styrian) and class II weak verbs (lufian, macian) lost the -i-, arid the forms stiren, Idveti, maken resulted.
In the Southern dialects the infinitive ending -ian > -ien often appears as -i, e.g. loui.
Class II verbs had the o-vowel in their past tense and second participle was weakened to -e-[6]: lovede, mdkede, loved, maked and thus lost their characteristic feature.3
In class III verbs the infinitives seggen, libben, habben are gradually superseded by seien, liven, haven, which have been derived on the analogy of the past tense and also of the 2nd and 3rd persons singular present indicative.
4.11. Perfect forms, which arose in OE, are widely used in ME. In Chaucer's works there are many sentences with the Present Perfect and the Past Perfect.
In ME appeared first instances of a continuous aspect, consisting of the verb be(n) and the first participle. They were very rare. Thus, in Chaucer's works only six examples of such forms have been foundnHere is one of them: singynge he was, or floytinge, al the day 'he was singing, or playing the flute, all day long'."
„A special future form, which started in OE, becomes in ME a regular part of the tense system; Chaucer uses this future form in many cases. The auxiliaries shal and wil are usually deprived of their-original modal meanings.
4.12. There are no radical changes in the structure of the sentence in trasition from OE to ME. Neither the main types of sentence nor the types of sentence parts and of subordinate clauses show any appreciable innovation.
5.1. The 17th and 18th centuries witnessed some great social and political upheavals, which influenced the language as well. The most outstanding events of the time were the bourgeois revolution of the 17th century, the Restoration of 1660, and the industrial revolution in the 18th century. But even before these events an important development took place in the history of the language.
Until the early 17th century the English language was only spoken in the British Isles. In the 17th century it crossed the borders. With the first English settlers in America-the language entered the New World. The official Anglican church created by the 16th-century Reformation was persecuting the Puritans. This was also the beginning of history of English in the New World.
Meanwhile political struggle in Britain became more and more acute and led to civil war, which ended with a puritan victory and proclamation of a Commonwealth in 1649.
The language of the Commonwealth belongs to the Early Modern English period, which lasted till about 1660.
The literary language of the time bears a strong imprint of puritan ideology.
However, puritan influence had made itself felt even before the revolution. It is very tangible in a famous Bible translation published in 1611, the authorized version, also often called the king James Bible.
As for Milton, the greatest poet and writer of the epoch (1608—1674), he created a peculiar individual style coloured by Greek and biblical influences.
From the viewpoint of this new trend, the language of the 16th and early 17th century was bound to appear wild and clumsy. Publications of Shakespeare's works appearing in the 18th century are full of arbitrary changes designed to make Shakespeare's text conform to the "correctness" of the 18th century. The greatest poet of the time, Alexander Pope (1688—1744), who edited Shakespeare's works in 1725, entirely failed to understand the forms in Shakespeare's text.
In the 17th and 18th century a great number of grammarians and orthoepists appeared, who set as their task the establishing of correct language forms.
In 1621 Alexander Gill's book, Logonomia Anglica (that is, English Word-law) was published. Gill stuck to conservative views in the sphere of pronunciation and condemned new tendencies in this field. However, his work is not devoid of interests: he quotes in a peculiar system of transcription the variants of pronunciation which he disapproves of, and in this way gives us some valuable information about the pronunciation of his time.
(Next came Charles Butler, author of English Grammar, which appeared in 1634. Butler proposed a modernized and rationalized spelling system.
The most serious of the orthoepists was Christopher Cooper, author of Grammatica Anglicana, published in 1685. Cooper was fully aware of the difference between sounds and letters and gave a list of homonyms resulting from phonetic change. He testifies that the following words were pronounced alike: heart — hart; a notion — an ocean; are — air — ere — heir, etc.
William Baker's book, Rules for True Spelling and Writing English, appeared in 1724. Baker noted divergencies between pronunciation and spelling and gave lists of words showing such divergencies.
About the middle of the 18th century there appears a tendency to limit the freedom of phonetic and grammatical variants within the national language.
The idea of a strict norm in language was expressed with yet greater clarity in a preface appended by Samuel Johnson (1709— 1784) to his famous-Dictionary, published in 1755.
5.4.In the early 17th century the English language penetrated into America. In the course of the following centuries it spread over the greater part of North America and reached the Pacific. On its way westwards the English language overcame its two rivals — French and Spanish.
In the extreme South-West of England, in Cornwall, the local Celtic language, Cornish, died out in the 18th century.
The Celtic language of the Isle of Man (in the Irish Sea), called Manx, is dying out.
In Ireland, which was conquered by the English in the early 17th century, struggle against English power lasted all through the 17th and the 18th centuries.
Struggle against English domination is steadily going on in Northern Ireland in our own time.
The number of people speaking Irish rose from 300,000 in 1929 to 666,000 in 1961; however, most Irish people speak English.
In the 18th century the English penetrated into India and it came under English power.
In the course of the Seven Years' War (1756—1763) the English conquered Canada, which had been a French colony. А few decades later English settlers appeared in Australia. During the 19th century the whole of Australia, and also New Zealand and many islands in Oceania were colonized. In the early years of the 20th century the English penetrated into South Africa and made themselves masters of the Cape Colony and of the Transvaal.
5.5. The most significant phonetic change of this period was the Great Vowel Shift, beginning in the 15th century. It left its imprint on the entire vowel system of the MnE period.
The essence of the shift was the narrowing of all ME long vowels, and diphthongization of the narrowest long ones; [i: >[ai], [u: > au].
The chronological frame of the shift remains somewhat doubtful. The well-known English scholar Henry Sweet (1845—1912) and the Danish scholar O. Jespersen (1860—1943) thought that the shift was only completed in the 18th century and that the pronunciation of the 16th and 17th centuries was something intermediate between the ME and the modern pronunciation. O. Jespersen represented this view in the following manner:
The separate items of the shift may be presented in the following way:
a: > ei
e: > e: > i: o: > ou
e: > i: o: > u:
i: > ai u: > au
5.6. The diphthongs [ai] and [ei] were towards the end of the ME period merged in [aei], as in day, way, etc. Eventually this [aei] developed into [ei]: [dei], [wei], etc.
The diphthong [ei] merged with [ei] from ME [a:]. A few pairs of homophones resulted from this: ail — ale, fain — feign-fane, lain — lane, maid — made, pail — pale, plain — plane, sail — sale, tail — tale, veil — vale.
ME [eu] (spelt eu,ew) developed through [iu] into [ju:], as in dew [dju:]. This change also affected French,words in which French [u] had been substituted by [iu], as pure, nature, etc.
In MnE the ME sounds [ou] and [6] were merged into one. This brought about several pairs of homophones: grown — groan, no, mown — moan, row — roe, rowed — road, rode, soul
5.7. In many cases when a word ended in two consonants, the final one was lost. The following words belong here.
Final [mb] was simplified to [m] in lamb, dumb, climb, comb, tomb, plumb, bomb. When final [b] was dropped, the letter b was preserved, and on the analogy of these words the letter was added to words ending in [m] which had never had any final [b]
Final [mn] was also simplified to [m] in damn, condemn, hymn, column, solemn, autumn.
Final [In] was simplified to [1] in mill (OE myln < Latin moli-num). In kiln final [n] is usually preserved. '
In some cases, in a cluster of three consonants the middle one was dropped. For example:
The cluster [stl] was simplified to [si] in castle, whistle, rustle, bustle; the cluster [stn] was simplified to [sn] in glisten, fasten, moisten; the cluster [ftn] was simplified to [fn] in often, soften; [stm >sm] in Christmas, postman; [ktl > kl] in exactly, directly; [ktn >kn] in exactness; [skl > sl] in muscle)
Some words of French origin with final -n have acquired a -t: peasant, pheasant, tyrant (Fr. paysan, faisan, tyran).
The causes of this change are not quite clear. Possibly they were due to analogy of words with final -nd or -nt: land, hand, band, bond, kind, mend, rend, send, spend, tend, extend, expand, wind; crescent, orient, Occident, patient, pint.
CA final -t appeared in several prepositions and conjunctions in -s: amonges > amongst, amiddes > amidst, againes > against, whiles > whilst.
In certain cases the initial consonant of a cluster is lost. Thus, [k] and [g] are lost before [n] in knave, knight, knee, know, knit, knell, gnat, gnarled, gnaw; also in words of Greek origin: gnosis, gnomic.
The consonant [h] was dropped in many unstressed syllables, as in forehead ['fond], shepherd ['/epad]; compare also perhaps [praeps] (alongside [pa'hasps]); in geographical names: Chatham ['tfaetam], Nottingham ['notirjam], Brougham [bru:m].
5.8. Some loan words, mostly bookish ones, whose spelling was more familiar than their sounding, had their pronunciation influenced by the spelling. For example, the words fault and vault were borrowed from French as faut, vaut; then the letter 1 was introduced to mark their ultimate Latin origin (falta, volta), and finally an [1] appeared in pronunciation as well. The word nephew (from Fr. ne-veu) was spelt neuew in ME. But as the French word comes from Lat. nepotem (ace. sing, of nepos), an etymological spelling with phwas introduced in English. Eventually a new pronunciation ['nefju:] induced by the spelling appeared alongside ['nevju:].
5.9. Development of English grammatical structure since the 16th century has attracted but little attention. Some scholars even thought that no development took place at all. Thus, F. Kluge brought his History of the English Language ' only to the late 16th century. Rene Huchon in his History of the English Language says that since the 16th century its history merges with history of style.
However, some valuable studies were made of separate aspects of post-Shakespearean English. The Czech scholar Bohumil Trnka devoted a special work to syntax of the English verb in the 16th and 17th centuries. Several theses were devoted to the language of Daniel Defoe, Samuel Richardson, and other writers. But much remains to be done in this field.
5.10. The process of eliminating survival plural forms went on in the 15th and 16th centuries. Forms like eyen, fon, which were still ,used by Chaucer, were now superseded by the regular forms eyes, foes.
In several substantives with final [f] or [9] alternation of the voiceless fricative with its voiced counterpart was. eliminated. This is the case with roof (plural roofs) and other words in -oof; also with belief (beliefs), death (deaths), hearth (hearths).
A few substantives have preserved their plural forms due to the weak declension or to mutation: ox (oxen), child (children), man (men), woman (women), foot (feet), goose (geese), tooth (teeth), mouse (mice), louse (lice), dormouse (dormice).
This peculiarity appears to be due to the meaning of these words. Most of them are names of animals (ox, goose, mouse, louse, dormouse, sheep, deer, trout, salmon). The plural of these nouns is used to denote a mass (a flock of sheep, a herd of swine, a shoal of fish, etc.)
The two-case system which was typical of Chaucer's language has been preserved in MnE. The sphere of the genitive case has been restricted to substantives denoting living beings and also some time notions, e. g. year, month, week, day'. With words denoting inanimate objects or abstract ideas the genitive has been generally replaced by the phrase "of + substantive".
As far as written English is concerned, we must note the use of the apostrophe to denote the genitive case. In the genitive singular the apostrophe was first used about 1680. Originally, it was meant to denote omission of the letter e.
5.11. In ME there appeared alongside synthetic degrees of comparison, phrases consisting of the words more and most and the adjective. In MnE the two types were differentiated: suffixes of degrees are used for monosyllabic and some dissyllabic adjectives, while the phrases are limited to the other dissyllabic and to polysyllabic ones.
In the 15th and 16th centuries mutation, which had survived in ME in the comparative and superlative of some adjectives is eliminated. Thus, for example the series long, lenger, lengest is replaced by long, longer, longest.
5.12. In formation of strong verb forms an important change also took place in this period.
In OE and ME every strong verb was characterized by four basic forms: (1) infinitive, (2) 1st and 3rd person singular, past indicative, (3) plural past indicative with 2nd person singular and past subjunctive, (4) second participle.
In MnE these four forms were reduced to three: (1) infinitive, (2) past tense, (3) second participle.
The system of perfect forms, which had arisen in OE and
developed in ME, goes on unfolding in the modern period. In Shakespeare's text there is a fully developed system of perfect forms. In MnE a continuous aspect was gradually formed, expressed by a very obvious morphological pattern (be -f- first participle).
Continuous forms are found in Shakespeare somewhat more frequently than in Chaucer, but on the whole they are not numerous.
In the 19th century passive continuous forms appear. They express an action taking place at a given time in the present or past more clearly, distinguishing it from the result of an action. But the system of passive continuous forms has been limited to the present and the past; neither a future continuous passive nor any perfect continuous passive forms have been developed so far.
5.13. MnE is characterized by further growth of the pattern "substantive -f- substantive", the first item acting as attribute and indicating some feature of the thing denoted by the second item. Among the first components of such phrases we find substantives of very different meanings, for example, your ryestraw hats, midnight mushrooms, midnight hags.
Alongside of this type the pattern "substantive genitive + substantive" remains in use, and it can be illustrated by such examples from Shakespeare: this man's life, his nurse's tears, the people's mouths, the dead man's knell, the tyrant's head, my country's love (= love for my country).
No material change can be found in the structure of the simple sentence in Early MnE as compared with ME. The means of expressing the subject, the object, and other parts of the sentence remain basically the same.
The freedom of word order became gradually still more restricted than it had already been in ME.
1 Lexicology. Syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations. Methods of lexicological research.
Lexicologyis composed of two morphemes taken from the Greek language (lexis- word, logos- a department of knowledge). Thus the term lexicology is generally defined as the science of words, the science of vocabulary of a given language.
The word is a basic language unit. Various branches of linguistics approach the word study from different angles. Phonetics – phonology study the outer form of the word, its sound form. Grammar is the study of word forms (morphology) and word groups combined in sentences (syntax). Stylistics deals with investigation of the styles of speech and stylistic expressive means.
Lexicology as a branch of linguistics has its own aims and methods of scientific research. Lexicology of modern English has for its basic aim the systematic description and study of the vocabulary of the language at the definite stage in history.
Lexicology is concerned with vocabulary units: words and phraseological units.
Until quite recently we applied the term system only to phonetics and grammar, now this term is also applied to lexicology and we speak of the lexical system of a language. A system is a certain abstraction it’s a whole constituted by into dependant elements of the same order. We study the properties of these elements and the relationships these elements enter.
Linguistic relationships between words are classified into syntagmatic and paradigmatic. Syntagmatic relations are based on the linear character of speech. And are studied by meanings of contextional and transformational and other types of analysis. In syntagmatic relations context is most important. The term context is defined as a minimal stretch of speech necessary and sufficient to determine which of the possible meanings of a word is used. Syntagmatic relations are reflected in the collocability of words including phraseological units. Paradigmatic relations reveal themselves in the morphemic structure of words and are described in terms of morphemes and their arrangement. Paradigmatic linguistic relationships may be subdivided in the following way:
1) the interdependence of elements within words (the morphological structure of words).
2) the interdependence of words within the vocabulary (reflects possible groupings within the system): word families, synonyms, etc.
3) the influence of other aspects of the language.
The theoretical course of modern English studies the system of the language in its present-day state. This approach to language is referred to in linguistic literature as synchronic. Diachronic approach deals with changes that the English language has undergone in the course its development. Today linguists hold that any linguistic phenomenon may be studied from both angles.
A word is autonomous unit of language in which a given meaning is connected with a given sound complex and which is susceptible of a given grammatical employment. Words consist of morphemes. Unlike a word a morpheme is not autonomous. Morphemes occur in speech only as constituent parts of words, not independently. Although the words may consist of a single morpheme. A morpheme is the minimal meaningful language unit. It isn’t divisible into smaller meaningful units. Words are combined in speech according to the syntactical norms of the language. Free word-combinations are created by the speaker according to certain syntactical patterns. This is a sphere of syntax.
2 Word-building.
Word-building is the process of creating words from the material available in the language after certain structural and semantic formulas and patterns. Within word-building we distinguish two main types: word-derivation and word-composition.
Words created by word-derivation have only one primary stem and derivational affixes. Some derived words have no affixes because derivation is achieved through conversion. Words created by word-composition have at least two primary stems. The shortening of words stands apart from those two. It cannot be regarded as part of either because in a shortened word we cannot single out the root morpheme or the affix.
Some of the word-building means can be used for the creation of new words wherever occasion demands in present-day English. These are called productive means of word-building. Other word-building means can no longer be used for this purpose. And they are commonly called nonproductive. Affixation has been a productive word-building means ever since the old English period. Various sound interchange which must have been productive at one time cannot be used to coin new words in modern English. Its function in modern English is only to distinguish one word from another, verb from noun. Productive: affixation, composition, conversion, shortening they are basic word-building means. Less productive: backformation (edit – editor), blends (brunch = breakfast + lunch). Nonproductive: sound interchange (food – feed), stress interchange (/export – ex/port).
Affixation is the formation of words by adding derivational affixes to stem. Affixation falls into suffixation and prefixation. Suffixes and prefixes differ in the position they occupy. Suffixes follow the root morpheme, prefixes precede it. Though they both modify the lexical meaning of the root morpheme, the suffixes are more closely bound up with the paradigm of the certain part of speech. As a result word-building suffixes are classified according to the part of speech they form. As for prefixes they cannot be classified on the same principal, because one and the same prefix may be added to the stems of different parts of speech. The addition of a suffix usually forms a word belonging to a different part of speech. On the contrary prefixes don’t usually change a part of speech (head – behead).
Allomorphsare positional variants of the same suffix or prefix (un=im=ir=il). They don’t differ in meaning. Allomorphs of suffixes are conditioned by the final phoneme of the stem. Allomorphs of prefixes depend on the initials of the stem with which they assimilate.
International affixes. A number of borrowed derivational affixes are at international currency. The suffix –ist of Greek origin is used in many European languages to form a noun denoting one who adheres to a given doctrine or system. Such prefixes as anty-, pro-, extra-,ultra- are common in words belonging to political and scientific terminology (extramural – заочный).
Compositionis the formation of the compound words by joining together two or more free stems of notional parts of speech. It’s a very old means of word-building in English. Since free stems are identical with independent words it’s sometimes very difficult to distinguish compound words and free phrases. To achieve this aim we must be guided by certain criteria. Like all other structural types of words in the English language compound words are characterized by inseparability which finds the expression in the graphic, phonetic, morphological and semantic integrity. Phonetically inseparability of a compound word is reflected in a unity stress. However there are some cases when a second component of a compound word retains a secondary stress. The graphic indication of inseparability is a solid or hyphenated spelling. The morphologic indications – are linking elements (o, I, s) and derivational affixes as –ed, -er. From the semantic point of view a compound word has a single semantic structure irrespective of the number of components. Semantic integrity is characteristic of all compound words and finally a compound word is characterized by a single stylistic reference as a whole.
The term conversion refers to the numerous cases of phonetic identity of word forms primarily the so called initial forms of two words belonging to different parts of speech. From the point of view of the morphemic structure they are root words. On the derivational level one of them should be referred to derived words, though they contain the same root morpheme. Consequently the question arises: what serves as the word-building means in these cases. The two words differ in the paradigm that is used as a word-building means. Hence we may define conversion as a formation of a new word through changes in its paradigm and its function in the sentence.
Which of the two words within a conversion pair is the derived member? There are several criteria:
1) makes use of the contradiction between a lexical meaning of the root morpheme and lexico-grammatical meaning of the stem (pen – object but to pen – contradiction).
2) a comparison of conversion pairs with analogous word pairs. If we compare such pairs as chat – to chat, work – to work with such pairs as converse – conversation, admire – admiration the verb is primary. We presume that in the previous pairs the verb is primary too. So this criteria is presented too.
3) a criterion based on derivational relations within a word cluster. The derivated words have suffixes added to noun stems which make it possible to conclude that the structural and the semantic center of the whole cluster is the noun.
4) a criterion based on semantic relations within conversion pairs. Relations are understood as those of an object and an action characteristic of this object. Thus making the verb the derived member……or relations of an action and the result of it (find – a find). This criterion has almost no limitation.
Shorteningis a formation of shorter words (monosyllabic) from a longer one. In most cases a shortened word exist in the vocabulary together with the long word from which it is derived and expresses the same meaning , differing only in stylistic coloring. Opinions differ as to whether these pairs are two different words or word variants .Shortening usually embraces two processes: Clipping or cutteling abbreviation . Clippings come into existence through cutting off the one or more syllables of a word. The stressed syllable is preserved (peramulator- pram). Sometimes it is the unstressed syllable which is preserved. We distinguish several groups of clippings:
1. Words that have been shortened at the end. This process is called apocope.
2. Words that have been shortened at the beginning – aphereses.
3. Words in which some syllables or sounds have been omitted in the middle – syncope
4. Words that have been shortened at the beginning and at the end (influenza - flu).
It is generally nouns that are shortened. Verbs are generally formed from clipped nouns. There are a few clipped adjectives but they remain nonliterary. Shortened words take on grammatical inflections. The diminutive suffix - y is often added.
Abbreviations are formed from the initial sounds or syllable of the words in set expressions of a terminological character. Abbreviations may be read alphabetically or like a word (NATO). In some cases only the first component is shortened (A-bomb). Abbreviations first make their appearances in written speech, mostly in newspapers and gradually pass into popular use. They also take on grammatical inflections. Graphic abbreviations exist only in writing.
Sound-interchangeis nonproductive. Its function is to distinguish one word from another. We distinguish vowel interchange and consonant interchange. Vowel interchange helps to distinguish two parts of speech nouns from verbs and adjectives from verbs. In some cases interchange is followed by affixation (Strong strength). Consonant interchange helps to distinguish two parts of speech nouns from verbs (Speak speech). Consonant interchange can be combined with vowel interchange (Breath Breathe). Stress-interchangeis not productive. Its function is to distinguish words: nouns from verbs (/export ex/port) and adjective from verbs (/frequent – fre/quent). We also observe sound interchange here but it is secondary (/increase – in/crease).Sound-imitation is the formation of new words imitating different sounds (splash – bang - crunch). Reduplicationis the formation of the word through the repetition of the certain combination of sounds, sometimes followed by the sound-interchange. There are 3 kinds of reduplication: 1) mere repetition (murmur, cuckoo); 2) vowel-interchange (tic-tac – crass-cross); 3) consonant-interchange (helter-skelter). Blends-itis the formation of the words by fusing the initial part of one word with the final part of the second word. Back-formation is the formation of the shortened word from a longer word by subtracting what is understood as a suffix (beg - beggar).
3 Semasiology. Word meaning. Polysemy. Homonymy.
Semasiology is the branch of the study of language dealing with the meaning of words and word equivalents. If treated synchronically Semasiology deals not with individual words, but with semantic structures typical of the language studied and its general semantic system. If treated diachronically Semasiology studies the changes in meaning which word undergo. Thus the main objects of Semasiology are distinctive features and types of lexical meaning (Polysemy), semantic structure of words, semantic development of words, semantic groupings in the vocabulary system (synonyms, antonyms).
Actually the definition of a word as a maximum free form holds good for notional words only. It’s only notional words that can stand alone yet have meaning and form a complete utterance. They can name different objects of reality, the qualities of these objects and actions, or the process in which they take part. In sentences they may function both as primary and secondary members. Functional words on the contrary are lexical units which are used only in combination with notional words or in reference to them. This group comprises auxiliary verbs, prepositions, conjunctions and articles. Primarily they express grammatical relationships between words. At the same time we cannot say that they have no lexical meaning of their own.
Lexical meaning of a word is the realization of the notion by means of a definite language system. Thus lexical meaning isn’t identical to notion but it may reflect human notions and in this sense may be considered as the form of their existence. It is very important to distinguish between lexical meaning of a word in speech and its semantic structure in language. A word may have more than one meaning. Polysemy exists only in language not in speech because in speech every word has only one meaning. All the meanings of a polysemantic word form its semantic structure. In other words it is defined as a structural set of interrelated elements. The semantic structure of a word is also a fact of language but not of speech. Every separate meaning of a word in its semantic structure is called a lexico-semantic variant. Lexico-semantic variant may be direct and figurative, abstract and concrete, primary and secondary, narrow and extended, stylistically neutral and stylistically colored, archaic and present-day. One and the same lexico-semantic variant may belong to different groups.
The problem of Polysemy is the problem of interrelation and interdependence of various meanings of the same polysemantic word. Polysemy may be viewed synchronically and diachronically. If viewed synchronically it is understood as coexistence of various meanings of the same word of a certain period of time and the arrangement of these meanings in the semantic structure of the word. If viewed diachronically it is a historical change in the semantic structure of the word resulting in one meaning being added to the ones already existing and in the rearrangement of these meanings in its semantic structure.
There are various types of semantic change. All types depend upon some comparison between the earlier and the new meaning of the given word. Semantic changes are usually classified as: enlargement or extension of meaning, narrowing, generalisation, transfer, irradiation and etc. Narrowing or specialisation – when the meaning of the word is narrowed or specialised. The word means fewer objects and has fewer referents (deer- a wild beast – deer - олень). Widening or generalisation – is the process when the word is applied to given variety of referents. In most cases it may be combined with the higher order of abstraction, then in the notion expressed by the earlier meaning. It is very typical of words to develop their concrete meaning to abstract ones (ridan- to ride). Transfer of meaning. A metaphor is a transfer of name based on association of similarity and thus is actually a hidden comparison. Metaphors may be based upon different types of similarity: 1) similarity of shape (head - cabbage); 2) analogy between duration of time and space (long); 3) transition of proper names into common ones (Don Juan). In the metonymy this transfer is based on association of contiguity. This transfer may be conditioned by special temporal, symbolic, functional and other connections (chair). (She is a fox – metaphor. She wears fox – metonymy). Ameliriation or elevation – is a semantic shift undergone by words due to their referents coming up the social scale (cwen – Quinn, kwem - woman). Pejoration or degradation – is connected with a lowering in social scale connected with the appearance of a derogatory and scornful emotional tone reflecting the disdain of the upper classes towards the lower one (cnafa – knave). Euphemism – is the substitution of words of mild or vague connotations for expressions rough, unpleasant or for some other reason unmentionable. Within the diachronic approach the phenomenon has been reputably classed by many linguists as taboo. With primitive people taboo is a prohibition meant as safeguard against supernatural. With people of developed culture euphemism is something different. It has nothing to do with taboo and is dictated by social usage, moral tact and etiquette. We must distinguish linguistic causes and extra linguistic causes. Linguistic changes are changes due to the constant interdependence of vocabulary units in language and speech: 1) such as differentiation between synonyms; 2) changes taking place in connection with ellipsis and with fixed contexts. Changes determined by the social nature of the language are called extra linguistic causes. They are observed in change of meaning resulting for: 1) the development of the notion expressed and the thing named; 2) by the appearances of new notions and things. These two extra linguistic causes are connected with the development of a human mind. The changes of notions and things named go hand in hand.
Homonyms proper are words identical in pronunciation and spelling but different in meaning. Words different in sound and meaning but asyndetically identical in spelling are called homographs (lead – вести, руководить, свинец). Words of the same sound but different in meaning and spelling are called homophones (buy - bye). Homonyms proper are classified into: full and partial (when only some forms of the words coincide in sound). Full homonyms are lexical when they are grammatically identical in all forms and differ only in lexical meaning (mass – масса, месса). Full homonyms are lexico-grammatical if their forms coincide but they belong to different parts of speech (after – после, с). Causes which bring about homonymy are: sound development which causes words of different origin to coincide and change of meaning. Both may be combined with a loss of endings and other morphological processes and changes of spelling (flour=1flower 2flour). The main problem of homonymy is the criteria distinguishing it from Polysemy.
1) According to the etymological criterion homonyms are words having different sources.
2) According to the criterion of spelling homophones are excluded from homonyms and only homographs remain.
3) When homonyms belong to different parts of speech they differ not only in their semantic structure but also in their syntactic function and consequently in distribution.
4) The criterion of context is not very reliable. Homonyms are used in different contexts because their meaning is different. But different lexico-semantic variants of a polysemantic word are also realized in different contexts.
5) The semantic criterion is the most important according to it homonyms have unrelated meanings. Whereas different meanings of a polysemantic words are related to each other.
4 Etymological peculiarities of the English word-stock.
The English word-stock is characterised by great heterogeneity. The inhabitants of the British Isles came into contacts with different people and these contacts were naturally reflected in the language. Political, social and other factors outside the language are usually called extra linguistic factors. Several waves of invasions, the introduction of Christianity in the early days, the colonial policy of the English empire in later days, account for great number of borrowed words in English. As a result the English word-stock comprises a great number of words borrowed from almost all the languages of the world. It is commonly believed that the total number of so called native words doesn’t exceed 30% of all the vocabulary units in modern English. 70% been borrowed from Latin, Greek, French and other languages. In linguistic literature the term native is applied to words which belong to the original English word-stock known from the earliest manuscripts of the old English period. These manuscripts were a few and the term is also applied to words whose origin cannot be traced to any other language. The term native is applied not only to the oldest Anglo-Saxon layer but also to words coined later by means of various processes working in English from native materials (ealne wsey - always). Borrowed words or loanwords are words the origin of which can be traced to some other language outside English irrespective of the period of adoption. The immediate source of borrowing is usually known and reflects actual economic or cultural contacts between people. It’s an important extra linguistic factor which helps to master the history of this or that nation (table- French immediate source- Latin tabula).
Ways of borrowing: through oral speech (by immediate contact between the peoples), through written speech (by indirect contacts from books). Oral borrowing took place chiefly in the early periods of history (through trade). These words are usually short and have undergone more changes. Written borrowings preserve their spelling (communiqué).
Words of native origin consist for the most part of very ancient elements: Indo-European, Germanic, English proper. The bulk of the old English word-stock has been preserved although some words have passed out of existence. Almost all Indo-European words belong to very important groups. Common Germanic words are even more numerous. They have parallels in German, Dutch, Icelandic and other Germanic languages (summer, winter, house, must). They are polysemantic, their combinatory power is great, they give rise to large word families, they are root, they are frequently used.
Latin borrowings. The old Germanic tribes of Anglo-Saxons and jutes got to know Romans on the continuity before these tribes invaded the British Isles. The earliest borrowings from Latin are wine, pondo, uncia. These tribes bred cattle they drunk milk but couldn’t make cheese or butter. They learned the art of cheese and butter making from Romans. These tribes knew only apples and other fruits were borrowed. With the introduction of the Christianity in the 7-th century many religious terms appeared in English (monk, bishop, candle). The second influx of Latin borrowings was observed during the renaissance (15-16). Numerous translations of ancient authors hold forth a number of bookish words (illustr-ate, a-ct, ele-ct, contrib-ute, constit-ute).
Scandinavian borrowings began to penetrate into the everyday English in the 9-th century (husbonda, hap; influenced to the meaning: dream-joy, draumr-dream; the combination of letters sk: sky, skin).
French borrowings. Some French words entered the English language even before the Norman invasion in 1066 (month, castle, tower). After the Norman invasion a lot of terms appeared in English among them terms denoting running of the state, court terms, military terms, terms of science and education (government, council, power, judge, jury, solder, admiral, war, battle, enemy, lesson, library, pupil, pen). Latter borrowings retain French spelling and pronunciation (bourgeois, routine, police, millionaire). These borrowings were so numerous that some English scholars began to state that English seized to be a Germanic language. Late French and Latin borrowings account for the appearance of long words of many syllables mostly literary words. They added to the wealth of synonyms. Brought with the new affixes and gave rise to etymological duplets a wealth of international words. Etymology of words may be reflected in sound and graphic form: French- (ж, дж, ч), Greek- k.
Assimilation. The term assimilation is used to denote a partial or total conformation to the phonetical, graphical and morphological standards of the receiving language and its semantic system. The degree of assimilation depends upon the length of period during which the word has been used in the receiving language. Upon its importance for communication purpose and its frequency. Oral borrowings due to personal contacts are assimilated more completely and more rapidly than literary borrowings. Completely assimilated words are found in all layers of older borrowings. They may belong to the first layer of the Latin borrowings to Scandinavian words. Completely assimilated French words are extremely numerous and frequent (table, chair, face, figure). They follow all morphological, phonetical and orthographical standards. Being very frequent and stylistically neutral they may occur as dominant words in synonymic groups. They take an active part in word formation. They are also indistinguishable. Phonetically many of them are included in the list of 500 most frequent words in English. Partially assimilated loanwords can be subdivided into subgroups:
a) loanwords not assimilated semantically because they denote objects and notions peculiar to the country from which they came (pilaf, sherbet);
b) not assimilated grammatically. These are nouns borrowed from Greek or Latin which keep their original plural forms;
c) not completely assimilated phonetically. The French words borrowed after 1650 afford good example: police, machine. Others alongside with peculiarity in stress contain sounds or combination of sounds that are not standard for the English language and do not occur in the native words;
d) not completely assimilated graphically are words from French in which the final consonant is not pronounced. Some may keep a diacritic mark.
Unassimilated loanwords (barbarisms) are words from other languages used by English people in speech and writing but not assimilated in any way and for which there are corresponded English equivalents (addio, ad libit um – at pleasure).
Translation-loans are words and expressions formed from the material already existing in the language but according to patterns borrowed from another language. It is practically a morpheme for morpheme translation (fatherland, masterpiece). The term semantic loan means the development of a new meaning under the influence of another language.
It is often the case that a word is borrowed by several languages, such words usually convey notions which are significant in the field of communication. So, many of them are of Greek and Latin origin. Most names of sciences are international. There are also numerous terms of arts in this group. It is quite natural that political terms frequently occur in this group. 20-th century scientific and technological advances brought a great number of new international words. The English language also contributed a considerable number of sport’s terms. Fruits and foodstuffs imported from exotic countries often transport their names too, and being simultaneously imported to many countries become international.
5 The English language and its variants.
English is the national language of the British Isles and the USA, Australia, New Zeland and most of the provinces in Canada. By tradition it remains an important means of communicating in many former British colonies. English is not spoken with uniformity by all who use it. There are two main variants of English. British English is spoken on the British Isles and is some of the outline regions of the British Empire. American English is spoken in USA. Canadian English occupies an intermediate position between two main variants of English being however somewhat closer to the American.
British Englishis characterized by the large diversity of its dialects, which testifies to the long existence of the English language. In considering these dialects it is necessary to distinguish between the local dialects of the British Isles which date back to the Anglo-Saxon times and which are in fact of tribal origin. And the outlying dialects of the British English which are of purely territorial origin. The grate diversity of local British dialects may be classified in to 6 main divisions: southern, western, eastern, midland, northern lowland (Scottish).
The recognized literary standard of British English is based on the London dialect which occupied an intermediate position between the southern and midland groups of dialects. In every dialect there are preserved a number of old words and forms which have become obsolete in standard English (brak - сломал).stand closer to the old English than to the corresponding modern English words. The same is true of pronunciation ([hu:s] house, [a:t] out). Similar traits are true of other dialects:
1) different words are used to express one and the same concept (bonny- pleasant, throng –busy, poppet –little one);
2) words may differ in their phonetic forms preserving at the same time their identity ([heim] home, [tua] two). In this case we speak about the dialectal variants of English words. However these differences do not brake up the English language which exists as a unity of its dialects. Dialects are cheerfully preserved in rural communities in the speech of elderly people. Their boundaries have become less stable than they used to be. The distinctive features are tending to disappear with the shifting of population due to migration of working class families in search of employment. And the growing influence of urban life over the countryside. Dialects are said to undergo rapid changes under the pressure of standard English taught at school and the speech habits cultivated by TV, radio and cinema.
The English of Australia and New Zeland differs somewhat from European English in pronunciation and vocabulary. Many words in Australian English have been borrowed from aborigines (lubra –native black woman, womera- копьё). There are also a number of common English words which have acquired a specific meaning in Australia (selection –a place of land, farm). There some differences in pronunciation ([pensul] pencil, [ai] – [o:]). What has been said of Australian English is true in general for south Africa and other outlying parts of the British Empire (assegai – дротис, quaggy –топкий, болотистый). Just like the local dialects of the British Isles the dialects of the outlying regions of the British Empire differ in particulous while the word-stock as well as their grammatical structure remains practically the same. However it is necessary to point out that there is an essential difference between the local dialects of the British Isled and the dialects of the outlying parts of the Empire such as Australia New Zeland and etc. whereas the local dialects of the first types have no future and are faced with inevitable obliteration by standard English, the dialects of the second type stand a chance of developing into individual variants of English similar to American English. That is if they develop literary standards of their own, different from the British literary standard.
For about 4 centuries the American English developed more or less independently of the British Empire and was influenced by the new surroundings. Americans have to coin new words for the unfamiliar flora and fauna. They borrowed words from other languages especially from American Indians and Spanish.
Peculiarities of American English. The forms of speech which are usually referred to as Americanisms are not in general confined to any particular state or district but are typical of American English as a whole. Americanisms include words and word combinations differing widely in character:
1) words that retain in America meaning non obsolete or dialectal in British English (fall –осень, apartment - flat);
2) new forms coined from old English elements (bull-frog – toad- жаба);
3) common English words which have changed their meaning in American English (armory-арсенал, литейная; dormitory –спальня, общежитие);
4) contributions from the American Indians, German, Irish, Canadian French, Spanish, Dutch and other languages which were first received in American English (canoe, moccasin, delicatessen, hamburger);
5) American phraseology has a number of peculiarities distinguishing it from the phraseology of the British English (to baulk up the wrong tree= to wake up the wrong passenger= to hunt the wrong hare - просчитаться).
American spelling differs in a way from English (-ise/-ize, -our/-or).
1.
Basic units of phonology.
Phonetics is concerned with the human noises by which the thought as actualized or given audible shape: the nature of these noises, their combinations, and their functions in relation to the meaning. Phonetics studies the sound system of the language, that is segmental phonemes, word stress, syllabic structure and intonation. It is primarily concerned with expression level, however, it is obliged to take the content level into consideration too, because only meaningful sound sequences are regarded as speech, and the science of phonetics, in principle at least, is concerned with such sounds produced by a human vocal apparatus as are carriers of organized information of language.
Phonology studies the linguistic function of consonant and vowel sounds, syllabic structure, word accent and prosodic features, such as pitch, stress and tempo.
Phonetics studies sounds as articulatory and acoustic units, phonology investigates sounds as units, which serve communicative purposes. The unit of phonetics is a speech sound, the unit of phonology is a phoneme.
The phoneme is a minimal abstract linguistic unit realized in speech in the form of speech sounds opposable to other phonemes of the same language to distinguish the meaning of morphemes and words.
The phoneme is a dialectical unity of its three aspects: 1) material, real and objective, 2) abstractional and generalized, and 3) functional.
The actual speech sounds pronounced by the speaker or reader are variants, or allophones, of phonemes.
Speech sounds which have one or more articulatory, and therefore acoustic, features in common and at the same time differ from each other in some degree are said to belong to one and the same phoneme, i.e. are variants of one and the same phoneme, if they, when pronounced one instead of the other, are incapable of differentiating words or the grammatical forms of one and the same word. For example, in the words /eıt/ (eight) and /eıtθ/ (eighth) the [t] consonants are similar, but at the same time they are slightly different: [t] in /eıt/(eight) is an alveolar consonant, whereas the [t] in /eıtθ/ (eighth) is a dental consonant.
That variant of the phoneme which is described as the most representative and free from the influence of the neighbouring phonemes is considered to be typical, or principal. The variants used in actual speech are called subsidiary. Subsidiary allophones can be positional and combinatory. Positional allophones are used in certain positions traditionally, according to the orthoepic norms of the language. For example, the English /l/ is realized in actual speech as a positional allophone: it is clear in the initial position, and dark in the terminal position, compare light, let and hill, mill. Combinatoryallophones appear in the process of speech and result from the influence of one phoneme upon another (assimilation and adaptation, or accommodation). For example, dental variants of the English forelingual phonemes /t, d, n, l/ which are due to the assimilating influence of the following dental consonants [θ, ð], as in /eıtθ/ (eighth), / ɔ:lˈðoʊ/ (although).
The third aspect of the phoneme, its functionality, is reflected in the definition of the phoneme as the smallest language unit capable of differentiating words and their grammatical forms. The distinctive function is the principle function of the phoneme as such. It is this function that justifies the existence of the term phoneme at all.
The ability of members or allophones of one phoneme to exist only in different phonetical contexts or positions is called complementary distribution. The total sum of all allophones of one phoneme forms the full distribution of the phoneme.
Modifications of consonants in connected speech.
The problem of defining the phonemic status of sounds in connected speech is too complicated because of the numerous modifications of sounds in speech. As a result of the intercourse between consonants and vowels and within each class there appear such processes of connected speech as assimilation, accommodation, vowel reduction and elision which is sometimes termed deletion.
The adaptive modification of a consonant by a neighbouring consonant in the speech chain is known as assimilation,e.g. the alveolar [t] followed by the interdental [θ] becomes dental: eighth, at three.
As far as the direction of assimilation (and accommodation) is concerned it can be: 1) progressive, when the first of the two sounds affected by assimilation makes the second sound similar to itself, e.g. in desks, pegs, the sounds [k] and [g] make the plural inflection [s] similar to the voiceless [k] in [desks] and to the voiced [g] in [pegs]; 2) regressive, when the second of the two sounds affected by assimilation makes the first sound similar to itself, e.g. in the combination at the the alveolar [t] becomes dental, assimilated to the interdental [ð] which follows it; 3) double, or reciprocal, when the two adjacent sounds influence each other, e.g. twice – [t] is rounded under the influence of [w] and [w] is partly devoiced under the influence of the voiceless [t].
The term accommodation is often used by linguists to denote the interchanges of “vowel + consonant type” or “consonant + vowel type”, for instance, some slight degree of nasalization of vowels preceded or followed by nasal sonorants: never, men; or labialization of consonants preceding the vowels [o] and [y] in Russian: больно, конь, думать, лучше.
One of the wide-spread sound changes is vowel reduction. Reduction is actually qualitative or quantitative weakening of vowels in unstressed positions, e.g. board – blackboard, man – postman.
Elision or complete loss of sounds, both vowels and consonants, is often observed in English. Elision is likely to be minimal in slow careful speech and maximal in rapid relaxed colloquial forms of speech.
Elision marks the following sounds: 1) loss of [h] in personal and possessive pronouns he, his, her, him and the forms of the auxiliary verbs have, has, had, e.g. What has he done? [‘wot əz i· ,dΛn]; 2) [l] tends to be lost when preceded by [ɔ:], e.g. always [ɔ:wız], all right [ɔ:’raıt]; 3) alveolar plosives are often elided in case the cluster is followed by another consonant, e.g. next day [‘neks ‘deı], just one [ʤΛs ‘wΛn]. Examples of historical elision are also known. They are initial consonants in write, know, knight, the medial consonant [t] in fasten, listen, whistle, castle.
We also occasionally find sounds being inserted. When a word which ends in a vowel is followed by another word beginning with a vowel, the so-called intrusive ‘r’ is sometimes pronounced between the vowels, e.g. Asia and Africa [eı∫ər ənd ‘æfrıkə], the idea of it [ði:aıdıər əv ıt]. The so-called linking ‘r’ is a common example of insertion, e.g. clearer, a teacher of English. The linking and intrusive [r] are both part of the same phonetic process of [r] insertion. When the word-final vowel is a diphthong which glides to [ı] such as [aı], [eı] the palatal sonorant [j] tends to be inserted, e.g. saying [‘seıjıŋ], trying [‘trajıŋ]. In case of the [u]-gliding diphthongs [∂u], [au] the bilabial sonorant [w] is sometimes inserted, e.g. going [‘gəuwıŋ], allowing [ə’lauwıŋ].
2.
The syllable.
Speech can be broken into minimal pronounceable units into which sounds show a tendency to cluster or group themselves. These smallest phonetic groups are generally given the name of syllables. Being the smallest pronounceable units, the syllables form language units of greater magnitude, that is morphemes, words and phrases. Each of these units is characterized by a certain syllabic structure. Consequently we might say that a meaningful language unit has two aspects: syllable formation and syllable division which form a dialectical unity.
It is necessary to mention that the syllable is a fairly complicated phenomenon. The severe complexity of the phenomenon gave rise to many theories.
Talking about the analysis of articulatory or motor aspect of the syllable we could start with the so-called expiratory, or chest pulse or pressure theory which was experimentally based by R.H.Stetson. This theory is based on the assumption that expiration in speech is a pulsating process and each syllable should correspond to a single expiration so that the number of the syllables in an utterance is determined by the number of expirations made in the production of the utterance. This theory was strongly criticized by Russian and foreign linguists. G.P.Torsuev, for example, writes that in a phrase a number of words and consequently syllables can be pronounced with a single expiration. This fact makes the validity of the pulse theory doubtful.
Another theory most often referred to is the theory of syllable put forward by O.Jespersen. It is generally called the sonority theory and is based on the concept of sonority. According to O.Jespersen each sound is characterized by a certain degree of sonority which is understood as acoustic property of a sound that determines its perceptibility. According to this sound property a ranking of speech sounds could be established. This starts with the open vowels as the most sonorous, continues through the close vowels, the sonorants, the voiced fricatives, the voiced plosives, the voiceless fricatives and ends with the voiceless plosives as the least sonorous. In any sequence the most sonorous sounds tend to form the centre of the syllable and the least sonorous – the marginal segments. Thus in the word plant, for example, the sequence passes from the minimally sonorous [p], through [l] with a greater degree of sonority to the maximum sonorous [α:]. It continues with decreasing sonority through [n] to a second minimum with [t].
There are syllables in many languages which contradict this principle. According to V.A.Vassilyev, the most serious drawback of this theory is that it fails to explain the actual mechanism of syllable formation and syllable division.
In Russian linguistics there has been adopted the theory of the syllable sketched in a very general way by L.V.Shcherba. It is called the theory of muscular tension. The point is that in most languages there is a syllabic phoneme in the centre of the syllable which is usually a vowel phoneme or, in some languages, a sonorant. The phoneme preceding or following the syllable peak are called marginal. The energy, that is the tension of articulation, increases within the range of prevocalic consonants and then decreases within the range of postvocalic consonants. Therefore the syllable can be defined as an arc of articulatory (or muscular) tension. The theory has been modified by V.A.Vassyliev. The point is that the syllable like any other pronounceable unit can be characterized by three physical parameters: pitch, intensity and length. Within the range of the syllable these parameters vary from minimum on the prevocalic consonants to maximum on the centre of the syllable, then there is another decrease within the postvocalic consonants. So the syllable can be treated as an arc of articulatory effort.