* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download II) As for the morphological typology of languages, the relationship
Modern Greek grammar wikipedia , lookup
Yiddish grammar wikipedia , lookup
Old Irish grammar wikipedia , lookup
Lithuanian grammar wikipedia , lookup
Ojibwe grammar wikipedia , lookup
French grammar wikipedia , lookup
Old English grammar wikipedia , lookup
Sanskrit grammar wikipedia , lookup
Untranslatability wikipedia , lookup
Compound (linguistics) wikipedia , lookup
Old Norse morphology wikipedia , lookup
Pipil grammar wikipedia , lookup
Archaic Dutch declension wikipedia , lookup
Latvian declension wikipedia , lookup
Esperanto grammar wikipedia , lookup
Scottish Gaelic grammar wikipedia , lookup
Polish grammar wikipedia , lookup
Grammatical case wikipedia , lookup
Serbo-Croatian grammar wikipedia , lookup
Russian declension wikipedia , lookup
Malay grammar wikipedia , lookup
Contrasted Linguistics BTANN603SZM Töltéssy Zoltán Week 1 17th February, 2014 Typology of languages I) All of us study more languages. While memorising new words, we happen to find words similar to ones in another language. All of us visit different countries so we cannot avoid being influenced by the linguistic context. Once we can realise that words we unintentionally acquire resemble similar words in another language. Thus on the grounds of personal experience a parallel can be drawn between the two languages. E.g. Slovak dobre, Polish dobrze and Czech dobře have the same sense, usage and very similar phonetic forms. It can be concluded that these languages must belong to one group because these nations/peoples all live in Central Europe, their speech is very similar, people of different nationalities can even understand each other. It may be supposed that the ways in which languages differ from each other are not entirely random, but show various types of dependencies among those properties of languages which are not invariant differences statable in terms of the ‘type’. The construct of the ‘type’ is, as it were, interposed between the individual language in all its uniqueness and the unconditional or invariant features to be found in all languages (Greenberg 1974:54–5). Languages can be classified from very different aspects. The categorisation linguists have carried out so far is as below: 1. If languages are studied diachronically, their historical roots are explored. It is called genetic classification. Its field is historical linguistics. The main classes are. (a) natural languages and (b) artificial languages. 2. If languages are examined from a synchronic aspect, their typology is determined and described. Language typology is concerned with the ahistorical comparison of languages. (a) Morphological typology (based on morphological characteristics) (b) Morphosynthetic typology (based on semantic roles: agent, patient, instrument; semantic relations) (c) Syntactic typology (based on word order) (d) Pragmatic typology (based on given~new information division) II) As for the morphological typology of languages, the relationship between morphemes and words is observed. A morpheme is the smallest meaningful unit of grammar. A word is a lexical item which belongs to a lexical category having an identifiable meaning 1 Contrasted Linguistics BTANN603SZM Töltéssy Zoltán Week 1 and/or grammatical function and a fairly consistent phonological shape. Words are free morphemes, affixed are bound. In the early nineteenth century, Wilhelm von Humboldt classified languages into three types. The classification can be made up with a fourth group. 1) An ideal isolating language is one in which there is a one-to-one correspondence between words and morphemes, i. e. a word typically consists of a single morpheme, as in Vietnamese or Chinese. Words tend to be one syllable long and invariable in form. The function of words in a sentence is shown primarily by word order. Ni men to hua wo pu tu tung. (Chinese) you / plural / possessor / language / I / not / all / understand ‘I do not entirely understand your language.’ ‘Egyáltalán nem értem a nyelvedet.’ Tôi chỏi bóng rổ. (Vietnamese) (Agent+Event+Instrument denoted by four words) ‘I play basketball.’ (Agent+Event+Instrument denoted by three words) ‘Kosárlabdázom.’ (Agent+Event+Instrument denoted in a single word) It is a common feature of isolating languages that the lack of grammatical variability is compensated by intonation called tones within syllables. This tonic feature is displayed by the diacritics seen in the Vietnamese example. 2) An agglutinating or agglutinative language is one which attaches separable affixes (bound morphemes) to stems (free morphemes) so that there may be several morphemes in a word but the boundaries between them are always clear. Each morpheme has a reasonably invariant form. Turkish, Swahili and Hungarian belong to the class. Different bound morphemes (prefixes and suffixes) are attached to a free morpheme (a word/stem). leg | ki | dolg | o | z | o | tt | a | bb | an prefix +preverb +stem/+ linking+ derivational + link. + der. + link.+ compar- + case root vowel suffix V suff. V ative suffix suffix 3) A polysynthetic or incorporating language makes great use of affixation and often incorporates what English would represent with nouns and adverbs in the element that resembles a verb, e. g. Eskimo. A Hungarian example: Látok. — I can see. Látom. — I can see it. 2 Contrasted Linguistics BTANN603SZM Töltéssy Zoltán Week 1 Látlak. — I can see you. (The Hungarian verb form incorporates both the agent (subject) and the patient (object) of the event expressed by it. By contrast, the parts of the English sentence/clause name the elements of the event one by one.) Let’s compare the lexical items listed in the table below. Table 1 The agent and the patient are the same person. Hungarian fésül fésülködik borotvál borotválkozik mos mosakodik Polish czesać czesać się golić ogolić się myć myć się Slovak česať česať sa holiť holiť sa umyvať umyvať sa German kämmen sich kämmen rasieren sich rasieren waschen sich waschen Italian pettinare pettinarsi radere radersi lavare lavarsi Both the agent and patient are incorporated in the verb form expressing the event (visszaható ige). The patient is denoted by a reflexive pronoun. The patient is denoted by a reflexive pronoun. The patient is denoted by a reflexive pronoun. Both the agent and patient are incorporated in the verb form expressing the event. A: Mit csinálsz már annyi ideig a fürdiben? B: Borotválkozom. In German: 4 A: Was machst du so lange im Badezimmer? B: Ich rasiere mich. A flective/inflecting/flectional/fusional language is one in which morphemes are represented by affixes but in which it is difficult to assign morphemes precisely to the different parts of the affixes, e. g. Latin, German, Slavic languages. There are cases in the declension of nouns. While each affixe in agglutinative languages have a distinct grammatical function, these functions cannot be separated in suffixes of cases. E.g. although in the form chłopcu it can be claimed that two morphemes can be identified, i.e. a zero singular suffix and a –u dative suffix but in the case of chłopcom the suffix –om incorporates elements of both the plural and the dative because it is not a separate element expressing plurality that could be contrasted with the zero singular suffix. Table 2 Declension of nouns 3 Contrasted Linguistics BTANN603SZM Töltéssy Zoltán Week 1 Polish Singular Nominative Accusative Genitive Dative Instrumental Locative Vocative Plural Nominative Accusative Genitive Dative Instrumental Locative Vocative chłopiec chłopca chłopca chłopcu chłopcem chłopcu chłopcze! chłopcy chłopców chłopców chłopcom chłopcami chłopcach chłopcy! German indef. /def. (k)ein / der Knabe (k)einen / den Knaben (k)eines / des Knaben (k)einem / dem Knaben ------- Romanian indef. /def. un băiat / băiatul un băiat / băiatul unui băiat / băiatului unui băiat / băiatului ----băiete! die Knaben die Knaben den Knaben der Knaben ------- indef. /def. nişte băieţi / băieţii nişte băieţi / băieţii unor băieţi / băieţilor unor băieţi / băieţilor ----băieţilor! Suffixes mark the very different grammatical functions conspicuously: Puellam bellam amo. (Latin) — ‘I love the beautiful girl.’ Puell | am || feminine singular accusative bell | am || feminine singular accusative 4 am | o. first person singular present active indicative subject Contrasted Linguistics BTANN603SZM Töltéssy Zoltán Week 1 III) Very few languages fall clearly into one of the above categories. There are no pure cases. Theoretically speaking languages may locate themselves at any point on the scale from analytic to polysynthetic: 1) Analytic (word = morpheme) isolating languages agglutinative languages 2) Synthetic (word > morpheme) flective languages 3) Polysynthetic (word = clause) 5 incorporating languages Contrasted Linguistics BTANN603SZM Töltéssy Zoltán Week 1 IIII) How can English be classified as regards the system of morphology? There are not unambiguous examples of this kind of classification. ‘True’ instances turn out to be false. Not any one language will fall neatly into one type. Therefore English displays simultaneously various characteristics listed below: 1) It may show the characteristic features of an isolating language : Would you shut the door? It must have been found in the street the day when the tall boy met his friends from the school not far from the sea in Hull the town of great fêtes of new year’s nights. Long live the Queen! 2) Although there are very few prefixes and suffixes in English, the majority of them are rooted in foreign languages, derived word forms can very often be found in everyday texts. This feature is of an agglutinative language. Even words belonging to the core of the vocabulary can be derivational forms: unfriendliness friend friendly — A suffix is added to the root. An adjective is derived from a noun. friendly unfriendly — A prefix is added to the stem. Another adjective is derived from an adjective. unfriendly unfriendliness — A suffix is added to the stem. A noun is derived from an adjective. An exceptionally long English word reads below: antidisestablishmentauthoritarianism 6 Contrasted Linguistics BTANN603SZM Töltéssy Zoltán Week 1 3) The characteristic feature of a flective language is displayed in the declension of personal pronouns in English. Despite the fact that three cases can be distinguished in the declension of pronouns, the isolating nature of pronoun forms is claimed to be true. They cannot be inflected thus a consistent system of pronoun forms cannot be identified. Table 3 Declension of English personal pronouns I = the person who is speaking, 1st person you = the person who is being spoken to, 2nd person he/she/it = the person who is being spoken of, 3rd person Number Person Singular st Gender Case nd 1 --- 2 --- I you me rd st Plural 2nd --- 3rd --- 3 Feminine Neuter 1 --- he she it we you they you him her it us you them my your his her its our your their mine yours his hers its ours yours theirs my own your own his own her own its own our own your own their own myself yourself himself herself itself our selves yourselves themselves Masculine Common case Nominative case Subjective case Oblique case Accusative case Objective case Genitive case (Possessive pronouns) Attributive (Premodifier) Substantive (Substitution) Own-form Reflexive (/Emphatic) pronouns 7 Contrasted Linguistics BTANN603SZM Töltéssy Zoltán Week 1 4) English can evince the nature of an incorporating language as can be seen in the table below: Table 4 Verbs showing reflexitivity Hungarian fésül fésülködik borotvál borotválkozik mos mosakodik Polish czesać czesać się golić ogolić się myć myć się Slovak česať česať sa holiť holiť sa umyvať umyvať sa German Kämmen sich kämmen Rasieren sich rasieren Waschen sich waschen Italian pettinare pettinarsi radere radersi lavare lavarsi English comb comb shave shave wash wash Both the agent and patient are incorporated in the verb form expressing the event. E.g.: A: What is she doing? B: Combing in the bedroom. 8 Contrasted Linguistics BTANN603SZM Töltéssy Zoltán Week 1 Sources: Eifring, Halvor and Theil, Rolf. (2005) Linguistics for Students of Asian and African Languages. <http://www.uio.no/studier/emner/hf/ikos/EXFAC03-AAS/h05/larestoff/linguistics/index.html> Released: 2005 Retrieved: 11-01-2010 Greenberg, J.H. (1974) Language typology : a historical and analytic overview. The Hague : Mouton, 1974. 82 p. ; 23 cm (Janua linguarum. Series minor, ISSN --- ; no. 184), Lyons, John. (1992) Introduction to theoretical linguistics. Reprinted. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1992, ©1968. x, 519 p. ; 21.4 cm ISBN 0-521-09510-7 Malmkjær, Kirsten (ed.). (1995) The linguistics encyclopedia. North American consultant editor James M. Anderson. Paperback edition. London ; New York : Routledge, 1995. xx, 575 p. ISBN 0-415-12566-9 McArthur, Tom. (1992) The Oxford companion to the English language. Oxford ; New York : Oxford University Press, 1992. xxvii, 1184 p. ISBN 0-19-214183-x McArthur, Tom (ed.). (1998) Concise Oxford companion to the English language. Assistant editor Roshan McArthur. Oxford ; New York : Oxford University Press, 1998. xx, 692 p. : ill. ; 19.7 cm (Oxford paperback reference, ISSN ---) ISBN 0-19-280061-2 Törkenczy, Miklós. (2002) Practical Hungarian grammar. Budapest : Corvina, 2002. 184 p. ISBN 963-13-131-9 9