Literature

Дата добавления: 2014-01-11; просмотров: 6; лекция была полезна: 0 студентам(у); не полезна: 0 студентам(у).
Опубликованный материал нарушает авторские права? сообщите нам...

PLAN

Introduction

Lecture 1

SEMINAR 1.

MATERIALS: 1. Millrood, R. English Teaching Methodology. Communicative Language Teaching. Input Reading 1. Pp. 8 – 17. Exploratory tasks 1.1. – 1.7.

2. Lecture 1.

3. References and Further reading. Pp. 32-33.

1. The subject of theoretical grammar. Its relations to practical grammar.

2. The systematic structure of the language. Theory of levels.

1) Блох М.Я. Теоретическая грамматика английского языка. – М.: Высшая школа, 2006.

2) Блох М.Я. Практикум по теоретической грамматике английского языка: Учеб. пособие. – М.: Высшая школа, 2007. – 471 с.

3) Блох М.Я. Теоретические основы грамматики. – М.: Высшая школа, 2005.

TERMS

Theoretical grammar unites the knowledge of phonology and lexicology. This allows to achieve the most accurate description of a language.

To teach a language successfully one should make difference between the knowledge of the language which we gain from practical courses and the knowledge about the language which we obtain studying linguistic disciplines: phonology, lexicology and grammar.

Each of the three linguistic disciplines studies a correspondent constituent part of the language, i.e. the phonological system, the lexical system and the grammatical system.

The phonological system is the subfoundation of language; it determines the material (phonetical) appearance of its significant units.

The lexical system is the whole set of naming means of the language.

The grammatical system is the whole set of rules (or regularities) which determine the combination of naming means (words) in the formation of utterances as the embodiment of thinking process.

So, grammatical system incorporates the phonological and lexicological systems with their units: phoneme and word which are incorporated into the grammatical unit, i.e. sentence.

The aim of theoretical grammar is to present a theoretical description of its grammatical system, i.e.

· scientifically analyse and define its grammatical categories;

· and study the mechanisms of grammatical formation of utterances out of words in the process of speech making.

As we see, the aim of theoretical grammar is double: to analyse scientifically (1) the system of the language and (2) its actualization in speech.

The differentiation between language and speech was first made by Ferdinand de Saussure. It became principal for linguists, though it is not universally recognized nowadays, i.e. some scholars consider the opposition “language – speech” to be artificial, since language and speech can be considered as interrelated phenomena compared to two sides of the sheet of paper.

In earlier periods of the development of linguistic knowledge, grammatical scholars believed that the only purpose of grammar was to give strict rules of writing and speaking correctly.

That was the so-called “prescriptive” grammar dealing more with the form and structure than with the meaning (semantics). In accordance with these ideas the utterances of the type “Colourless green ideas sleep furiously” suggested as back as 1956 by N.Chomsky were classed as grammatically correct while utterances of the type “Furiously sleep ideas green colourless” had to be analysed as “ungrammatical” “non-sentences”.

However, a couple of years later this linguistic problem was disputed in an experimental investigation with informants – natural speakers of English, who won’t consider incorrect even the second utterance, regarding it as a piece of poetry.

The described situation proves that form and meaning should be regarded together in their dialectical unity.

A step forward made by theoretical grammar was that it started to discriminate between the plane of content and the plane of expression.

The plane of content (=meaning) comprises (закл. в себе) the purely semantic elements contained in language, while the plane of expression (=form) comprises the material (formal) units of language taken by themselves, apart from the meaning rendered by them. The two planes are closely connected, so that no meaning can be realized without some material means of expression.

Grammatical elements of language present a unity of content and expression or unity of form and meaning.

The correspondence between the planes of content and expression is very complex, and it is peculiar to each language. This complexity is clearly illustrated by the phenomena of polysemy, homonymy and synonymy.

In cases of polysemy and homonymy two or more units of the plane of content correspond to one unit of the plane of expression.

In cases of synonymy two or more units of the plane of expression correspond to one unit of the plane of content. For instance, the forms of the verbal future indefinite, future continuous and present continuous (several units in the plane of expression) can be in certain contexts of the synonymous meaning of the future action (one unit in the plane of content).

Taking into consideration the discrimination between the two planes, we may say that the purpose of grammar as a linguistic discipline is, in the long run, to disclose and formulate the regularities of the correspondence between the plane of content and the plane of expression in the formulation of utterances out of the stock s of words as part of the process of speech production.

The stated purpose is pursued by both parts of grammar, i.e. morphology and syntax, since morphology deals with the formation of words while syntax – with the formation of sentences out of words.

Morphology and syntax are regarded as parts of practical grammar as well. The main difference of practical and theoretical grammar is that practical grammar prescribes the rules while theoretical grammar describes them giving theoretical foundation for them.

Language is a system of signs which are closely interconnected and interdependent.

The system of language includes,

· on the one hand, the body of material units – sounds, morphemes, words, word-groups;

· on the other hand, the regularities or rules of the use of these units.

Speech comprises both the act of producing utterances, and the utterances themselves, i.e. the text.

Thus, we have the broad philosophical concept of language which is analysed by linguistics into two different aspects – the system of signs (language proper) and the use of signs (speech proper).

The sign in the system of language has only a potential meaning. It is actualized in speech, i.e. made situationally significant as part of the grammatically organized text.

Lingual units stand to one another in two fundamental types of relations: syntagmatic and paradigmatic.

Syntagmatic relations are immediate linear relations between units in a sequence (string). Syntagmatic relations are actually observed in utterances.

The other type of the relations, opposed to syntagmatic, are called paradigmatic. Unlike syntagmatic relations, paradigmatic relations cannot be directly observed in utterances. Paradigmatic relations coexist with syntagmatic relations in such a way that some sort of syntagmatic connection is necessary for the realization of any paradigmatic series.

Grammatical paradigms express various grammatical categories. The minimal paradigm consists of two form-stages: boy – boys (category of number).

Units of language are divided into segmental and supra-segmental. Segmental units consist of phonemes. Supra-segmental units do not exist by themselves, but are realized together with segmental units and express different functions; to the supra-segmental units belong intonation, accent, pauses, patterns of word-order.

The segmental units of language form a hierarchy of levels:

Supra-proposemic " dicteme

Proposemic " proposeme (sentence)

Phrasemic (syntactical) " phraseme (phrase)

Lexemic (lexical) " lexeme

Morphemic (morphological) " morpheme

Phonemic (phonetical) " phoneme

The lowest level of lingual segments is phonemic. The function of phonemes is purely differential: it differentiates morphemes and words.

The level located above the phonemic one is the morphemic level. The morpheme is the elementary meaningful part of the word.

The next level in lingual hierarchy is the level of words, or lexemic level. The word differs from the morpheme, since it directly nominates things and their relations. Since words are built up by morphemes, the shortest words consist of one explicit morpheme only: man, I, it, etc.

The next level is the level of phrases or word-groups, i.e. phrasemic level. To level-forming phrase types belong combinations of two or more notional words. These combinations, like separate words, have a nominative function, but they represent the referent of nomination as a complicated phenomenon, c.f.: extremely difficult.

Above the phrasemic level lies the level of sentences, or proposemic level. The peculiar character of the sentence (proposeme) as a signemic unit of language consists in the fact that naming a certain situation, it expresses predication, i.e. shows the relation of the denoted event to reality.

Prof. Blokh considers the proposemic level to be the next to the highest, which is the so-called supra-proposemic the unit of which can be called cumulation, i.e. the construction of separate sentences into a textual unity.

So, bearing in mind five segmental levels of lingual hierarchy, in theoretical grammar we’ll start the analysis with the second level, which is the sphere of morphology.

The students must know

· what is the difference between the so-called “prescriptive” grammar and “descriptive” grammar;

· what is the aim of theoretical grammar as a linguistic discipline;

· what is the difference between the plane of content and the plane of expression and how they are related to each other;

· the peculiarity of correlation of language and speech;

· what relations of lingual units are called syntagmatic;

· what relations of lingual units are called paradigmatic;

· what are the segmental and supra-segmental lingual units;

· the levels of lingual hierarchy and their units.

monster [0monstc] the plane of expression

the plane of content

1) an imaginary creature that is large and frightening

2) someone who is very cruel