scholarly journals Functional class (so called “part of speech”) assignment as a kind of meaning-bound word syntactic information

2015 ◽  
pp. 15-33
Author(s):  
Jadwiga Wajszczuk
Keyword(s):  
Higher Order ◽  
Functional Class ◽  
Word Formation ◽  
The Other ◽  
Order Unit ◽  
Parts Of Speech ◽  
Part Of Speech ◽  
Syntactic Information ◽  
Theory Of Language ◽  
The One

Functional class (so called “part of speech”) assignment as a kind of meaning-bound word syntactic informationThe traditional division of the lexicon into parts of speech which seems to satisfy the requirements of a syntactic description, on the one hand, and a word formation description, on the other hand, cannot be looked upon as a result of a strict classification covering the totality of the lexicon and being based on a coherent set of criteria. Making the criteria more precise or correcting them is an issue of extreme importance and urgency in the work on the theory of language. Such achievements can help solve many other problems, in particular, syntactic ones. The article presents a scheme of several preliminary steps of an amelioration program (a scheme which has been improved compared to the author’s earlier attempts going in the same direction). The program is based on combinability characteristics of words, i.e. on those properties that are responsible for the tasks to be accomplished by a given class of expressions in making up a higher order unit, i.e. a syntagm (the author emphasizes this point: it is syntagm rather than sentence which is the category the recommended approach is focusing on), and that, importantly, determine the limits of syntactic rules, i.e. the ins and outs of the rules (the limits concerning the overall stock of words).

Combining Forms and Affixoids in Morphology

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dany Amiot ◽  
Edwige Dugas
Keyword(s):  
Major Part ◽  
Word Formation ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The Other ◽  
Formation Processes ◽  
Good Criterion ◽  
Part Of Speech ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The One

Word-formation encompasses a wide range of processes, among which we find derivation and compounding, two processes yielding productive patterns which enable the speaker to understand and to coin new lexemes. This article draws a distinction between two types of constituents (suffixes, combining forms, splinters, affixoids, etc.) on the one hand and word-formation processes (derivation, compounding, blending, etc.) on the other hand but also shows that a given constituent can appear in different word-formation processes. First, it describes prototypical derivation and compounding in terms of word-formation processes and of their constituents: Prototypical derivation involves a base lexeme, that is, a free lexical elements belonging to a major part-of-speech category (noun, verb, or adjective) and, very often, an affix (e.g., Fr. laverV ‘to wash’ > lavableA ‘washable’), while prototypical compounding involves two lexemes (e.g., Eng. rainN + fallV > rainfallN). The description of these prototypical phenomena provides a starting point for the description of other types of constituents and word-formation processes. There are indeed at least two phenomena which do not meet this description, namely, combining forms (henceforth CFs) and affixoids, and which therefore pose an interesting challenge to linguistic description, be it synchronic or diachronic. The distinction between combining forms and affixoids is not easy to establish and the definitions are often confusing, but productivity is a good criterion to distinguish them from each other, even if it does not answer all the questions raised by bound forms. In the literature, the notions of CF and affixoid are not unanimously agreed upon, especially that of affixoid. Yet this article stresses that they enable us to highlight, and even conceptualize, the gradual nature of linguistic phenomena, whether from a synchronic or a diachronic point of view.

scholarly journals COMPOSITE ADJECTIVES IN THE DIGOR DIALECT OF THE OSSETIAN LANGUAGE

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
И.Н. ЦАЛЛАГОВА
Keyword(s):  
Word Formation ◽  
The Other ◽  
Speech Analysis ◽  
Main Function ◽  
Theoretical Base ◽  
New Words ◽  
Part Of Speech ◽  
General Terms ◽  
The One ◽  
Linguistic Means

Композитное словообразование привлекает внимание ученых еще с середины XX в. Такой интерес обусловлен, с одной стороны, комплексной и неоднозначной сущностью композитов, с другой, тем фактом, что их основная функция – пополнение словарного запаса языка – явление непрерывное. Динамика процессов, происходящих в языке, неразрывно связана с жизнью общества, с социально-экономическими и политическими явлениями. Образование новых слов продиктовано самой сутью языка – обеспечением потребности человека в языковых средствах. Суть словосложения в том, что для обозначения какого-либо нового предмета или явления, или же его признака, происходит образование новой лексемы путем соединения двух и более основ. После этого процесса лексема функционирует в языке, при этом ее семантика может быть неотделимой от семантики составляющих ее компонентов, или же она приобретает совершенно новое значение. Исследования данного порядка имеют огромное значение для любого языка, но особенно это актуально для так называемых «малых языков». Несмотря на то, что вопросы композитного словообразования в той или иной степени отражены в трудах, посвященных осетинскому языку и его диалектам, многое здесь остается неясным, в особенности это касается дигорского диалекта. В существующих грамматиках дигорского диалекта данные вопросы описаны лишь в общих чертах; специальных исследований в области композитного словообразования на сегодняшний день не существует. Данная статья посвящена одной из частных проблем в рамках этой темы: рассмотрению композитов-прилагательных в дигорском диалекте осетинского языка. В работе дается обзор базовых теоретических проблем, связанных с композитообразованием, анализируются научные подходы к изучению прилагательных-композитов, как в лингвистике в целом, так и в осетинском языкознании. На основе существующей теоретической базы дигорские композиты-прилагательные анализируются и систематизируются. Выявлены способы формирования наиболее продуктивных словообразовательных моделей сложных прилагательных, проведен частеречный анализ образующих их компонентов. Composite word formation has been constantly attracting the attention of scientists since the middle of the XXth century. This interest is due, on the one hand, to the complex and ambiguous nature of composites, on the other, to the fact that their main function is to replenish the vocabulary of the language, which is a continuous phenomenon. The dynamics of the processes occurring in the language is inextricably linked with the life of society, with socio-economic and political phenomena. The formation of new words is dictated by the very essence of the language - ensuring a person's need for linguistic means. The essence of the word composition is that to designate a new object or phenomenon, or its sign, a new lexeme is formed by combining two or more stems. After this process, the lexeme functions in the language while its semantics can be inseparable from the semantics of its constituent components or it acquires a completely new meaning. Studies of this order are of great importance for any language, but this is especially true for the so-called "minor languages". Despite the fact, that the issues of composite word formation are to a certain degree reflected in the works devoted to the Ossetian language and its dialects, there are many poorly studied issues, especially in the Digor dialect. In the existing grammars of Digor, these issues are described only in general terms, there are no separate studies in the field of composite word formation. This article is devoted to one of the particular problems within the framework of this topic: composites-adjectives in the Digor dialect of the Ossetian language. The study provides an overview of the basic theoretical problems associated with compositing, analyzes scientific approaches to the study of adjectives-composites, both in linguistics in general and in Ossetian linguistics. On the basis of the existing theoretical base, Digor adjective composites are analyzed and systematized. The ways of forming the most productive word-formation models of complex adjectives are revealed, a part-of-speech analysis of the components forming them is carried out.

scholarly journals Adverbs in Contrast – Criteria for Distinguishing from Other Parts of Speech

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (22) ◽  
pp. 13-29
Author(s):  
Bozinka Petronijevic
Keyword(s):  
Word Formation ◽  
The Other ◽  
Parts Of Speech ◽  
Specific Language ◽  
Prepositional Phrases ◽  
Part Of Speech ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Universal Category ◽  
Opposite Situation ◽  
Formation Systems

This paper attempts at examining and determining, using the vast corpus of Serbian and German languages, whether the part of speech in question exists as such in each of these languages, as well as whether it (adverb) is a universal or specific language category. The research shows that most languages recognise the adverb as a distinctive part of speech, which implies that it is a universal category that can be defined according to the following criteria: a) morphological (adverbs have no flexions, but they undergo comparison with regard to the relative subclass) and syntactic (conditioned by verbs as nucleus, assuming in most cases the function of adverbials as verb complements; b) rare attributive function before nouns and adverbs themselves; c) differences between specific languages, German and Serbian included, are a result of their respective word formation systems. In this particular case, each of the two languages recognises relatively few simple words (simplizia); on the other hand, the explicit (suffixational) derivation is largely productive in Serbian, whereas there is a completely opposite situation in German concerning this issue (although the process is recorded in the latter as well); and, finally, adverb derivatives in Serbian correspond, as a rule, to adjectives and prepositional phrases functioning as adverbials in German.

Argument Structure and Morphology

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jim Wood ◽  
Neil Myler
Keyword(s):  
Argument Structure ◽  
Word Formation ◽  
The Other ◽  
Proper Treatment ◽  
Structure And Morphology ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
The One ◽  
Theoretical Issues

The topic “argument structure and morphology” refers to the interaction between the number and nature of the arguments taken by a given predicate on the one hand, and the morphological makeup of that predicate on the other. This domain turns out to be crucial to the study of a number of theoretical issues, including the nature of thematic representations, the proper treatment of irregularity (both morphophonological and morphosemantic), and the very place of morphology in the architecture of the grammar. A recurring question within all existing theoretical approaches is whether word formation should be conceived of as split across two “places” in the grammar, or as taking place in only one.

scholarly journals Translation and the Application of Linguistics

2002 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 374-386
Author(s):  
Probal Dasgupta
Keyword(s):  
Applied Linguistics ◽  
Scientific Progress ◽  
Translation Studies ◽  
The Other ◽  
Literary Studies ◽  
General Level ◽  
Avant Garde ◽  
Linguistic Research ◽  
Theory Of Language ◽  
The One

Abstract This article explores some topics at the boundary between linguistics theory and the applied linguistic foundations of the practice of translation. Section 1, The irrelevance of the avant-garde , considers the relation between such academic adventures as semiotics and poststructuralism on the one hand and the theory of language and the practice of translation on the other, and argues that radical antiscientism does not bear on the foundations of translation. Section 2, The irrelevance of the technical , looks at formal syntax and semantics in relation to the concepts of applied linguistics and shows that careful contemporary linguistics cannot underpin an applied enterprise that includes translation studies. Section 3, The substantive hase of translation , indicates (in some detail for translation and at a general level for other applied linguistic activities) the direction that the contemporary integration of various lines of linguistic research is taking vis-à-vis the needs of such applied enterprises as translation, literary studies, language planning, lexicography, and language teaching. Section 3 invokes a concept of substance as opposed to form and thus sets the scene for the concluding section 4, Pragmatics, applied studies, and scientific progress , which argues that it is necessary to take help from linguistics in order to construct the field of translation studies in such a way that practitioners can truly benefit freely from all relevant branches of knowledge, in view of the fact that chaos is an obstacle to genuine freedom.

scholarly journals POS-tagging a bilingual parallel corpus: methods and challenges

2017 ◽  
pp. 35-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irene Doval
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Major Error ◽  
Error Patterns ◽  
Parallel Corpus ◽  
Pos Tagging ◽  
Ongoing Process ◽  
Part Of Speech ◽  
Improve Accuracy ◽  
The One ◽  
Speech Information

This paper reviews the author’s experiences of tokenizing and POS tagging a bilingual parallel corpus, the PaGeS Corpus, consisting mostly of German and Spanish fictional texts. This is part of an ongoing process of annotating the corpus for part-of-speech information. This study discusses the specific problems encountered so far. On the one hand, tagging performance degrades significantly when applied to fictional data and, on the other, pre-existing annotation schemes are all language specific. To further improve accuracy during post-editing, the author has developed a common tagset and identified major error patterns.

Infinitesimal Kinematics Methods in the Mobility Determination of Kinematic Chains

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. M. Rico ◽  
J. J. Cervantes ◽  
A. Tadeo ◽  
J. Gallardo ◽  
L. D. Aguilera ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lie Algebra ◽  
Good Deal ◽  
Higher Order ◽  
The Other ◽  
Velocity Analysis ◽  
Euclidean Group ◽  
Kinematic Chains ◽  
Order Analysis ◽  
The One

In recent years, there has been a good deal of controversy about the application of infinitesimal kinematics to the mobility determination of kinematic chains. On the one hand, there has been several publications that promote the use of the velocity analysis, without any additional results, for the determination of the mobility of kinematic chains. On the other hand, the authors of this contribution have received several reviews of researchers who have the strong belief that no infinitesimal method can be used to correctly determine the mobility of kinematic chains. In this contributions, it is attempted to show that velocity analysis by itself can not correctly determine the mobility of kinematic chains. However, velocity and higher order analysis coupled with some recent results about the Lie algebra, se(3), of the Euclidean group, SE(3), can correctly determine the mobility of kinematic chains.

scholarly journals The adjective: an eminently syncategorematic part of speech

Kalbotyra ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 74 ◽  
pp. 72-87
Author(s):  
Jan Goes
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
The Third ◽  
Part Of Speech ◽  
The One

In this article we propose an alternative to the theories which subdivide the adjective into three major types (qualifier, relational, adjective of the third type), themselves subdivided into several subclasses. We believe instead that there is only one adjectival lexeme with different uses (unitary hypothesis). To do this, we start from the two ways of looking for the adjectival prototype: on the one hand, the abstract prototype built by accumulating criteria, on the other, the semantic prototype. We examine the behavior of occurrences of the abstract prototype (admirable, monumental) and the semantic prototype (grand) with respect to gradation, the attributive function (more specifically the place of the adjective) and the predicative function. The examples show not only that the two prototype models can be reconciled, but above all that the behavior and the meaning of any adjective depend in large part on the noun it qualifies, a result which confirms our unitary hypothesis. The syntactic-semantic dependence of the adjective on the supporting substantive is such that it can be concluded that the adjective is a syncategorematic part of speech, rather than a polysemous one.

scholarly journals On Word ‘Fake’ and What Is Behind It

2015 ◽  
Vol 28 (33) ◽  
pp. 89-98
Author(s):  
Kazimierz Luciński
Keyword(s):  
English Language ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
The Other ◽  
Parts Of Speech ◽  
New Words ◽  
Linguistic Description ◽  
Part Of Speech ◽  
Russian Soil

The paper focuses on a loanword borrowed from the English language “fake” that became very popular in the Russian soil. The author shows the derivational abilities of a word leading to the formation of new words that belong to the other parts of speech: a verb “фейковать”, an adjective “фейковый”, a noun “фейковость”. Every part of speech is analysed on the basis of paradigmatic relations, in which the word is involved, along with its sociolinguistic characteristics such as the field of use and social strata to which the native speakers belong. The author does not limit himself to an ordinary linguistic description of this loanword and its sense-correlates; instead the author tries to present socio-cultural peculiarities of reality that made possible a wide use of this loanword borrowed from the English language. 

scholarly journals Interjections

Linguistics ◽  
2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Libert
Keyword(s):  
Point Of View ◽  
The Other ◽  
Word Class ◽  
Original Function ◽  
Parts Of Speech ◽  
Part Of Speech ◽  
Semantics And Pragmatics ◽  
Conservative Policy ◽  
Long Time

Interjections are one of the traditional parts of speech (along with nouns, verbs, etc.), although some linguists have considered them not to be a part of language but rather instinctive reactions to a situation. The word interjection comes from the Latin interjicere “to throw between,” as they were seen as words that were tossed into a sentence, without being syntactically related to other items. Examples of English interjections are oh!, ah!, ugh!, and ouch! Interjections such as these, which are not (zero-)derived from words belonging to other parts of speech, and which have only an interjectional function, are called primary interjections; interjections that have evolved from words of other classes and which have retained their original function in addition to their new one are known as secondary interjections. Secondary interjections are often swear words, e.g. shit!, or religious terms, e.g. Jesus! Some (putative) interjections, interjectional phrases, consist of more than one word, e.g. my God!; they could be problematic for the view that interjections are a word class or part of speech. Interjections have received considerably less attention from linguists than the other parts of speech. This may be due, in part, to the just mentioned view that they are not really linguistic items and thus are of little or no interest from a linguistic point of view. However, to say that they have been neglected, as some authors do, is an overstatement; as can be seen in this article, scholars have been thinking and writing about different aspects of interjections for a long time (and note that this article mentions only works devoted (at least in large part) to interjections, not works on other subjects that also discuss interjections). Thus here one will see works on the phonetics/phonology, syntax, semantics, and pragmatics of interjections, among other subjects. There does, however, seem to be one gap in the literature: few, if any, papers focus on the morphology of interjections. A problem in compiling a bibliography on interjections is that authors disagree on what should be included in the set of interjections; for example, are onomatopoeias interjections (and thus should works on onomatopoeias be included in a bibliography on interjections)? In this article a conservative policy has been taken, and works dealing only with onomatopoeias (or greetings, etc.) have been excluded.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document