Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Grammatical Cases ¿WHO IS CHARLES J. FILLMORE?
Charles J. Fillmore (born 1929) is an American linguist, and an Emeritus Professor of Linguistics at the University of California, Berkeley.
Dr. Fillmore has been extremely influential in the areas of syntax and lexical semantics. He was a proponent of Noam Chomsky's theory of generative grammar during its earliest transformational grammar phase. He was one of the founders of cognitive linguistics, and developed the theories of Case Grammar (Fillmore 1968), and Frame Semantics (1976).
He was one of the first linguists to introduce a representation of linguistic knowledge that blurred this strong distinction between syntactic and semantic knowledge of a language. He introduced what was termed case structure grammar and this representation subsequently had considerable influence on psychologists as well as computational linguists.
Grammar Case is a system of linguistic analysis, focusing on the link between the valence, or number of subjects, objects, etc., of a verb and the grammatical context it requires.
The system was created by the American linguist Charles J. Fillmore in (1968), in the context of Transformational Grammar. This theory analyzes the surface syntactic structure of sentences by studying the combination of deep cases (i.e. semantic roles) -- Agent, Object, Benefactor, Location or Instrument -- which are required by a specific verb.
For instance, the verb "give" in English requires an Agent (A) and Object (O), and a Beneficiary (B); e.g. "Jones (A) gave money (O) to the school (B).
According to Fillmore, each verb selects a certain number of deep cases which form its case frame. Thus, a case frame describes important aspects of semantic valency, of verbs, adjectives and nouns.
Case frames are subject to certain constraints, such as that a deep case can occur only once per sentence.
Some of the cases are obligatory and others are optional. Obligatory cases may not be deleted, at the risk of producing ungrammatical sentences.
A fundamental hypothesis of case grammar is that grammatical functions, such as subject or object, are determined by the deep, semantic valence of the verb, which finds its syntactic correlate in such grammatical categories as Subject and Object, and in grammatical cases such as Nominative, Accusative, etc.
Fillmore puts forwards the following hierarchy for a universal subject selection rule:
Agent < Instrumental < Objective
That means that if the case frame of a verb contains an agent, this one is realized as the subject of an active sentence.
Case grammar is an attempt to establish a semantic grammar. (Most grammars by linguists take syntax as the starting-point).
Using a modified form of valency theory Fillmore suggests that the verb establishes a set of cases in a sentence: these are like slots, which usually need not all be filled. For example, consider these sentences:
1. Mary opened the door with a key.
2. Mary opened the door.
3. A key opened the door.
4. The door opened.
In (1) the semantic cases are: Mary - agent; the door - object; a key - instrument.
In (2) they are as in (1), except that there is no instrument.
In (3) the cases are: a key - instrument; the door - object.
In (4) the only case is the door - object.
In other words, to open requires at the minimum that the object be specified in a sentence.
Dr. Fillmore has been extremely influential in the areas of syntax and lexical semantics. He was a proponent of Noam Chomsky's theory of generative grammar during its earliest transformational grammar phase. He was one of the founders of cognitive linguistics, and developed the theories of Case Grammar (Fillmore 1968), and Frame Semantics (1976).
He was one of the first linguists to introduce a representation of linguistic knowledge that blurred this strong distinction between syntactic and semantic knowledge of a language. He introduced what was termed case structure grammar and this representation subsequently had considerable influence on psychologists as well as computational linguists.
Grammar Case is a system of linguistic analysis, focusing on the link between the valence, or number of subjects, objects, etc., of a verb and the grammatical context it requires.
The system was created by the American linguist Charles J. Fillmore in (1968), in the context of Transformational Grammar. This theory analyzes the surface syntactic structure of sentences by studying the combination of deep cases (i.e. semantic roles) -- Agent, Object, Benefactor, Location or Instrument -- which are required by a specific verb.
For instance, the verb "give" in English requires an Agent (A) and Object (O), and a Beneficiary (B); e.g. "Jones (A) gave money (O) to the school (B).
According to Fillmore, each verb selects a certain number of deep cases which form its case frame. Thus, a case frame describes important aspects of semantic valency, of verbs, adjectives and nouns.
Case frames are subject to certain constraints, such as that a deep case can occur only once per sentence.
Some of the cases are obligatory and others are optional. Obligatory cases may not be deleted, at the risk of producing ungrammatical sentences.
A fundamental hypothesis of case grammar is that grammatical functions, such as subject or object, are determined by the deep, semantic valence of the verb, which finds its syntactic correlate in such grammatical categories as Subject and Object, and in grammatical cases such as Nominative, Accusative, etc.
Fillmore puts forwards the following hierarchy for a universal subject selection rule:
Agent < Instrumental < Objective
That means that if the case frame of a verb contains an agent, this one is realized as the subject of an active sentence.
Case grammar is an attempt to establish a semantic grammar. (Most grammars by linguists take syntax as the starting-point).
Using a modified form of valency theory Fillmore suggests that the verb establishes a set of cases in a sentence: these are like slots, which usually need not all be filled. For example, consider these sentences:
1. Mary opened the door with a key.
2. Mary opened the door.
3. A key opened the door.
4. The door opened.
In (1) the semantic cases are: Mary - agent; the door - object; a key - instrument.
In (2) they are as in (1), except that there is no instrument.
In (3) the cases are: a key - instrument; the door - object.
In (4) the only case is the door - object.
In other words, to open requires at the minimum that the object be specified in a sentence.
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
The Copenhagen school
The Copenhagen School, officially the "Linguistic Circle of Copenhagen (Cercle Linguistique de Copenhague)", was a group of scholars dedicated to the study of structural linguistics founded by Louis Hjelmslev and Viggo Brøndal. In the mid twentieth century the Copenhagen school was one of the most important centres of linguistic structuralism together with the Geneva School and thePrague School.
The Copenhagen School of Linguistics evolved around Louis Hjelmslev and his developing theory of language, glossematics. Together with Viggo Brødal he founded the Cercle Linguistique de Copenhague a group of linguists based on the model of the Prague Linguistic Circle.
In the mid twentieth century the Copenhagen school was one of the most important centres of linguistic structuralism together with the Geneva School and thePrague School.
Within the circle the ideas of Brøndal and Hjelmslev were not always compatible and Hjelmslevs more formalist approach attracted a group of followers, principal among them Hans Jørgen
Uldall and Eli Fischer Jørgensen, who would strive to apply Hjelmslevs abstract ideas of the
nature of language to analyses of actual linguistic data.
In the mid twentieth century the Copenhagen school was one of the most importantcentres of linguistic structuralism together with the Geneva School and thePragueSchool.
In 1989 a group of members of the Copenhagen Linguistic circle inspired by the advances in
cognitive linguistics and the functionalist theories of Simon C. Dik founded the School of Danish
Functional Grammar aiming to combine the ideas of Hjelmslev and Brøndal, and other important
Danish linguists such as Paul Diderichsen and Otto Jespersen with modern functional linguistics.
Among the prominent members of this new generation of the Copenhagen School of Linguistics
were Peter Harder, Elisabeth Engberg Petersen, Frans Gregersen and Michael Fortescue, and
the basic work of the school is "Danish Functional Grammar."
Louis Hjelmslev (October 3, 1899, Copenhagen – May 30, 1965, Copenhagen) was a Danish
linguist whose ideas formed the basis of the Copenhagen School of linguistics. Born into an
academic family, Hjelmslev studied comparative linguistics in Copenhagen, Prague and Paris
(with a.o.Antoine Meillet and Joseph Vendryes).
žHis most well-known book, Omkring sprogteoriens grundlæggelse, or in English
translation, Prolegomena to a Theory of Language, first published in 1943, critiques the
then-prevailing methodologies in linguistics as being descriptive, even anecdotal, and not
systematising.
In 1931, he founded the Cercle Linguistique de Copenhague. Together with Hans Jørgen Uldall
he developed a structural theory of language which he called glossematics, which developed the
semiotic theory of Ferdinand de Saussure. Glossematics as a theory of language is
characterized by a high degree of formalism, it is interested only in describing the formal
characteristics of language, and a high degree of logical rigour.
The Linguistic Circle of Copenhagen
The Linguistic Circle of Copenhagen was founded by Hjelmslev and a group of Danish
colleagues on September 24, 1931. Their main inspiration was the Prague Linguistic Circle,
which had been founded in 1926. It was, in the first place, a forum for discussion of theoretical
and methodological problems in linguistics. Initially, their interest lay mainly in developing an
alternative concept of the phoneme, but it later developed into a complete theory which was
coined glossematics, and was notably influenced by structuralism. Membership of the group
grew rapidly and a significant list of publications resulted, including an irregular series of larger
works under the name Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Copenhague.
The Copenhagen School of Linguistics evolved around Louis Hjelmslev and his developing theory of language, glossematics. Together with Viggo Brødal he founded the Cercle Linguistique de Copenhague a group of linguists based on the model of the Prague Linguistic Circle.
In the mid twentieth century the Copenhagen school was one of the most important centres of linguistic structuralism together with the Geneva School and thePrague School.
Within the circle the ideas of Brøndal and Hjelmslev were not always compatible and Hjelmslevs more formalist approach attracted a group of followers, principal among them Hans Jørgen
Uldall and Eli Fischer Jørgensen, who would strive to apply Hjelmslevs abstract ideas of the
nature of language to analyses of actual linguistic data.
In the mid twentieth century the Copenhagen school was one of the most importantcentres of linguistic structuralism together with the Geneva School and thePragueSchool.
In 1989 a group of members of the Copenhagen Linguistic circle inspired by the advances in
cognitive linguistics and the functionalist theories of Simon C. Dik founded the School of Danish
Functional Grammar aiming to combine the ideas of Hjelmslev and Brøndal, and other important
Danish linguists such as Paul Diderichsen and Otto Jespersen with modern functional linguistics.
Among the prominent members of this new generation of the Copenhagen School of Linguistics
were Peter Harder, Elisabeth Engberg Petersen, Frans Gregersen and Michael Fortescue, and
the basic work of the school is "Danish Functional Grammar."
Louis Hjelmslev (October 3, 1899, Copenhagen – May 30, 1965, Copenhagen) was a Danish
linguist whose ideas formed the basis of the Copenhagen School of linguistics. Born into an
academic family, Hjelmslev studied comparative linguistics in Copenhagen, Prague and Paris
(with a.o.Antoine Meillet and Joseph Vendryes).
žHis most well-known book, Omkring sprogteoriens grundlæggelse, or in English
translation, Prolegomena to a Theory of Language, first published in 1943, critiques the
then-prevailing methodologies in linguistics as being descriptive, even anecdotal, and not
systematising.
In 1931, he founded the Cercle Linguistique de Copenhague. Together with Hans Jørgen Uldall
he developed a structural theory of language which he called glossematics, which developed the
semiotic theory of Ferdinand de Saussure. Glossematics as a theory of language is
characterized by a high degree of formalism, it is interested only in describing the formal
characteristics of language, and a high degree of logical rigour.
The Linguistic Circle of Copenhagen
The Linguistic Circle of Copenhagen was founded by Hjelmslev and a group of Danish
colleagues on September 24, 1931. Their main inspiration was the Prague Linguistic Circle,
which had been founded in 1926. It was, in the first place, a forum for discussion of theoretical
and methodological problems in linguistics. Initially, their interest lay mainly in developing an
alternative concept of the phoneme, but it later developed into a complete theory which was
coined glossematics, and was notably influenced by structuralism. Membership of the group
grew rapidly and a significant list of publications resulted, including an irregular series of larger
works under the name Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Copenhague.
chomsky
The formalism of context-free grammars was developed in the mid-1950s by Noam Chomsky, and also their classification as a special type of formal grammar (which he called phrase-structure grammars).
A context-free grammar provides a simple and mathematically precise mechanism for describing the methods by which phrases in some natural language are built from smaller blocks, capturing the "block structure" of sentences in a natural way. Its simplicity makes the formalism amenable to rigorous mathematical study. Important features of natural language syntax such as agreement and reference are not part of the context-free grammar, but the basic recursive structure of sentences, the way in which clauses nest inside other clauses, and the way in which lists of adjectives and adverbs are swallowed by nouns and verbs, is described exactly.
In Chomsky's generative grammar framework, the syntax of natural language was described by a context-free rules combined with transformation rules. In later work (e.g. Chomsky 1981), the idea of formulating a grammar consisting of explicit rewrite rules was abandoned. In other generative frameworks, e.g. Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar (Gazdar et al. 1985), context-free grammars were taken to be the mechanism for the entire syntax, eliminating transformations.
—A formal grammar (sometimes simply called a grammar) is a set of formation rules for strings in a formal language. The rules describe how to form strings from the language's alphabet that are valid according to the language's syntax. A grammar does not describe the meaning of the strings or what can be done with them in whatever context—only their form.
—Formal language theory, the discipline which studies formal grammars and languages, is a branch of applied mathematics. Its applications are found in theoretical computer science, theoretical linguistics, formal semantics, mathematical logic, and other areas.
—A formal grammar is a set of rules for rewriting strings, along with a "start symbol" from which rewriting must start. Therefore, a grammar is usually thought of as a language generator. However, it can also sometimes be used as the basis for a "recognizer"—a function in computing that determines whether a given string belongs to the language or is grammatically incorrect. To describe such recognizers, formal language theory uses separate formalisms, known as automata theory. One of the interesting results of automata theory is that it is not possible to design a recognizer for certain formal languages.
—Parsing is the process of recognizing an utterance (a string in natural languages) by breaking it down to a set of symbols and analyzing each one against the grammar of the language. Most languages have the meanings of their utterances structured according to their syntax—a practice known as compositional semantics . As a result, the first step to describing the meaning of an utterance in language is to break it down part by part and look at its analyzed form (known as its parse tree in computer science, and as its deep structure in generative grammar).
—The linguistic formalism derived from Chomsky can be characterized by a focus on innate
universal grammar (UG), and a disregard for the role of stimuli. According to this position,
language use is only relevant in triggering the innate structures. With regard to the tradition,
Chomsky’s position can be characterized as a continuation of essential principles of
structuralist theory from Sauss...ure (Givón 2001). This is particularly the case for Saussure’s
principles of abstractness and arbitrariness. In Chomsky’s formalism, though, the principles of
abstractness of language structure and the arbitrariness between linguistic structure and
meaning are preserved – and the degree of abstractness is increased.
—It is probably not controversial to pair off linguistic formalism from Chomsky and
cognitive psychology. With regard to the tradition, cognitive psychology cannot be
characterized as continuous in the sense outlined for linguistic formalism. Rather, cognitive.
psychology emerged as an antithesis to behavioural psychology (Chomsky, 1959). These
different conditions in history may shed light on the rather simplistic adoption of linguistic
theory into the cognitive approach, and may probably also explain why the assumptions of
linguistic theory are rarely questioned in cognitive approaches to dyslexia. The formalist
propositions regarding innateness and stimuli do fit extensively with the cognitive opposition
to behaviouristic psychology.
FUNCTIONAL LINGUISTICS: THE PRAGUE SCHOOL
Prague school, school of linguistic thought and analysis established in Prague in the 1920s by Vilém Mathesius
It included among its most prominent members the Russian linguist Nikolay Trubetskoy and the Russian-born American linguist Roman Jakobson; the school was most active during the 1920s and ’30s.
Linguists of the Prague school stress the function of elements within language, the contrast of language elements to one another, and the total pattern or system formed by these contrasts, and they have distinguished themselves in the study of sound systems. They developed distinctive-feature analysis of sounds; by this analysis, each distinctive sound ...
Prince Nikolai Sergeyevich Trubetzkoy (Russian; Moscow, April 16, 1890 - Vienna, June 25, 1938) was a Russian linguist and historian whose teachings formed a nucleus of the Prague School of structural linguistics. He is widely considered to be the founder of morphophonology.
Trubetzkoy, like other members of the Prague School, was well aware that the functions of speech are not limited to the expression of an explicit message.
In analysing the function of speech Trubetzkoy followed his Viennese philosopher collage Karl Bühler, who distinguish between the representation of function(that stating facts), the expressive function (that of expressing temporary or permanent characteristics of the speaker), and the conative function (that of influencing the hearer
Trubetzkoy shows that Bühler´s analysis can be applied in phonology.
A phonetic opposition which fulfils the representation function will normally be a phonetic contrast; but distinctions between the allophones of a given phoneme, where the choice is not determinated by the phonemic environment, often play an expressive or conative role.
A manifestation of Prague attitude that language is a tool which has a job to do the fact that members of that School were much preocupied with the aesthetic, literary aspects of language use.
In Chinese, morphemes and syllables are co-terminous, but modern Mandarin has so few phonologically distinct syllables that on averages each syllable is ambiguous as between three or four etymologically distinct morphemes in current use.
Roman Osipovich Jakobson (October 11, 1896, Moscow – July 18, 1982, Boston) is a scholar of Russian origin; he took his first degree, in Oriental languages, at Moscow University
As a pioneer of the structural analysis of language, which became the dominant trend of twentieth-century linguistics, Jakobson was among the most influential linguists of the century.
Influenced by the work of Ferdinand de Saussure, Jakobson developed, with Nikolai Trubetzkoy, techniques for the analysis of sound systems in languages, inaugurating the discipline of phonology.
He went on to apply the same techniques of analysis to syntax and morphology, and controversially proposed that they be extended to semantics (the study of meaning in language).
Jakobson is a phonological Tory. For him, only a small group of phonetic parameters are intrinsically fit to play a linguistically distinctive role.
The system of parameters forms a fixed hierarchy of precedence. The details of the invariant system are not determined by mundane considerations such as vocal-tract anatomy or the need for easily perceived distinctions, but by much “deeper” principles having to do with innate features of the human mind.
Preliminaries to Speech Analysis: List a set of twelve pairs of terms which label the alternative values of what are claimed to be the twelve “distinctive” features’ of all human speech.
Bloomfield: Voicing (say) was distinctive in English and non-distinctive in Mundarin.
Jakobson: “Distinctive” means “able to be used distinctively in a human language”.
The theory is the cetain physically quite distinct articulatory parameters are “psychologically equivalent”, as one might say. For example; “FLAT” : represents interchangeably each of the following articulatory parameter-value: lip-rounding, pharyngalization and retroflex articulation.
Among consonants, the distinction between labial and alveolar stops appears before the distinction between alveolars and velars
All children go through a stage at which, for example, CAT is pronounced as something like TAT.
Stops are acquired before fricatives.
In order to substantiate his belief that the phonological universals he discusses are determined by “deep” psychological principles rather than by relatiely uninteresting facts about oral anatomy or the like, Jakobson devotes considerable space to discussion of synaesthetic effects
Cases where perceptions in one sensory mode (in this case, speech-sound) correlate with perceptions in another mode (Jakobson considers mainly associations of sounds with colours).
One of the claims that is important for Jakobson is that synaesthetic subjects tend to perceive vowels as coloured but consonants as colourless – black, white or grey.
Linguists of the Prague school stress the function of elements within language, the contrast of language elements to one another, and the total pattern or system formed by these contrasts, and they have distinguished themselves in the study of sound systems. They developed distinctive-feature analysis of sounds; by this analysis, each distinctive sound ...
Trubetzkoy
Prince Nikolai Sergeyevich Trubetzkoy (Russian; Moscow, April 16, 1890 - Vienna, June 25, 1938) was a Russian linguist and historian whose teachings formed a nucleus of the Prague School of structural linguistics. He is widely considered to be the founder of morphophonology.
Trubetzkoy, like other members of the Prague School, was well aware that the functions of speech are not limited to the expression of an explicit message.
In analysing the function of speech Trubetzkoy followed his Viennese philosopher collage Karl Bühler, who distinguish between the representation of function(that stating facts), the expressive function (that of expressing temporary or permanent characteristics of the speaker), and the conative function (that of influencing the hearer
Trubetzkoy shows that Bühler´s analysis can be applied in phonology.
A phonetic opposition which fulfils the representation function will normally be a phonetic contrast; but distinctions between the allophones of a given phoneme, where the choice is not determinated by the phonemic environment, often play an expressive or conative role.
A manifestation of Prague attitude that language is a tool which has a job to do the fact that members of that School were much preocupied with the aesthetic, literary aspects of language use.
In Chinese, morphemes and syllables are co-terminous, but modern Mandarin has so few phonologically distinct syllables that on averages each syllable is ambiguous as between three or four etymologically distinct morphemes in current use.
Roman Jakobson
Roman Osipovich Jakobson (October 11, 1896, Moscow – July 18, 1982, Boston) is a scholar of Russian origin; he took his first degree, in Oriental languages, at Moscow University
As a pioneer of the structural analysis of language, which became the dominant trend of twentieth-century linguistics, Jakobson was among the most influential linguists of the century.
Influenced by the work of Ferdinand de Saussure, Jakobson developed, with Nikolai Trubetzkoy, techniques for the analysis of sound systems in languages, inaugurating the discipline of phonology.
He went on to apply the same techniques of analysis to syntax and morphology, and controversially proposed that they be extended to semantics (the study of meaning in language).
Jakobson is a phonological Tory. For him, only a small group of phonetic parameters are intrinsically fit to play a linguistically distinctive role.
The system of parameters forms a fixed hierarchy of precedence. The details of the invariant system are not determined by mundane considerations such as vocal-tract anatomy or the need for easily perceived distinctions, but by much “deeper” principles having to do with innate features of the human mind.
Preliminaries to Speech Analysis: List a set of twelve pairs of terms which label the alternative values of what are claimed to be the twelve “distinctive” features’ of all human speech.
Distinctive
Bloomfield: Voicing (say) was distinctive in English and non-distinctive in Mundarin.
Jakobson: “Distinctive” means “able to be used distinctively in a human language”.
The theory is the cetain physically quite distinct articulatory parameters are “psychologically equivalent”, as one might say. For example; “FLAT” : represents interchangeably each of the following articulatory parameter-value: lip-rounding, pharyngalization and retroflex articulation.
CHILDREN’S ACQUISITION OF LANGUAGE
Among consonants, the distinction between labial and alveolar stops appears before the distinction between alveolars and velars
All children go through a stage at which, for example, CAT is pronounced as something like TAT.
Stops are acquired before fricatives.
In order to substantiate his belief that the phonological universals he discusses are determined by “deep” psychological principles rather than by relatiely uninteresting facts about oral anatomy or the like, Jakobson devotes considerable space to discussion of synaesthetic effects
Cases where perceptions in one sensory mode (in this case, speech-sound) correlate with perceptions in another mode (Jakobson considers mainly associations of sounds with colours).
One of the claims that is important for Jakobson is that synaesthetic subjects tend to perceive vowels as coloured but consonants as colourless – black, white or grey.
Readiness to acknowledge that a given language might include a range of alternative “systems”, “registers” or “styles”; where American Descriptivists rended to insist on treating a language as a single unitary system.
Consider, as a very crude example of the problem, the treatment of non-naturalized foreign loan-words.
Nasal vowels are not usual in English, so a Descriptivist would find it difficult to justify the omission of /Ʒ/ from a phonemic analysis of English
ROMAN JAKOBSON
Functions of Language
Grammatical Forms
Descriptive Structuralism is frequently referred to as Binarist. This orientation is its strength and weakness. The strength resides in elementary calculability, an impersonal, objective, exhausting of possibilities: given any A, B pair, however defined, the presence or absence of a value for each, however defined, can be calculated. With values of + or - :
A: + - + -
B: + + - -
Its weakness is identical with that of Plato’s technique of the Division: in the conceptual world, we rarely know enough about any pair to establish exclusive values beyond the most generic; in the empirical world, factual relations are just as complex.
Stable States
Synchronic linguistic description proceeds on the counter-factual assumption of constant and stable forms paired with meanings within an unchanging speech-community, some forms are never observable in isolated utterance. This justifies the distinction of free and bound forms, when both are established as linguistic forms. Constructed linguistic forms have at least two, so A’ linguistic form which bears a partial phonetic-semantic resemblance to some other linguistic form is a complex form and the common parts are constituents or components, while A’ linguistic form which bears no partial phonetic-semantic resemblance to any other form is a simple form or morpheme .
Basic and Modified Meaning
The meaning of a morpheme is a sememe (the meaning of a morpheme), constant, definite, discrete from all other sememes: the linguist can only analyze the signals, not the signalled, so that is why linguistics must start from the phonetics, not the semantics, of a language. The total stocks of morphemes is a language’s lexicon.
A simple feature of grammatical arrangement is a taxeme; meaningful units of grammatical form are tagnemes and their meanings are called episememes. Tagmemes can consist of several taxemes. Statements of its lexical and grammatical forms completely describe an utterance.
Sentence Types
Order can imply (but is not exhausted by) position, which can be functional; a form alone is in absolute position, with another, in included position. Sentences relate through order, position, and, within a sentence, are distinguished by modulation, pratactic arrangement, and features of selection.
Languages show full and minor sentence types distinguished by taxemes of selection.
Words
Since the word is a free form, freedom of occurrence largely determines our attitude towards parts of a language. But even with our typographic conventions, we are inconsistent in distinguishing words and phrases, and in other languages, it is difficult to keep them apart.
Syntax
Grammar deals with constructions under morphology and syntax, syntax takes as its construction those in which noone of the immediate constituents is a bound form. The free forms (words and phrases) of a language appear in larger free forms (phrases), arranged by taxemes of modulation, phonetic modification, selection and order.
Forms resultant from Free Forms
Free forms combining can be said to produce a resultant phrase, of which the form-class of one member may be determinative of the phrase’s grammatical behavior: in such a case, the construction is called endocentric, otherwise, it is exocentric when the phrase or construction does not follow the grammatical behavior of either constituent.
Order
Is most important in languages, grammatically and/or stylistically
Parts of Speech
Most languages show a smaller number, and in such languages, syntactic form classes tend to appear in phrases rather than words.
Leonard Bloomfield
It starts with the term scientific…
Language interests everyone.
a) Outside speakers b) Inside speakers
c) Speech relating the two
Sapir concluded that a minimum for human language is formation and expression of concrete and relational ideas .
Language can be seen as the totality of mutually effective substitute responses.
Mentalism differs from materialism by distinguishing langue from parole. It opposes wholes or parts to material and formal principles; mind to brain; understanding to experiencing.
Mentalism is dualistic because it recognizes mental and material.
Behaviorism is monistic: It admits only a single kind of data (material) .
When one speaks a sentence, the form it takes is due to the utterances which the speaker, since infancy has heard from other members of his community.
1.It is dualistic because it considers both mental and material kinds of data
2.It is monoistic because only considers a single kind of data(material)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)