By Peter Matthews
This booklet is a concise old survey of structural linguistics, charting its improvement from the 1870s to the current day. Peter Matthews examines the beginnings of structuralism and analyzes the very important function performed in it via the research of sound structures and the issues of ways platforms switch. He discusses theories of the general constitution of a language, the "Chomskyan revolution" within the Fifties, and the structuralist theories of which means. The e-book contains exposition, specifically, of the contributions of Saussure, Bloomfield and Chomsky.
Read or Download A Short History of Structural Linguistics PDF
Similar language & grammar books
This booklet examines intimately the acceptability prestige of sentences within the following 5 English buildings, and elucidates the syntactic, semantic, and sensible necessities that the structures needs to fulfill to be able to be correctly used: There-Construction, (One’s) approach building, Cognate item building, Pseudo-Passive development, and Extraposition from topic NPs.
This paintings goals to supply facts to validate elements of Hirtle's idea (1982). except the assurance given to it within the grammars, quantity in English nouns has acquired quite little consciousness, particularly within the zone of theoretical issues. Guided via the rules of psychomechanics, Hirtle placed forth a reasonably complicated concept of quantity in English nouns.
The new prior has visible an expanding curiosity in iconicity particularly between linguists. This assortment places the interdisciplinary learn of iconic dimensions (comprising what has been termed ‘imagic iconicity’, in addition to ‘diagrammatic iconicity’, i. e. iconicity of a extra summary and not more semiotic variety) at the map, paying detailed awareness to using iconicity in literary texts.
Octavo, publisher's forums, dustwrapper, xxiii, 405pp. solid to excellent: dusty forums with mild put on, strong hinges/joints, fresh textual content, no markings, yet occasional marginal spots, ghost of a price-sticker to front pastedown; small tears and area put on to dustwrapper.
- Parameter Theory and Linguistic Change (Oxford Studies in Diachronic and Historical Linguistics)
- Microparametric Syntax and Dialect Variation (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory)
- Applying priming methods to L2 learning, teaching and research: Insights from Psycholinguistics (Language Learning & Language Teaching)
- Constraints on Displacement: A phase-based approach (Language Faculty and Beyond)
- Word Stress: Theoretical and Typological Issues
- On Language Diversity and Relationship from Bibliander to Adelung (Studies in the History of the Language Sciences)
Extra info for A Short History of Structural Linguistics
This is not concrete, but is formed by rules which, in a specific language, differentiate and order units of meaning. As elements of the language structure these are finite in number. In parallel there must likewise, in the structure of the language, be a ‘signifier’. This is in turn formed by the rules which, again in a specific language, differentiate and order units of sound. In individual acts of speech, signifiers are formed from an infinite variety of physical sounds. But, in the language structure, differences must again be finite (Trubetzkoy, 1939: 5–6).
But these are for Sweet distinguished by their length; thus, though the distinction exists, ‘it is not an independent one, being associated with quantity’. Therefore, in writing English, its representation ‘would be superfluous’. ). Sweet’s examples are from European languages, whose broad structure was familiar. But suppose that we are investigating one that is entirely unknown to us. We ‘hear’, for example, an l: to be precise, we hear a sound that we perceive as l in our own language. So, in our notes, we write ‘l’.
Bloomfield did not, in 1933, repeat his earlier definition of a language. But let us take ‘English’, for example, to be the totality of utterances possible ‘in English’. To describe ‘English’ is thus to describe these utterances, and the structure ‘of English’ will accordingly be the structure that, taken as a whole, they have. What exactly, then, is an ‘utterance’? For Bloomfield, it was an ‘act of speech’. This is again from 1926; in Language ‘utterance’ is not treated or indexed as a technical term.