Download European Linguistics in the 20th Century The Prague School

Linguistics in
Europe:
The Prague School
By Zakaria RMIDI
December 29, 2009
OUTLINE
1.
Introduction to The Prague School/
(Linguistic Circle of Prague)
2.
The Prague School’s Major
Contributions:
•
•
•
•
•
3.
Function in the Prague conception
The concept of opposition (phonological features)
The notion of neutralization: archiphoneme
The theory of Markedness
Recent contribution: Theme and Rheme
Conclusion:
•
The Prague School as a combination of structuralism
and functionalism.
1. Introduction
• The Prague School (Linguistic Circle of Prague) was
established in 1926 by Vilem Mathesius (1882-1946).
• Influenced by Saussurean School, the Prague School
emphasized the analysis of language as a system of
functionally related units.
• It was in 1911 that Mathesius published his first call for a non
historical approach to the study of language.
• Its contribution to phonological study is enormous.
• It includes influential linguists such as:
•
Prince Nikolay Sergeyevich
Trubetzkoy 1890-1938
• Roman Jakobson
1896-1982
For linguists of the Prague School:
• language must be studied as synchronic and as a dynamic
system.
• Language is systemic in that no element of it can be
satisfactorily analyzed or evaluated in isolation and
assessment can only be made if its relationship is
established with the coexisting elements in the same
language system.
• Language is functional in that it is a tool for performing a
number of essential functions or tasks for the community
using it.
• In 1928, the Prague Linguistic Circle group of
Jakobson, Mathesius, Trubetzkoy, and
Kartsevsky announced a radical departure
from the classical structural position of
Ferdinand de Saussure. They suggested that
their methods of studying the function of
speech sounds could be applied both
synchronically, to a language as it exists, and
diachronically, to a language as it changes.
2. The Prague School’s Major Contribution
 Function in the Prague conception:
• It was Karl Bühler who recognized three general
kinds of function fulfilled by language.
– The cognitive function.
– The expressive function.
– The conative function.
• The cognitive function:
• It refers to the employment of language in the transmission of
factual information.
• It is fulfilled characteristically by 3rd person non modal
utterances.
– e.g. John travelled yesterday.
• The expressive function:
• It refers to the indication of the mood or attitude of the
speaker ( or writer).
• Characteristically, it is fulfilled by 1st person utterances in
the subjunctive.
• e.g. I am happy to see you.
• The conative function:
• It refers to the use for influencing the person one is
addressing or for bringing about some particular effect.
• It is fulfilled by 2nd person utterances in the imperative.
• e.g. come here.
• The Prague School stresses the function of elements
within language, their contrast to one another and the
system formed by these elements. They developed
distinctive feature analysis, by which each sound is
regarded as composed of contrasting articulatory and
acoustic features, with sounds perceived as different
having at least one contrasting feature.
• Functionalists study phonic elements from the points
of view of the various functions they fulfill in a given
language.
 The concept of opposition (phonological
features):
A. Distinctive opposition:
–
–
–
The concept of opposition was first introduced by Trubetzkoy.
Speech sounds must be opposed to each other.
The opposition can be either distinctive or non distinctive.
• e.g. /pet/ and /bet/
 A distinctive opposition is between /p/ and /b/ in terms of
voicing.
 If we substitute one sound for the other the meaning will change.
 Therefore, the feature of voicing is considered to be
distinctive.
B. Non distinctive opposition:
– It is observed in the feature of aspiration.
– The aspiration can be seen sometimes in adding the sound
[h] when pronouncing some words.
– e.g. the phoneme /p/ in the word “pin” whether it is
aspirated [phin] or not [pin] the meaning doesn’t change.
– no distinctive opposition between the aspirated [ph] and the
non aspirated [p].
– there is only a phonetic manifestation of the same
phonological unit which is the phoneme /p/.
 Therefore, the feature of aspiration is considered to be non
distinctive.
The notion of neutralization:
Archiphoneme
• Phonemes that are contrastive in certain
environments may not be contrastive in all
environments. In the environments where they do
not contrast, the contrast is said to be neutralized.
• The neutralized distinction is known as an
archiphoneme.
• e.g. in English there are three nasal phonemes:
/m, n, ŋ/
– /sʌm/ sum
– /sʌn/ sun
– /sʌŋ/ sung
In this environment
these sounds are
contrastive.
→ The three nazal phonems are not neutralized.
• However, in other environment /m, n, ŋ/ are not
contrastive.
• e.g. /m, n, ŋ/ are not contrastive before plosives
such as /p, t, k/
– limp
– lint
– link
Only one of the three sounds
/m, n, ŋ/ appears before the
three plosives.
– only /m/ occurs before /p/
– only /n/ before /t/
– only /ŋ/ before /k/.
→ The three nazal sounds /m, n, ŋ/ are neutralized
before each of the plosives /p, t, k/.
→ the neutralized distinction is known as
archiphoneme.
→ the neutralization of /m, n, ŋ/ before /p, t, k/
could be notated in capital letter as |N|.
limp
lint
link
|lɪNp|
|lɪNt|
|lɪNk|
The Theory of Markedness:
– The notion of markedness was first developed in Prague
school phonology but was subsequently extended to
morphology and syntax, semantics...etc. A marked form is a
non-basic or less natural form and an unmarked form is a
basic or a default form.
 Markedness in Phonology:
 Markedness in Morphology:
 Markedness in Vocabulary:
 Markedness in Phonology:
• When two phonemes are distinguished by the
presence or absence of a single distinctive feature,
one of them is said to be marked and the other
unmarked for the feature in question.
• e.g. /b/ is marked and /p/ unmarked with respect to voicing.
 Markedness in Morphology:
• The regular English verb can be said to be marked
for past tense (by the suffixation of -ed) but to be
unmarked in the present.
• e.g. jumped (the marked form) versus jump (the
unmarked form).
 Markedness in Vocabulary:
•
In vocabulary the sense of markedness is more abstract, which
is independent of the presence or absence of an overt feature or
affix.
• For example:
• Lion is the unmarked choice in English.
• Lioness is marked.
• Brotherhood is unmarked.
• Sisterhood is marked.
 Recent contribution: Theme and Rheme.
- The distinction of the theme and rheme is the most valuable
contribution made by the post-world war II.
- The theme of a sentence is the part that refers to what is already
known or given in the context.
- The rheme of a sentence is the part that conveys new information.
- The theme is the point of departure of the message.
- the rheme is what the addresser wants to convey about the
message.
• A sentence contains a point of departure and a goal of
discourse. The point of departure, called the theme, is the
ground on which the speaker and the hearer meet.
• The goal of discourse is called the rheme. It presents the
very information that is to be imparted to the hearer.
• The theme tends to precede the rheme, regardless of
whether the theme or the rheme is the grammatical
subject.
• e.g.
• Sally
stands on the table.
Theme Rheme
• On the table stands Sally.
Theme
Rheme
3. Conclusion
• The general approach in the study of language for the Prague
school can be described as a combination of functionalism
(every component of a language, such as phoneme, morpheme,
word, sentence…etc exists to fulfill a particular function) and
structuralism (the context not just the components is what is
important). In addition, synchronic and diachronic approaches
are seen as interconnected and influencing each other. They
regard language as a system of subsystems, each of which has
its own problems but these are never isolated since they are
part of a larger whole. As such, a language is never in a state
of equilibrium, but rather has many deviations. It is these
deviations that allow the language to develop and function as a
living system.
Bibliography ‫ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ‬
• Malmkjær, Kirsten. 1995. The linguistics encyclopedia. 2nd edition.
London. Routledge.
• Rajimwale, Sharad. 2006. Handbook of Linguistic Terms. 1st edition. New
Delhi. Sarup & Sons.
• Lyons, John. 1981. Language and linguistics: an introduction. Cambridge.
Cambridge University Press.
• Vachek, Josef; Dubský, Josef; Dušková, Libuše. 2003. Dictionary of the
Prague School of Linguistics: Studies in Functional and Structural
Linguistics. Utrecht. John Benjamins Publishing Co.
• Sampson, Geoffrey. Schools of Linguistics. Stanford, Stanford University
Press
Online references ‫ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ‬
• Britannica Online Encyclopedia. “The Prague School: combination of
structuralism and functionalism”
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/342418/linguistics/35104/Com
bination-of-structuralism-and-functionalism#
• Hébert, Louis. “The Functions of Language”. Université du Québec à
Rimouski. http://www.signosemio.com/jakobson/a_fonctions.asp
Thank
you