1. Problems of the system and structure of the language in modern linguistics
linguistics.

2. Signs of the system and the specifics of the language system, its open
toasty and dynamism.

3. Language as a system of systems. Language system in synchrony and di
achronia.

4. Theories of the unity of the structure of the language.

5. Tiers of the language structure.

I. In modern science, it is impossible to name such a branch of knowledge, the development of which would not be associated with the introduction of the concepts of system and structure into it. The study of the system and structural properties of the object of knowledge has become one of the central tasks of most theoretical disciplines, passing as their | improvement from the description of the observed facts, their Knacks "fiction to the knowledge of the deep properties of the object and the principles of its organization, expressed primarily in systemic and structural relations.

Thanks to a systematic approach to the analysis of various linguistic units and categories, noticeable changes have occurred in linguistics: 1) its connections with other sciences have expanded and multiplied; 2) you- "New areas of research were shared; 3) the technique of linguistic analysis was improved, and our knowledge was replenished; important information about the features of language units and the relationships between them; 4) > The various aspects of speech activity and functioning language were examined from new positions.

As a result, the concepts of system and structure became the fundamental theoretical concepts of linguistics in general.

At the same time, the thesis about the systemic nature of the language and the importance of studying its structure, which is now accepted almost unconditionally by linguists of different schools and trends, is far from being revealed in specific studies in the same way, and the real content that is embedded in the corresponding terms is not identical.

The formation and evolution of a systematic approach to language took place against the backdrop of a general turn in science of the 20th century from "atomistic" to "holistic" views (i.e., to the recognition of the primacy of the whole over parts and the universal connection of phenomena). In the science of the 21st century, these trends continue.

N.M. Karamzin was one of the first to speak about the language system (using this term, but without giving it a linguistic interpretation) in connection with the publication of the six-volume "Dictionary of the Russian Academy" (St. Petersburg, 1784-1794) - the first proper academic dictionary of the Russian language, numbering 43257 words: "The Complete Dictionary published by the Academy, which belongs to those phenomena with which Russia surprises attentive foreigners; our, no doubt, happy fate in all respects is some kind of extraordinary speed: we ripen not for centuries, but for decades Italy, France, England, Germany were already famous for many great writers, without yet having a dictionary: we had church, spiritual books, had poets, writers, but only one primordially classical (Lomonosov) and presented a system of language (emphasis mine - L. And .), which can be compared with the famous creations of the Academy of Florence and Paris". It should be noted that N. M. Karamzin expressed the position on the language system 80 years before F. de Saussure, whose name is associated with the development of this category.

In the teachings of F. de Saussure, the system of language is considered as a system of signs. Its internal structure is studied by internal linguistics, the external functioning of the language system, i.e., the function

oning in connection with extrastructural reality is studied by external linguistics.

An important role in the development of the doctrine of the language system was played by the ideas of I. A. Baudouin de Courtenay on the role of relations in language, on the distinction between statics and dynamics, the external and internal history of the language, and his allocation of the most common units of the language system - phonemes, morphemes, graphemes, syntagms .

Ideas about the systemic organization of language have been developed in several areas of structural linguistics.

In studies of the late 20th - early 21st century, the non-rigidity, asymmetry of the language system, and the unequal degree of systemicity of its various sections are emphasized (V. V. Vinogradov, V. G. Gak, V. N. Yartseva). The differences between the language and other semiotic systems are revealed (Vyach. Vs. Ivanov, T. V. Bulygina). The "antinomies of development" of the language system (M. V. Panov), the interaction of internal and external factors of its evolution (E. D. Polivanov, V. M. Zhirmunsky, B. A. Serebrennikov), the regularities of the functioning of the language system in society (G V. Stepanov, A. D. Schweitzer, B. A. Uspensky), the interaction of the language system with brain activity (L. S. Vygotsky, N. I. Zhinkin, Vyach. Vs. Ivanov).

2. In modern linguistics, in principle, the following definition of a language system has been established: (from the Greek systema - a whole made up of parts) - a set of linguistic elements of any natural language that are in relationships and connections with each other, which forms a certain unity and integrity. Each component of the language system does not exist in isolation, but only in opposition to other components of the system (T. V. Bulygina, S. A. Krylov, LES, p. 452).

Structure is the structure of the system.

A. S. Melnichuk wrote: “It should be recognized as the most appropriate and corresponding to the word usage established in the language, such a distinction between the terms system and structure, in which the system is understood as a set of interrelated and

interdependent elements that form a more complex unity, considered from the side of the elements - its parts, and under structure- the composition and internal organization of a single whole, considered from the side of its integrity ... So, for example, the subject is both an element of the syntactic structure of the sentence, and a component systems sentence members... The structure (system) of language in the language itself is not amenable to direct observation... The objectively existing structure and system of language are found... in the endless repetition of their various aspects and elements, each time appearing in other concrete manifestations.

Language is an open dynamic system: it is in a state of constant development, enriching itself with new elements and getting rid of obsolete ones.

From the communicative means in animals, the language system differs in the ability to express logical forms of thinking.

From artificial formalized sign systems, the language system differs in the spontaneity of its emergence and development, as well as the possibility of expressing deictic, expressive and motivating information.

Being open to a certain extent, the language system interacts with the environment of human cognitive activity (the noosphere), which makes it necessary to study its external relations.

In modern systematics, the following features of systems are accepted: 1) the relative indivisibility of the elements of the system; 2) the hierarchy of the system; 3) the structure of the system.

Let's look at these signs.

1. Relative indivisibility of system elements s. The elements of the system are indivisible in terms of given systems. Its elements can be further subdivided, but for other tasks, and, therefore, constitute other systems. Thus, the system of syntax consists of a system of complex and a system of simple sentences. Any sentence consists of words, i.e., we can talk about a vocabulary system, words break up into morphe-168

this is already a word-formation system, etc. But both the lek-j system and the word-formation system are already other systems, not syntak-yukaya. In other words, the elements are potentially de-a, but in this system we are dealing with indivisible elemental

". The sign of the potential divisibility of elements is closely related to the ydacial divisibility of systems, i.e., with the hierarchical construction t systems.

2. Hierar system integrity. This sign implies the possibility of dividing this system into a number of other systems (subsist- <л), on the one hand, or the entry of a given system as an element into another, wider system. For example, the system % syntax is divided into subsystems of a complex sentence, a southern sentence, a phrase. In turn, the subsystem of a complex sentence breaks up into subsystems of the union fo and non-union sentence, the subsystem of the allied sentence breaks up into subsystems with a coordinating and subordinating connection, etc.

Thus, any system is a complex object with a hierarchical structure.

3. Structural system. Structure is a way of organizing elements, a scheme of connections or relationships between them. Therefore, just as a system does not exist without interconnected elements, it is also impossible without the structural organization of its elements.

Language systems can take different configurations: a field, a hierarchy of levels, etc.

The language system is opposed to an ordered set. -If everything in the system is interconnected and interdependent, then the change of parts in an ordered set does not change the matter. Language systems have already been discussed. An example of an ordered set is a student audience: tables, chairs, standing in a certain order and oriented to the pulpit, behind which the board hangs. You can add or reduce the number of tables or chairs, you can do without a blackboard, but the audience remains

carried by the audience. If necessary, you can convert it to a miniature class.

Following E. Coseriu, in the language they distinguish system and norm. The system shows open and closed ways for the development of the language, i.e. the system is not only what we observe in the language, but also what is in it Maybe to be understood by members of the same language community. In the process of realizing the possibilities inherent in the language system, the language develops.

So, for example, the system of Russian and Ukrainian consonantism is characterized by the opposition of sounds according to deafness - sonority. It is known that the sound [v] was sonorous. In the 10th century, Greekisms began to actively penetrate into the Russian language, along with the sound [f], but the language at first consistently rejected this sound (the words sail, Opana-nas, etc.), this trend is observed in vernacular and dialects (arithmetic, little twig, etc.). The features of articulation [v] and [f] made it possible to form a correlative pair in terms of voicedness - deafness, although [v] in the phonetic series behaves like a sonorant sound, combined with both voiceless and voiced consonants (beast - check), on the contrary, next to deaf consonants [in] can be assimilated [f] tornik.

There is nothing in speech that is not in the possibilities of language. L. V. Shcher-ba rightly noted: "Everything truly individual, not arising from the language system, not inherent in it potentially, not finding a response and even understanding, irrevocably perishes." Let's compare the occasionalisms: "And strawberries of super-watermelon size lie on the ground" (E. Yevtushenko) and "euy" (lily) by M. Kruchenykh.

3. Thus, in view of the foregoing, it can be argued that any unit of language is included in the system. In modern systems research, two types of systems are distinguished - homogeneous and heterogeneous-homogeneous systems consist of homogeneous elements, their structure is determined by the opposition of elements to each other and the order in the chain. Homogeneous systems include systems of vowels, consonants, etc.

heterogeneous systems are those that consist of heterogeneous elements, they are characterized by "multi-storey". In heterogeneous systems, there is a breakdown of the system into subsystems of homogeneous elements interacting with each other, as well as with elements of other subsystems. Above, we considered the syntax system. Language as a whole is a heterogeneous system.

So, for example, vocabulary and word formation are both connected and correlated in many different directions. The formation of new words is necessarily based on existing words, the mechanism of word formation cannot work without such support. At the same time, this mechanism, while working, gives new words, replenishes and changes vocabulary. For example, from the word hand - mitten, get engaged, sleeve, sleeve, etc.

The concept of consistency is gradual, i.e., it allows for a different degree of rigidity in the organization of the system. In well-organized (rigidly structured) systems (for example, in phonology, as opposed to vocabulary), a significant change in one element entails changes at other points in the system or even an imbalance in the system as a whole. For example, the system of vowels in opposition to deaf and voiced:

["] [D] M, which allowed to enter into her deaf

; ; borrowed sound [f].

The subsystems of the language develop at different speeds (the fastest is vocabulary as the least rigidly organized and the slowest is phonetics). Therefore, both in the whole language system and in its individual subsystems, a center and a periphery are distinguished.

Being an element of the system and a component of the structure, any linguistic unit is included in two types of general relations in the language - paradigmatic and syntagmatic.

Syntagmatics- a sequence of units of the same level (phonemes, morphemes, words, etc.) in speech.

paradigmatics- this is a grouping of units of the same level into classes based on the opposition of units to each other according to their differential characteristics.

Syntagmatics (horizontally)

south into the mountains into the forest

for a tour, etc.

Abstract on the topic:

"Language. Origin of language. Classification of languages"

Introduction

2. Origins of language

3. Classification of languages

Conclusion

Bibliography

INTRODUCTION

Language is a multifaceted phenomenon. To understand how it works, it is necessary to consider it in different aspects. It is necessary to evaluate the elements that it includes, how these elements interact with each other and how this interaction changes depending on the social conditions of the society using this language. It is also necessary to consider what changes occur in the language in the process of its historical development.

This work analyzes what a language is, considers its origin and classification.

1. LANGUAGE

Before you understand what a language is, you need to define its main functions. Primarily language is a means of expressing human thought, a means of communication.From this follow the main functions of the language - communicative and thought-forming.These functions determine the essence of the language, its main purpose.

Communication, however, in our world exists not only between people. There is also communication between animals, and in the modern world we can talk about communication between man and machine. How do these types of communication differ from each other?

Animal communication is primarily associated with instincts and occurs only if it is necessary to transmit signals (danger, readiness to reproduce offspring, protection of territory, etc.).

Human communication is an order of magnitude higher. Language communicationimplies not only the instinctive transmission of information (expressed mainly non-verbally - facial expressions, gestures), but also the exchange of thoughts. Such an exchange can be expressed both through the transmission of sounds (orally) and without (writing, the language of the deaf and dumb). It is also worth noting the languages ​​whose alphabets are adapted for transmission by certain means (Morse code, maritime flag).

Language is a system, in which the unity of meaning and sound (gesture, sign, movement) is essential. It is defined and, in isolation from speech, lends itself to study. Dead languages ​​(Latin, Hebrew) can serve as an example of this - we can quite master them, despite the fact that there are no groups of people in the world who use these languages ​​for communication. This also includes artificially created languages ​​(Esperanto, universal).

According to Yu. S. Maslov, language as a language system can be divided into two parts:

· inventory (system of language units);

· grammar (a system of rules for the interaction between units of a language).

Such a system serves as the basis for speech activity, expressed in the acts of speaking and understanding, which, in turn, form texts. The system is cyclic, and texts can change the inventory and grammar of the language: the appearance/disappearance of words in the language, changes in grammatical structures, etc. (see fig. 1).

Picture 1

2. ORIGINS OF LANGUAGE

Human speech as a means of communication and expression of human thought could arise only under certain conditions.

"None of the living beings, with the exception of man, possesses speech. This fact alone indicates that the most important condition for the emergence of speech is the presence of a certain physiological substrate or a certain physiological organization, most clearly embodied in man."

The question of the origin of the language was already raised by the ancient Greeks, and the controversy continues to this day.

There are several theories about the origin of the language:

1. Theory of onomatopoeia.Its meaning lies in the fact that a person, not having a language, but hearing the sounds of nature and imitating them, gradually developed a system thanks to which he was able to communicate.

It is absolutely impossible to deny onomatopoeia - in every language there are sounds of nature (oink-oink - pig, koo-ku - cuckoo, etc.), but it cannot be argued that a person could, on the basis of such elementary sounds, develop a complex language system and name objects that do not make sounds (stone, wood).

2. Theory of interjections.Developed by the Epicureans and supported by J.-J. Rousseau in the 18th century Proponents of this theory believe that the language originated interjections - sounds accompanying the emotions of primitive man (oh - groan, hee-hee - giggle, etc.).

There are even fewer such words in languages ​​than onomatopoeic ones, and besides, there are many words in the language that are not associated with emotions (proper names of objects - table, chair, spoon, etc.). For the sake of these words, a language should have arisen to a greater extent, rather than expressing the emotional state of a person, which is quite easily conveyed by facial expressions and gestures.

3. The theory of labor cries.Developed in the writings of the vulgar materialists and includes the proposition that language arose from the cries produced at the moment of labor. These cries did not carry any semantic load, they did not express anything and were used only as a means of rhythmizing labor. Without carrying any function (communicative, nominative, expressive), it is difficult to speak of these cries as the ancestors of the language in general. The theory should not be confused with the theory of Engels, who believes that communication arose in labor relations to facilitate work.

4. Labor theory.Developed by Engels. Primitive society, for survival, had to unite in groups. It was the group nature of labor that forced them to establish communication with their relatives. Language was the most convenient means for this. The more difficult the work became, respectively, the more difficult the language became. This theory is well traced in modern society, where technologies are rapidly developing (neologisms appear, obsolete words acquire a new meaning).

5. The theory of the social contract.Developed by Adam Smith and says that language arose at the time of the emergence of society, as a means necessary to agree.

The theory takes place in the later stages of language development. An example of this is the agreement of the world community on international designations of terms. In the ancient world, rather, it was first necessary to have a language and only then to negotiate.

5. Divine theory.Available for all peoples and says that the language was created by God, gods or divine sages.

At the moment, scientists do not have a common opinion about the origin of the language, however, it can be assumed that the language arose under the influence of several processes, which makes several theories true.

6. Anthropological theory.This theory explains the appearance of language by the physiological evolution of man. The change in the structure of the larynx and vocal cords, according to supporters of this theory, led to the appearance of speech. It is impossible to say that any of these theories are absolutely correct. However, it can be assumed that the appearance of a language is immediately associated with a combination of factors, including several theories at once. For example, one can imagine that a person has evolved in the process of labor and the emergence of a language is not only a consequence of a change in his vocal cords, but also the need for group communication.

3. CLASSIFICATION OF LANGUAGES

There is a huge variety of language classifications - they can be divided into groups according to the number of speakers, the presence of cases in the language, the number of vowels or consonants.

Perhaps the most common linguists distinguish the following classifications:

1. Genetic or genealogical classification.It is based on the concept of linguistic kinship, i.e. common origin of languages.

One of the main difficulties that arises in the classification of languages ​​is connected with the naming of the various degrees of classification. Usually, languages ​​are divided into families and groups. Intermediate associations are also possible: between a family and a group - a branch, or subfamily, between a group and individual languages ​​- a subgroup. Several families linked by genetic kinship can be combined into a higher-level linguistic set - a superfamily (in other words, a macrofamily, or phylum). Finally, various dialects are distinguished within the language, and dialects are distinguished within the dialect (see Table 1).

Table 1.

In linguisticsTerm for classification levelExample of combining languagessuperfamily (macrofamily, phyla)Nostratic languagesfamilyIndo-European languagessubfamily (branch)Balto-Slavic languagesgroupSlavic languagessubgroupEast Slavic languageslanguageRussian languagedialect (dialect)South Russian dialects

2. Typological classification of languages.It is based on the similarities and differences of languages, regardless of their historical development or territorial proximity. This classification is based primarily on grammar, uniting languages ​​according to the common structure.

Most famous morphological classification of languages, according to which languages ​​are divided into types according to the following criteria:

) isolating, or amorphous (Chinese, most languages ​​of Southeast Asia). They are characterized by the absence of inflection, the grammatical significance of word order, a weak opposition of significant and functional words;

) agglutinative, or agglutinating (Turkic and Bantu languages). They are characterized by a developed system of word-formation and inflectional affixation, a single type of declension and conjugation, grammatical unambiguity of affixes, and the absence of significant alternations;

) incorporating, or polysynthetic (Chukotka-Kamchatka, many languages ​​​​of the Indians of North America). They are characterized by the possibility of including other members of the sentence (most often a direct object) into the verb-predicate, sometimes with an accompanying morphonological change in the stems (the term "polysynthetic languages" more often denotes languages ​​in which the verb can agree simultaneously with several members of the sentence);

) inflectional languages ​​(Slavic, Baltic). They are characterized by the polyfunctionality of grammatical morphemes, the presence of fusion, phonetically unconditioned root changes, a large number of phonetically and semantically unmotivated types of declension and conjugation.

Many languages ​​occupy an intermediate position on the scale of morphological classification, combining features of different types; for example, the languages ​​of Oceania can be characterized as amorphous-agglutinative.

3. Areal classification of languages.Based on a territorial basis (East Slavic languages, Carpathian languages, etc.).

Such a classification can be applied both independently ((for example, the Carpathian area of ​​the Hungarian-Slavic dialects), and within the genealogical classification (for example, the Polissya area, covering Belarusian-Ukrainian dialects).

Classification applies to dialects of the same language and is the basis of linguistic geography.

Classifications of languages ​​can intersect and complement each other. Thus, for example, genealogical classification, lacking other features, can divide languages ​​with the help of their typological and areal classification. This happens when a language, according to the genealogical classification, is conditionally assigned to one or another group due to insufficient knowledge of one or another language.

CONCLUSION

Thus, language is a system that serves as the basis for verbal communication and is inherent in all living beings only to humans. He, as a system lends itself to research, classification.

The origin of the language is the subject of centuries-old controversy among scientists. There are several main theories of the origin of the language: onomatopoeia, interjections, labor cries, social contract, anthropological, divine.

One can only assume that initially a person learned to imitate the sounds of nature and express his emotions with sounds, and only then, when the need arose for more extended group communication, began to create a language.

Language classification is also a rather controversial issue. There are many principles by which languages ​​can be divided into groups. Linguists distinguish three main classifications: genealogical, typological and areal. These classifications can intersect and interact with each other, mix up.

All this suggests that language is a very complex phenomenon and requires long and thorough research. It should be understood that each language is a unique phenomenon and can be evaluated by science from different angles. Only due to its versatility, it can fully fulfill the thought-forming function, and therefore most accurately carry out the communicative function between people.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

language onomatopoeia areal genetic

1. Maslov, Yu. S. Introduction to linguistics [Text]: textbook / Yu. S. Maslov. - 2nd edition; revised and additional - M.; Higher School, 1987. - 272 p.

General Linguistics: Forms of Existence, Functions, History of Language / Ed. B. A. Serebrennikova. - M.: Nauka, 1970. - 597 p.

Dyachok, M. T., Shapoval, V. V. Genealogical classification of languages ​​/ M. T. Dyachok, V. V. Shapoval. - Novosibirsk, 2002. - 32 p.

Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary / Ch. ed. V. N. Yartseva. - M.; Soviet Encyclopedia, 1990.

Reformatsky A. A. Introduction to linguistics / A. A. Reformatsky; under. ed. V. A. Vinogradova. - M.: Aspect Press, 1996. - 536 p.

Benveniste, E. Classification of languages ​​/ E. Benveniste // New in linguistics. Issue. III. - M., 1963. - S. 36-55.

Tutoring

Need help learning a topic?

Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Submit an application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Structural nature of language

A critical analysis of the theory of the sign nature of language makes it possible to draw some conclusions about the actual nature of language. The main positive conclusion is that language, in contrast to any genuine system of signs, is in a state of continuous development. Again and again we have to return to the famous position of W. Humboldt that "language is not a product of activity (ergon), but activity (energeia)". However, now this thesis is filled, of course, with a different content.

The system of signs (or, as they say, the semiotic system) is incapable of development by its very nature. Its changes are changes in some set of units. You can arbitrarily include a number of new signs in it, replace some of them, or even exclude them, but all these manipulations cannot be called development. And, of course, changes of this kind are not subject to any laws precisely because they are arbitrary.

Another thing is language. The form of its existence is development, and this development is subject to certain laws. The development of the language is determined by its functions - to serve as a means of communication and an instrument of thinking. Since the needs of communication and thinking are in constant change and development, language is in constant change and development. Thus, the language does not develop spontaneously, its development is stimulated by the development of society, but the forms of language development are largely determined by those specific elements that make up the language, and by the relationships that develop within the language between these specific and real elements. Thus, we come to such extremely important concepts for linguistics as the concepts of system and structure.

The introduction of the concept of a system as applied to language is usually associated with the name of F. de Saussure (although the undoubted priority in this regard belongs to N.A. Baudouin de Courtenay). F. de Saussure called language a system of signs expressing ideas. This general definition is then subjected to additional clarifications and details. Some of them are of particular importance for the issue under consideration. “Language is a system,” writes F. de Saussure, “all parts of which can and should be considered in their synchronic connection.” F. de Saussure repeats this idea in different ways throughout his book. He speaks of an "axis of simultaneity" (as opposed to an "axis of succession"), "static linguistics", a synchronous "slice" or horizontal plane of language where "every interference of time is excluded", etc. All this gives the concept of a system of language qualities that cannot be overlooked when it comes to the nature of language and attempts are made to define it through the concept of a system.

Interdependence of language elements , on which the definition of language as a system is based, now, apparently, should be considered a generally recognized fact. At the same time, system relations are not something external to the individual components of the system, but are included in these elements themselves, forming their qualitative characteristics. Not infrequently, the difference in systemic relations constitutes the only basis for distinguishing the elements themselves. An excellent example of this is the developed by A.I. Smirnitsky, the theory of conversion in English. The morphological unformedness of the English word has repeatedly given rise to its actual removal beyond the limits of classification by parts of speech. So, love "to love" and love "love" were considered as one and the same word, which acquires the meaning of one or another part of the word, depending on the context. Objecting to such an interpretation, A.I. Smirnitsky wrote: “... Love - a noun is not just love, but there is a unity of the forms love, love "s, Loves, loves" (cf .: Love "s labor lost; a cloud of Loves); the last three forms are homonymous forms: they sound the same, but their grammatical meanings differ radically and, in addition, there are words in which the same differences find sound expression (cf .: woman "s, child" s - women, children - - women "s, children" s, etc.). In the same way, love - the verb is not limited to the form of love, but there is a unity of a certain number of forms [cf .: (to) love, loves, (he) loved, loved ( by him), loving, etc.]. Therefore, love is a noun and love is a verb, taken not in their individual forms, in which they are usually given in the dictionary, and in general when considered not in isolation, but in the totality of their forms , in which their change is manifested according to the laws of the grammatical structure of the English language, since they come at the disposal of grammar, differ from each other ha not only in meaning, not only in their functions, but also externally, in the sound of their forms. At the same time, the meanings of the forms of the noun and the forms of the verb, even if their sound coincides, for the most part turn out to be sharply different ... Thus, love - a noun and love - a verb as a whole are represented by completely different systems of forms that characterize them as different words ". With this approach, the morphological design of the word is carried out through the paradigm, i.e., on the basis of the entire set of systemic relations of the word, which allow you to establish different categories of words or transfer them from one category to another (conversion). “Conversion,” wrote A.I. Smirnitsky, "there is a kind of word formation (word production) in which only the paradigm of the word itself serves as a word-formation tool."

Such a well-known grammatical concept as a zero morpheme (form, inflection, affix), introduced into linguistics by F.F. Fortunatov and Baudouin de Courtenay before the publication of the "Course of General Linguistics" by F. de Saussure. After all, it is the absence of any ending in the word cows that determines the form of the genus in it. pad. pl. h. in opposition to the presence of the corresponding case endings in the declension paradigm of this word (cow, cow, cow, cow, etc.).

The position on the systemic nature of the language finds its application in modern linguistics in relation to all its aspects, but to the greatest extent to phonetic elements.

Pointing out that the phonemes of any language cannot be considered in isolation, outside of its entire phonological system, and even more so, it is impossible to compare the isolated phonemes of one language with the isolated phonemes of another language, despite their apparent similarity, G. Gleason writes: “What, in fact, does the statement mean that there is a phoneme (b) in both English and Loma, Luganda, and Kiowa? Almost nothing unless it can be proven that (b) all four of these languages ​​are in some respect the same. But, as we have already seen, a phoneme can only be defined in relation to a given speech form. Each of the languages ​​has its own system of phonemes and its own system of phoneme oppositions. It so happened (for reasons of a partially non-linguistic order) that the sign (b) was chosen to denote the same sound in each of these systems. This coincidence is the only link between these four languages.<56>kami, and thus the comparison above is linguistically meaningless. English (b) is a voiced labial plosive, the only such phoneme in this language. In Loma (b) is one of four voiced labial plosives that differ from each other in some other additional feature. In Luganda (b) there are two allophones: a voiced labial plosive, and a voiced fricative, which is as common as the first. (b) in Kiowa, it is used to denote a voiced labial fricative, since there is no voiced plosive indicated by this conventional sign. Our assertion that English, Loma, Luganda, and Kiowa are similar because they have the phoneme (b) will be tantamount to asserting that this hat, this dress, and this pair of shoes are the same size, since they are all designated by a single number.

language sign system

Conclusionse

General linguistics studies the language in action as an organic whole, in all its relationships with a person, society, culture, revealing the main patterns of the origin of the language, its development and functioning. Therefore, the appeal of general linguistics to other areas of knowledge is inevitable.

List of used literature

1. Azhej K. The speaking man: The contribution of linguistics to the humanities / Per. from fr. B.P. Naumov. M. URSS, 2003. S. 16-66.

2. Alefirenko I.F. Theory of language. Introduction to General Linguistics: Proc. allowance for students philol. specialist. Volgograd: Change, 1998. S. 3-11.

3. Budagov R.A. What the history of the science of language teaches us // Philological Sciences. 1986. No. 3. S. 13-25.

Featured on Allbest

Similar Documents

The concept of a linguistic sign and a sign system. The sign character of human language. Linguistic development of the essence of sign representation of natural language. Principles and provisions of Saussure's sign theory. The most typical language definitions.

abstract, added 06/10/2010


Philosophical foundations of Humboldt's linguistic concept. Definition of the essence of the language. The doctrine of the internal form of language. The problem of the correlation of language and thinking. The doctrine of the origin and development of language. Morphological classification of languages. Antinomies of language.

abstract, added 03/31/2008


Language as a sign system, the union of elements that are in relationships and connections that form a unity. Units, levels and sections of the language; the question of the functions of language in connection with the problem of its origin. Conditions for the functioning of book and colloquial speech.

abstract, added 08/08/2010


Language as a multifunctional system dealing with the creation, storage and transmission of information. Characterization of the main functions of the language as a sign system. The main components of the language, the facets of the linguistic sign. Language as a system of signs and ways of their connection.

test, added 02/16/2015


The concept of the language of interethnic communication, its essence and features, the history of formation and development in the Russian Federation. Factors in the transformation of the Russian language into a means of interethnic communication of various ethnic groups that make up Russia.

abstract, added 05/07/2009


Basic concepts of language and culture, their relationship. Features of the ethnic community, reflection in the language of the dynamics of culture and changes in the development of society. Typological features and genesis of the Korean language, the influence of other states on its development.

term paper, added 05/31/2010


Russian is one of the most widely spoken languages ​​in the world. Russian language as the language of interethnic communication of the peoples of the USSR and the language of international communication. Features of the origin of the Russian language. The role of the Old Church Slavonic language in the development of the Russian language.

abstract, added 04/26/2011


Analysis of the connection between the history of the English people and the history of the language. Disclosure of the patterns of development of the language as a specific system, in which the complete relationship of the development of individual elements of the structure of the language is carried out: phonetic, lexical.

presentation, added 05/04/2014


Properties, functions and features of a language, the concept of a linguistic sign. Speech and speech activity, correlation of language and speech. Oral and written speech, their similarities and differences. Verbal and non-verbal means of communication: gestures, facial expressions, intonations, laughter, tears.

presentation, added 04/05/2013


The history of the development and structure of the language in Austria. Lexical features of the Austrian version of the German language. Lexical borrowings in the vocabulary. Word formation, grammatical and phonetic features of the Austrian version of the German language.

The definition of language as a system of systems, most fully developed by the Prague School of Functional Linguistics, is undoubtedly justified, but it should not be given the absolute character that we observe in this case. Separate “circles or tiers of the linguistic structure” appear in A. A. Reformatsky as systems that are closed in themselves, which, if they interact with each other (forming a system of systems or a system of language), then only as separate and integral unities. It turns out something like a coalition of allied nations, whose troops are united by the common task of military operations against a common enemy, but stand under the separate command of their national military leaders.

In the life of a language, the situation is, of course, different, and the individual “tiers or systems” of language interact with each other not only frontally, but to a large extent, so to speak, by their individual representatives “one on one”. So, for example, as a result of the fact that a number of English words during the period of the Scandinavian conquest had Scandinavian parallels, there was a splitting of the sound form of some common words in their origin. Thus, doublet forms were created, separated by regular processes in the phonetic system of the Old English language, which ended before the Scandinavian conquest. These doublet forms also provided the basis for differentiating their meanings.

So, there was a difference skirt - "skirt" and shirt (<др.-англ. scirt) — «рубашка», а также такие дублетные пары, как egg — «яйцо» и edge (

Similarly, the German Rappe - "black horse" and Rabe - "raven" (both from the Middle High German form of garre), Knappe - "squire" and Knabe - "boy" and others bifurcated; Russian dust - gunpowder, harm - vered, having a genetically common basis. An even more striking example of the regular interaction of elements of different “tiers” is the phonetic process of reduction of finite elements, well known from the history of the Germanic languages ​​(which in turn is associated with the nature and position of the Germanic stress in the word), which caused extremely important changes in their grammatical system.

It is known that the stimulation of analytic tendencies in the English language and the deviation of this language from the synthetic structure is directly related to the fact that the reduced endings were unable to express the grammatical relations of words with the necessary clarity. Thus, a purely concrete and purely phonetic process brought to life not only new morphological, but also syntactic phenomena.

This kind of mutual influence of elements included in different "tiers" or "homogeneous systems" can be multidirectional and go both along an ascending (i.e., from phonemes to elements of morphology and vocabulary) line, and downward. So, according to J. Vahek, the different fate of paired voiced final consonants in Czech (as well as Slovak, Russian, etc.), on the one hand, and in English, on the other hand, is due to the needs of the higher planes of the respective languages. In the Slavic languages, due to neutralization, they were stunned, and in English the opposition p - b, v - f, etc. was preserved, although the opposition in sonority was replaced by opposition in tension.

In the Slavic languages ​​(Czech, etc.), the emergence of new homonymous pairs of words, due to the stunning of the final voiced consonants, did not introduce any significant difficulties in understanding, since in the sentence they received a clear grammatical characteristic and the sentence model in these languages ​​was not functionally overloaded. . And in English, precisely because of the functional overload of the sentence model, the destruction of the opposition of final consonants and the emergence of a large number of homonyms as a result of this would lead to significant difficulties in the communication process.

In all such cases, we are dealing with the establishment of links on an individual basis between elements of different "tiers" - phonetic and lexical.

Regular relations are established, therefore, not only between homogeneous members of the language system, but also between heterogeneous ones. This means that systemic connections of linguistic elements are formed not only within the same "tier" (for example, only between phonemes), but also separately between representatives of different "tiers" (for example, phonetic and lexical units). In other words, the regular connections of the elements of the language system can be multidirectional, which does not exclude, of course, special forms of systemic relations of the elements of the language within the same "tier".

V.A. Zvegintsev. Essays on General Linguistics - Moscow, 1962

1. The concept of the system and structure of the language

The preservation of the language is explained by the stability of its sound and grammatical structure. In other words, the stability of a language relies on its consistency and structure.

Terms system and structure often replace each other, but they do not coincide in all meanings.

In the "Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language": the word system(Greek origin, lit. “the whole of its constituent parts”), the word structure(lat. origin., "structure, location")

System and structure language implies that the language has internal order, organizing parts in whole.

Consistency and structure characterize the language and its units as a whole from different angles. Under structure the unity of heterogeneous elements within the whole is understood. System- this is the unity of homogeneous interdependent elements.

The language is characterized by a complex structure of interrelated and heterogeneous elements. The structure of the language includes different elements and their inherent functions. It is formed by the following levels (tiers):

Ø phonetic,

Ø morphological,

Ø lexical,

Ø syntactic,

Ø ( text),

Ø ( cultural).

The concept of the last two levels / tiers was introduced into scientific use relatively recently, however, not all scientists are of the opinion that these levels should be considered as part of the linguistic analysis of the language system. Indeed, these two levels / tiers take us beyond the actual language system in the traditional linguistic sense and connect the language directly with the society and culture in which the language functions.

2. Language units (elements of levels) and their functions

units phonetic tiers are phonemes (sounds) – material incarnations of the language; they implement two main functions: perceptual(perception function) and significative, or distinctive(the ability to distinguish between significant elements of the language - morphemes, words, sentences, cf.: that, mouth, cat, steel, table, etc.).

Units morphological tiers - morphemes - express concepts

a) root(real), compare: [-table-] [-earth-], etc.;

b) foliar 2 kinds: values signs, compare: [-ost], [without-], [re-], and values relations, cf .: [-y], [-ish], etc., for example, sit-y, sit-yish, table-a, table-y.

It - semasiological function expressions concepts, but not naming. Morpheme does not name, only word has nominative function. By naming something, we turn a morpheme into a word. For example, the root red- expresses the concept of a certain color, but red (noun) names the phenomenon. Therefore, it is believed that the morpheme, as the smallest meaningful unit of the language, has a meaning, but this meaning is connected, it is realized only in combination with other morphemes. True, this statement is fully true for affixes, and only partially true for root morphemes (see the example above).

Units lexical level - tokens (words) - they call things and phenomena of reality, they perform a nominative function. The lexical level of the language system is special in the sense that its units are considered the basic units of the language. At the lexical level, the most complete semantics. A number of linguistic disciplines are engaged in the study of the lexical composition of the language: lexicology, phraseology, semantics, semasiology, onomastics and etc.

Units syntactic level - phrases and suggestions - perform communicative function, that is, necessary for communication. This level is also called constructive-syntactic or communicative-syntactic. We can say that the basic unit of this level is offer model. Is engaged in the study of the proposal syntax.

The elements of all levels in the language form a unity, which is expressed in the fact that each lower level is potentially the next highest and, conversely, each higher level consists of at least one lower level. For example, a sentence may consist of one or more words, a word may consist of one or more morphemes, and a morpheme may consist of one or more phonemes.

Language units are formed at a lower level and function at a higher one.

For example, a phoneme is built at the phonemic level, but functions at the morphemic level as a semantic unit.

This property of language units links language levels into a single system.

Within each level / tier of the linguistic structure (phonetic, morphological, lexical, syntactic), its units form their own separate system, that is, all elements of this level act as members of the system. The systems of individual tiers of the language structure form the general system of a given language.

3. Basic types of relations between language units.

To talk about the relationship between language units, it is necessary to introduce and define the following concepts: language units, language category, level/tier, language relations.

Language units- its permanent elements, differing from each other in structure, purpose and place in the language system.

According to their purpose, language units are divided into:

Ø Nominative - word (lexeme)

Ø Communication - offer

Ø Linear - phonemes and morphemes, forms of words and forms of phrases

Language categories– groups of homogeneous language units; categories are combined on the basis of a common categorical attribute, usually semantic. For example, in the Russian language there are categories of tense and aspect of the verb, case and gender, categories of collectiveness, animation, etc.

Level (tier ) language - a set of units and categories of the same type of language: phonetic, morphological, lexical, syntactic.

Language relations- the relationship between the tiers and categories of the language, its units and their parts.

The main types of relationships between language units: paradigmatic, syntagmatic and hierarchical.

paradigmatic relations (Greek paradigm - example, sample) are relations that unite language units into groups, categories, categories. Elements that are in paradigmatic relationships constitute a class of phenomena of the same type. Paradigmatic relations are relations of choice.

For example, the consonant system, the declension system, and the synonymic series rely on paradigmatics. When using the language, paradigmatic relations allow you to select the desired unit, as well as form words, their forms by analogy with those already available in the language, for example, case forms of one word, synonymous series.

Syntagmatic relations unite units in their simultaneous sequence. These are relations of units arranged linearly, for example, in the flow of speech. On syntagmatic relations, morphemes are built as combinations of phonemes, words as sets of morphemes and syllables, phrases and sentences as sets of words, complex sentences as sets of simple sentences.

Hierarchical relations connect the levels of the language with each other, these are the relations of structurally simpler units to more complex ones (remember: units are formed at a lower level, but function at a higher one).

All these types of relations in the language system are not isolated, they determine each other to one degree or another.

4. Phonology. Basic concepts of phonology

Initially, speech sounds were defined as sound formations that corresponded to letters: letters were "pronounced", they were "hard" and "soft", "vowels" and "consonants". With the development of linguistics in the 19th century, it made it possible to take a different look at the relationship between letters and sounds, since by that time sufficient material had accumulated to compare the sounds of modern and ancient languages, as well as the sounds of related languages.

Speech sounds are complex in nature, therefore, within the framework of linguistics, separate phonetic disciplines have emerged over time that study various aspects of speech sounds: phonetics phonology(functional phonetics).

Phonetics studies the sound structure of a language: speech sounds and the rules for their combination into words in a speech stream, an inventory of language sounds, their system properties, sound laws. The sphere of interest of phonetics also includes syllable, stress, and intonation.

As a natural phenomenon, the sound of speech can be considered in three aspects:

Ø acoustic(under study speech acoustics);

Ø articulatory (articulatory phonetics);

Ø functional (phonology).

Phonology studies the sounds of speech in their functional or social aspect. What matters here is not the physical quality of speech sounds. But their functions are in the language system.

From this point of view, speech sounds are a way of materializing morphemes and word forms, acting as a unity of sound and meaning.

The multidimensionality of the sound of speech caused the ambiguity of the main phonetic terms speech sound and phoneme.

The sound of speech- an acoustic phenomenon, an articulatory complex necessary for pronouncing a specific sound, a unit of the sound system of a language.

Phoneme- the smallest unit of the language, it does not have its own meaning and serves only to distinguish the sound shells of words. This is the sound unit of the language, i.e. the sound of speech in the system of phonemes of a given language. The number of phonemes in a language is small, in any language of the world it is limited to a two-digit number.

The description of units of the phonetic level began long ago, even before the formation of linguistics as a science. To date, this level of the language system can be considered as extremely described. As already mentioned, phonetic level units are characterized by phonetics(acoustic and articulatory) and phonology(functional phonetics).

The creator of the doctrine of the phoneme is Ivan Alexandrovich Baudouin de Courtenay. He laid the foundations of phonology. His teaching is based on two basic principles:

Ø phoneme - a set of articulatory and acoustic representations;

Ø Phonemes themselves have no meaning, but they also perform a semantic-distinctive function (significative).

The idea of ​​the phoneme was picked up by other scientists. The representative of the Prague linguistic school, Russian scientist Nikolai Sergeevich Trubetskoy in 1939 wrote the book "Fundamentals of Phonology". From this point on, phonology becomes a separate linguistic discipline.

For Nikolai Sergeevich Trubetskoy and other scientists of the Prague Linguistic School, the phoneme is a unit opposition capable of distinguishing morphemes or words.

The core of Trubetskoy's phonological concept is meaningful phoneme function. Sounds are combined into phonemes not by articulatory or acoustic proximity, but by functional community. If, depending on the position in the word, sounds are pronounced differently, but perform the same function, form the same words, they are considered as varieties of the same phoneme. Consequently:

Ø phoneme - the shortest language unit that serves to distinguish between the material shell of a word and morphemes;

Phoneme is a complex sound unit, a set of different acoustic and articulatory properties, which manifests itself in different ways in the sound chain and performs a significative function in different ways.

The central concept of the teachings of Nikolai Sergeevich Trubetskoy is phonological oppositions , sound oppositions capable of differentiating the meaning of the words of a given language. For example, the opposition of consonants on the basis of sonority / deafness in Russian.

Phonological oppositions form the phonological systems of particular languages.

There are only 12 pairs of differential features (DP) in all languages ​​of the world. Different types of sounds are characterized by different pairs of DPs. For example, vowels are characterized by rise, row, labialization. In different languages, DP pairs are different, there is a certain set of DP for phonemes of a given national language. For example, in Russian DP, the length/shortness of vowels does not “work”, i.e. is not essential, and in English this feature distinguishes meanings, i.e. is significant, cf.:

Ø Russian: sonority/deafness, noisiness/sonority, hardness/softness, front/rear tongue;

Ø English: longitude / brevity, labiality / non-labiality;

Ø French: nasal/non-nasal, etc.

Each phoneme is a bundle differential signs , which distinguish phonemes from each other and contribute to the recognition of words and morphemes. Phonemes also have non-essential ones ( non-integral) signs that are not used to distinguish phonemes of the language.

The conditions under which phonemes are pronounced are called positions .

The concept of a phoneme is closely related to the concept positions, i.e. the position of the sound in a word or morpheme. Strong positions are distinguished, in which the phoneme realizes all its differential features, and weak ones, in which some of these features are lost. The system of strong and weak positions in the Russian language can be represented as follows.

In a strong position, the phoneme realizes all its differential features, in a weak one it neutralizes (loses) some of them.

Phonemes appear in options and variations.

Variation is a positional variation of the same phoneme ( m and r - w and R).

Options are common positional varieties of different phonemes ( ro h– ro With ).

Only in strong positions is the system of phonemes of a given language revealed.

All phonemes of a particular language form it phonological system , i.e. they are interconnected, interdependent and united by a common meaningful function.

The phonetic systems of different languages ​​differ:

Ø the number of phonemes (English - 44, Russian - 41, French -35, German - 36);

Ø the ratio of vowels and consonants (Russian - 6 vowels:: 35 consonants; English - 12 vowels:: 8 diphthongs:: 17 consonants; French - 18 vowels:: 17 consonants; German - 15 vowels:: 3 diphthongs:: 18 consonants) ;

Ø specific laws of phoneme compatibility in the flow of speech (in different languages ​​(in Russian, despite the small number of vowel phonemes, their occurrence in speech is almost half of the phonemic composition).

5. Main phonological schools

Further development of the ideas of Ivan Alexandrovich Baudouin de Courtenay and Nikolai Sergeevich Trubetskoy in Russia led to the formation of the main phonological schools: Moscow (MFSh) and Leningrad (LFSH).

Representatives of the IPF (R.I. Avanesov, P.S. Kuznetsov, A.A. Reformatsky, V.N., Sidorov, etc.) consider the phoneme as the shortest sound unit, which is the elements of the sound shell of significant units of the language (lexemes and morphemes). At the heart of the IDF concept is the concept positions, i.e. the conditions for the use and implementation of phonemes in speech (see above). Here, a strong position is considered as favorable for identifying the functions of phonemes, and a weak position is considered unfavorable. Phonemes perform two functions: recognition (perceptual) and discrimination (significative). Depending on the function, completely different results will appear in the same weak positions: a perceptually weak position gives variations, and a weak significative position gives options.

LFSH (L.V. Shcherba, L.R. Zinder, N.I. Matushevich, etc.) considers the phoneme as sound type associated with specific phonetic representations. According to LFS, a phoneme is not only a bundle of differential features, but a specific sound unit.

The theoretical disagreements between the IPF and the LFS are connected precisely with this difference in the understanding of the phoneme. So, in the words oak, roses, pond, etc. representatives of the first school will see variants of phonemes [b], [h], [e], and representatives of the second school will see phonemes [p], [s], [t]. From the point of view of the IMF, soft sounds, , are not independent phonemes, since they never occur in the same positions as hard sounds, and from the point of view of the LFS, these are phonemes that are acoustically different from hard ones.

However, what these two phonological schools have in common is that they

Ø recognize the social nature of the phoneme;

Ø rely on the connection of phonetics and phonology;

Ø consider the phoneme as a unit of language;

Ø proceed from the presence of a phonological system of a particular language and its historical variability.

6. Grammar. Major grammatical traditions

Morphology and syntax are parts grammar – sciences about grammatical structure of the language , which means:

Ø ways and means of changing lexical units (morphology);

Ø construction of sentences from lexical units in speech, according to the expressed thought.

Morphology is the study of the grammatical form of a word and its structure. Morphology deals with the study of units of the morphological level. She offers classifications of morphemes, describes their characteristics and the laws of functioning in the language.

Syntax- the doctrine of the rules for the compatibility of units in a sentence and the relationship between them. Learns how to build phrases and sentences.

The modern provisions of grammatical theory have been greatly influenced by the Greco-Latin tradition, since ancient scientists have made a great contribution to the development of grammatical problems.

Plato tried to classify the parts of speech on a logical basis, he singled out the name and the verb. The verb is what refers to the action, the name is the designation of the one who performs this action.

Aristotle studied sentence structure. He believed that a sentence expresses a thought. In addition, Aristotle was engaged in the analysis of parts of speech: name, verb and union. He introduced the concept of the case of a name or verb, by which he understood the indirect forms of these parts of speech.

In the 2nd century BC. in ancient Greece, the Alexandrian grammar school was created, whose representatives are Aristarchus of Samothrace, Apollonius Diskol, Dionysius Thracian. The Alexandrians define a word as the smallest meaningful part of coherent speech, and a sentence as a combination of words that expresses a complete thought. This school developed in detail the doctrine of the parts of speech. Dionysius distinguished 8 parts of speech: name, verb, adverb, participle, pronoun, article, preposition, union. Apollonius studied the syntactic properties and functions of parts of speech. But the Alexandrians have not yet reached the understanding of the need to analyze the morphological structure of the word.

Roman grammar generally followed the rules of Greek grammar, using them to analyze the Latin language. The development of Latin grammar became very important in the Middle Ages, when Latin became the language of religion, science and education.

In the 17th-18th centuries, developments appeared in the field of grammatical differences in European languages ​​(English, French, German, Russian). "Russian Grammar" by Mikhailo Vasilyevich Lomonosov appeared in 1757.

In the development of linguistic thought of the 17th century, a special position is occupied by the so-called "General and Rational Grammar", or the grammar of Port-Royal, written by the abbots of the monastery of Port-Royal A. Arnaud and C. Lanslo. The philosophical basis of this grammar is the ideas of Rene Descartes, who emphasized the omnipotence of the human mind, which should serve as a criterion of truth.

The purpose of the Port-Royal Grammar was to study logical principles, underlying all the languages ​​of the world, i.e. the existence of language was investigated in terms of the ability to express logically correct thought. The authors proceeded from the identification of logical and linguistic categories and set themselves the task of identifying universal categories found in all languages.

Universal grammars created on the material of different languages ​​are, in essence, an attempt to comprehend the structure of the language.

Grammar as a linguistic science studies the form and content, structure and functioning of grammatical units and categories. The complex nature of grammatical units and categories has led to the emergence of various approaches to their study. These approaches underlie the classification of grammar types. Main types of grammars:

Ø formal grammar studies, first of all, grammatical forms, their structure, groupings according to parts of speech and inflection rules (paradigms), combinations (syntactic links). The main units of grammar are the word-formation and inflectional model, the form of the word and phrase;

Ø functional grammar studies the potential functions of language units and categories and their functioning within the same modern state of the language. Functional grammar is characterized by the consideration of language units in the interaction of grammatical and lexical units of a language within a schematic and real context;

Ø Abstract linguistic grammars are opposed to speech, communicative grammars, in which the object of study is speech communication, speech activity.

7. Grammar categories

The set of grammatical forms expressing the same or mutually opposed meanings is grammatical category . For example, all cases make up the category of cases. The sets of grammatical categories in different languages ​​do not match.

Grammatical form- this is the unity of grammatical meaning and grammatical means expressing this meaning. Grammatical forms are such varieties of words that, having the same lexical meaning, differ in grammatical meaning. Grammatical forms form paradigms , which are a set of grammatical forms, established in a certain order.

8. Properties of the word. Lexicology

The vocabulary of a language is called vocabulary(Greek: lexicos - vocabulary, logos - teaching).

Lexicology- a branch of linguistics that studies the patterns inherent in the entire vocabulary of a language, as well as the features of various groups of words. Since the word has many different sides, a number of sections of lexicology stand out.

Ø Semasiology - studies the meanings of words (meaning structure, semantic oppositions, semantic features, etc.).

Ø Onomasiology - studies the process of naming.

Ø Onomastics - proper names. It is divided into anthroponymy (the study of people's names), toponymy (the study of geographical names), ethnonymy, etc.

Ø Phraseology - stable phrases.

Ø Etymology - the origin of words.

Ø Lexicography - the science of methods for describing vocabulary and principles for compiling dictionaries, etc.

Lexicology can be synchronic and diachronic (historical), as well as general and particular.

The totality of all the words of a language vocabulary (vocabulary). In developed languages, there are hundreds of thousands of words. Dictionary V.I. Dalia contains 200,000 words, the Big Academic Dictionary (BAS) - 120 thousand, the Modern Dictionary of the Russian Language - 500 thousand. No person uses all the words: it stands out in the vocabulary main fund words (words active use). For a particular person, they differ active and passive dictionary. The child's vocabulary is approx. 3 thousand words, a teenager - approx. 9 thousand words, and an adult - 11-13 thousand.

The word is one of the basic units of language. Unlike other units, it has nominative function - naming function.

Many definitions of the word can be formulated, but none of them can be exhaustive. All definitions will differ depending on the aspect in which the word is considered (for example, from the point of view of graphics, a word is a chain of graphemes between two spaces). In order to define a word, it is necessary to highlight its main features.

Word- this is:

Ø sound unity according to the laws of phonetics of a given language;

Ø grammatical unity according to the laws of grammar of a given language;

Ø a significant unit of the language that has a nominative function;

Ø has positional independence (i.e., it is characterized by the absence of a rigid linear connection with neighboring words, cf.: The weather is warm today – The weather is warm today);

Ø has syntactic independence (i.e., the ability to receive the syntactic function of a member of a sentence or a separate sentence).

Thus, the word is a phonetic, grammatical and lexical unity. Please note that these characteristics represent different sides of the word from the point of view of different levels of the language system.

Not all words have the same ratio of these characteristics.

Can be given working definition the words : this is the minimum relatively independent unit of a language that has lexical and grammatical relatedness and is freely reproduced in speech to build an utterance .

The word as a unit of language (in the system) is called lexeme . The lexeme is the “ideal word”. In speech we are dealing with allolexes(variants of implementation of a separate lexeme), or word forms, cf. Man is man's friend(3 words, but 2 lexemes).

Every word is a unity of sound and meaning. The connection between sound and meaning is arbitrary, it is fixed by social practice. In the meaning of the word, the connection of the language with the outside world is manifested. However, lexicology describes the words, but not items the surrounding world.

Lexical meaning- this is what the given word means, this meaning is correlated with the concept and refers the word to a certain section of the lexical-semantic system of the language. grammatical meaning - this is the belonging of the word to a certain grammatical category, determines the compatibility of the word and the ways of its modification.

The core of lexical meaning is a mental reflection of a particular phenomenon of reality, an object or a class of objects. The object denoted by the word is called denotate .

Alexander Afanasyevich Potebnya spoke about the immediate and future meaning of the word, and also pointed out the dialectical unity of the linguistic and extralinguistic content of the word.

Distinguish denotative and connotative meaning of the word. Denotative meanings are specific ( dog, green), abstract ( joy honestly), imaginary ( mermaid). Connotative meaning is the emotional, expressive, evaluative and stylistic characteristics of a word (cf.: dog – little dog).

Lexical meanings are specific and individual, i.e. each lexical meaning belongs to one word, but in relation to the subject, each lexical meaning turns out to be generalized.

Lexical meanings are classified depending on the relation to objects and phenomena of reality:

Ø Nominative ( house, birch) signal ( this one, he)

Ø Straight ( head, hand) portable (time running)

Ø concrete abstract

By the nature of the subject relatedness, the meanings are own(single) and common nouns(general).

Lexical meaning is based on concept: a generalized thought about a given subject or phenomenon. Different types of words relate to a concept in different ways, although each concept can be expressed by a word or a phrase. But the word is not the same as the concept. The concept is a category logic. We can say that the meaning is wider, and the concept is deeper. For example, one word can have several meanings, i.e. relate to several concepts; one concept can be denoted by several words; a concept can be expressed by a compound name.

The relationship between sound and meaning arises by chance, but once it has arisen, it becomes mandatory for all speakers of a given language.

The lexical meaning may contain inner shape (motivation , i.e. an indication of the reason why this meaning turned out to be expressed by this particular combination of sounds (for example, onomatopoeic words, or such as moon rover, airplane etc.).

Not all words retained their motivation. Each language has its own reasons for motivation. Wed: windowsill, airplane. Over time, the word undergoes a process deetymologization (i.e. forgetfulness of motivation; cf. cabbage from caput- head). In the case of speculation of motivation, such a phenomenon arises as false (folk) etymology; compare: semi-clinic, semi-ver, caterpillar etc.

The entire vocabulary of a language can be considered as a system whose structure is determined by the types of lexical meanings and lexico-grammatical categories of words. So, all words can be categorized parts of speech in accordance with their lexical and grammatical relatedness. Depending on the relationship of lexical meanings, polysemantic the words, homonyms , synonyms , antonyms , paronyms etc. From the point of view of changing the language in the lexical composition, there are neologisms (new words that have appeared in the language are the result of various kinds of borrowings or changes in the semantic structure of words existing in the language - a computer, dealer), historicisms (words naming obsolete realities - chain mail, sandals), archaisms (obsolete words - eyes, cheeks).

The concept of the systemic nature of the language and its structure came to the science of language at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries. In this way, linguistics to some extent reflected the general trend in the formation of scientific knowledge (cf. the emergence of ideas about the system in other sciences: the theory of the origin of species by Charles Darwin, the system of chemical elements by Dmitry Mendeleev, etc.).

It should be added that the language system is in the process of constant change. True, different levels of language change in different ways, both qualitatively and quantitatively. The lexical level turns out to be the most mobile: new words and new meanings appear, some words go out of use, etc.

Thus, the language system, on the one hand, tends to change, and on the other hand, it must maintain integrity, otherwise the language will cease to fulfill its functions, since people will no longer understand each other. These are two opposite processes that affect the system, so it is customary to say that the language system is always in the state relative equilibrium.

TASKS ON THEME 5

Questions and practical tasks

1. Why do you think people came from understanding the connections between objects and phenomena of the surrounding reality to describing these connections in accordance with the principle of systemicity in the 19th century?

2. What examples of systemic description from other sciences can you give?

3. Why is it said that language is a “system of systems”?

BUT. Draw a diagram of the language system. Try to show on this diagram all types of relationships between language units.

B. Solve the problem.

Suggestions given

The elephant surprises everyone with its big ears.

He was driving on a dusty road.

· I knew her as a little boy.

He was reading a book on a warm evening.

· The rocket pierced the clouds with black lightning.

He dug up the bed with a sharp shovel

· I knew him as a little boy.

· I considered him a complete fool.

· He left Kursk by evening train.

In these sentences, the instrumental case of the last noun has different meanings. To find out this difference, it is enough to remake (transform) these sentences so that their meaning is preserved, but instead of a turnover with the instrumental case, they contain some other grammatical construction (it is allowed to transform the whole sentence, and not just the turnover with the instrumental case).

With these transformations, try to distinguish as many (all?) of these sentences from each other as possible.

Come up with your own suggestions for a similar task.

AT. Solve the problem.

Given the words too and also. Find: a) such a sentence with the word too, where instead of too cannot be consumed also(the sentence becomes invalid); b) such a proposal, where instead of also cannot be consumed too; c) a sentence where these words are interchangeable.

G. Comment on Jean Aitchison's statement. What does the author want to draw our attention to?

LITERATURE

1. Rozhdestvensky V.S. Lectures on general linguistics.

2. Khrolenko A.T. General linguistics.

3. Linguistic encyclopedic dictionary.

4. Stepanov Yu.S. Fundamentals of linguistics.