scholarly journals Един фрагмент от процеса на преконфигуриране на дублетността в българския книжовен език (върху съществителните пожертвование и пожертвувание; самопожертвование; себепожертвование) / A Fragment of the Process of Reconfiguration of Doublets in the Standard Bulgarian Language (Based on the Nouns Pozhertvovanie and Pozhertvuvanie; Samopozhertvovanie; Sebepozhertvovanie)

2020 ◽  
Vol 67 (67.03) ◽  
pp. 84-98
Author(s):  
Zhaneta Zlateva ◽  
Tatyana Aleksandrova
Keyword(s):  
Small Group ◽  
Standard Language ◽  
Verbal Nouns ◽  
Modern Language ◽  
Language System ◽  
Normative Status

The paper discusses the dynamics of the codification of a small group verbal nouns formed with the suffixes -ovanie and -uvanie in Bulgarian standard language. The rea-sons for keeping, eliminating or reconfiguration of these doublets in the newest orthography dictionaries have been analyzed. The paper examines the factors that determine their normative status, associated with diachronic processes in language and with modern language tendencies and codification decisions in other items of the language system as well. Keywords: Bulgarian standard language, codification, doublets, verbal nouns, nouns formed with suffixes -ovanie and -uvanie

scholarly journals Problems of Spanish [z], [s], [c] Sounds Pronunciation in Teaching Standards of the Spanish Language as a Foreign

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Max Camacho-Chavarria ◽  
Yana Podoplelova
Keyword(s):  
Present Article ◽  
Spanish Language ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Theoretical Point ◽  
Standard Language ◽  
Language System ◽  
Spanish Speaking ◽  
Teaching Standards ◽  
Consonant Sounds ◽  
Social Level

The present article considers linguistic norms and pronunciation standard of the Spanish language. It is shown that from the theoretical point of view the normative standards of dialectic variation of the Spanish language are considered. The problem of geographically diversified pronunciation standard of the Spanish consonant sounds is established. It is being noted that the unified standard language norm for all Spanish- speaking countries to be used in terms of teaching standards of the Spanish language as a foreign. The conclusion is made that knowledge of functioning particularities of the language system at cultural and social level is highly needed. In addition to that dialectic and accent variations of the Spanish language are to be taken into consideration

scholarly journals The relation between the codification and actual usage of the preposition VIRŠ

2014 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Sonata Vaičiakauskienė
Keyword(s):  
Written Language ◽  
Periodical Press ◽  
Standard Language ◽  
Language System ◽  
Actual Usage ◽  
Slavic Languages ◽  
Distance Property ◽  
Time Distance

The analysis of Lithuanian syntax phenomena shows that there are many inconsistencies in the actual usage of some cases and prepositions and the codified rules of grammar that apply to them.  This article concentrates on the actual usage of the Lithuanian preposition virš (‘above’) over the last decade. Thus the aim of the article is to discuss the relation between the codified rules of grammar and the current use of the preposition virš and to provide some guidelines in relation to the specification of its codified rules. The analysis of the usage of virš reveals that this preposition is used to refer to some excess in quantity, weight, time, distance, property or characteristic as well as to some overbalance, especially in periodical press. Such usage of the preposition virš is quite frequent both in spoken and written language. Currently, such usage of virš is considered by language standardisers as avoidable or even unacceptable in standard language. Such attitudes of linguists are based on the fact that the usage of virš in the sense of excess is a result of the influence of Slavic languages and dialects. The data of the analysis suggest that the usage of the preposition virš is becoming more common not only due to the above-mentioned reason but also because of the similarity or even overlap between the meanings of constructions used to refer to excess that are standardised and those that are considered to be avoidable. Systemic characteristics of the usage of the preposition virš show that its usage in the sense of excess is not necessarily in conflict with the standard language system. As a result, the pervasive use of the preposition virš in the sense of excess suggests that with regard to language users’ habits but not conflicting with language systematicity, linguists should consider the possibility of standardising the usage of virš in the sense of ‘excess’. Certainly, before anything can be put forward, more research on the usage of the preposition virš has to be carried out.

scholarly journals On the term of standard language

2016 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Irena Smetonienė ◽  
Antanas Smetona ◽  
Audrius Valotka
Keyword(s):  
Language Policy ◽  
Public Discourse ◽  
Written Language ◽  
Substantial Part ◽  
Common Language ◽  
Standard Language ◽  
Language System ◽  
State Management ◽  
Language Variety ◽  
The Status

After we started direct communication and collaboration with foreign scholars, we immediately noticed that one of the reasons of miscommunication derives from the lack of discussion of terminological synonymy as well as the concept of a term. For example, miscommunication may occur due to such issues as the understanding and the relationship of such terms as a borrowing and a foreign word, such Lithuanian words as naujadaras, naujažodis and neologizmas which are usually all rendered in English as a neologism, language policy and language planning, etc. In addition, numerous debatable issues arise regarding the use of the term marker and its synonyms in the context of morphology and the choice of different terms to refer to the administrative style (kanceliarinis, dalykinis, administracinis stilius in Lithuanian). There is a tendency to opt for an international term since it facilitates communication with foreign scholars. This article explores terms that deal with language ‘standardness’ used in linguistic research and in written public discourse. In addition, it raises a question of whether it would not be useful to replace the term of common language with that of standard language. In our opinion, the term standard language better reflects such aspects of a given language variety as its normative nature, national status, formality, a consistent and natural acquisition of the language system as well as the application of the acquired knowledge in the processes of language standardisation and language policy. Certainly, replacing a term with a different one is not difficult, i.e. it is a matter of agreement and intention; however, in our case the question seems to be directly related not only to terminology but also to the concepts that they signify. On the one hand, international practice shows that local terms remain local and cause problems in translating them into other languages; on the other hand, it also reflects differences in the content of the terms when they are used to refer to different stages of language development.Several terms were used in Lithuanian linguistics to refer to language standardness. Jonas Jablonskis used the term written language. The scholar emphasised that he chose the term deliberately since he was not aiming at codifying spoken language and since written language was deemed as the most important in his time. The term common language created by Pranas Skardžius entered public use only in 1927. However, after 1950, the term of common language was replaced by the Russian term literary language. It was no better than other terms, it had no traditions in Lithuania but it was important as a political stance of showing how united Soviet linguistics was. Such purposeless change of terms was not accepted well by linguists working both in Lithuania and abroad. This issue was discussed on many occasions in writings by Skardžius, Jonikas and it was debated widely by Lithuanian linguists. The term common language was started to be used again in 1969.Today the status of our language is different: we have the system of established vocabulary, grammar, the whole language system is standardised, we have institutions that set and monitor language norms (State Commission of the Lithuanian Language and the State Language Inspectorate), institutions that foster Lithuanian, standardised language is used in all public domains, its status is established by a special law. As a result, contemporary situation can be defined by two clear terms: 1) Lithuanian which encompasses dialects, sociolects, idiolects and which also subsumes borrowings and jargon since it is part of our daily language which is not regulated by any laws or resolutions; 2) standard language which is understood as a language variety of the highest prestige. We do not suggest that the use of the term common language should be abandoned but we believe it should have a different place in the system of terms. As we are familiar with the way language development processes are termed in other countries the examples of which are provided in the first part of this article, we argue that common language may refer to a certain stage in the development of our language. Thus the language of a pre-standard stage used by the whole nation which has been more or less standardised can be referred to by the term common language. It would involve such language use which occurs in the initial stages of the development of a standard language, i.e. it would no longer refer to some tribal or dialectal language but rather to the general language used by the whole nation or its substantial part which first occurs in a written form and which is standardised only on the primitive or intuitive level without any language policy at the national or any other institutional level. However, this stage is over now and therefore, similarly to Latvians, we have to use the term standard language. In our opinion, standard language is a standardised language variety which is used in public discourse (state management, media, school) and in international communication.

scholarly journals Morphology Features of the Suffixal Slang Adverbs in the Lithuanian Language: Hybrid Suffixcal Derivatives -ai formed from the Suffixal Adjectives -iškas and from the Primary Adjectives

2020 ◽  
pp. 21-32
Author(s):  
Robertas Kudirka
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Language ◽  
Morphological Analysis ◽  
Morphological Features ◽  
Standard Language ◽  
Language System ◽  
Linguistic System

This article is one part of the research of adverbs in Lithuanian slang. Although there is no systematic and comprehensive research into the Lithuanian language slang, slang is commonly believed to be chaotic and have no grammatical system. The purpose of this article is to morphologically examine the derivatives formed with suffix -ai from the adjectives with suffix -iškas and from the primary adjectives without suffixes. The material (79 adverbs) is collected from the dictionary of Lithuanian slang and the dictionary of non-standard Lithuanian. The study aims to identify the systematic morphological features. To achieve the aim the research words are classified according to their suffixes, their origin is determined and morphological analysis is performed.The research reveals that a foreign language unit that emerges in the context of another language undergoes assimilation - it is transformed in one way or another by adapting it to the linguistic system. In Lithuanian slang, adverbs with the suffix -ai are mostly made up from hybrid adjectives of Russian origin with the suffix -iškas. There is also a number of adverbs formed from English hybrid adjectives. A few are derived from semantically neologic adjectives. The majority of suffixal -ai derivatives that are formed from primary adjectives are Russian origin. Adverbs which are derived from the adjectives with the suffix -iškas always retain the accent in the root: this pattern is common to all slang adverbs. All forms of adverbial degrees have accented suffixes. The findings of the reseach reveal that the morphological features of the studied slang adverbs have undergone certain transformations and follow the regularities of the Lithuanian language system: the slang adverbs copy derivative models of the standard language.

THE ROLE AND ATTITUDE OF UZBEK DIALECTS IN THE STANDARD LANGUAGE SYSTEM(BAYSUN DISTRICT ON THE EXAMPLE OF THE SOUND “J” DIALECTS)

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 98-103
Author(s):  
Muyassar Kholova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Literary Language ◽  
Standard Language ◽  
Language System ◽  
The Common

This article will discuss the role of the dialect and its relation to the literary language, concerning the transfer of the dialect in the corpus, as well as opinions on the relevance in the explanatory dictionary.The article reflects the author's scientific views, based on the previously existing scientific views of scientists of world dialectology about how the word regiolect relates to dialect or regiolect terms in the explanatory dictionary. The scope of the dialects, the evaluation of literary language as a source of systematic enrichment of the common dialect from the ancient language and the ancient Uzbek literary language more phonetic, partly lexical-grammatical taxonomy of the works of this period and published monolingual dictionaries in 2006-2008, 2020 compared and justified theoretically

scholarly journals Prefixal Innovations as a Mean of Psychological Impact on Consciousness Ofrecipient

2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-113
Author(s):  
Nataliia Kostusiak ◽  
Oleksandr Mezhov
Keyword(s):  
Small Group ◽  
Psychological Impact ◽  
Main Idea ◽  
External Factors ◽  
Language System ◽  
The Press ◽  
Double Function

The article characterizes structural and derivation features of innovations, which have enriched language system during the beg inning of the XXI century and are presented in Ukrainian media text. It is emphasized on the importance of interaction between external factors and language dynamic, the advantage of studying of prefixal innovations, taking into account the text environment, functional-stylistic, and psycholinguistic specifications was grounded. It was mentioned, that most of the innovations have negative emotional-expressive evaluation. They include derivatives with prefixal morphemes псевдо-, квазі-, лже-, it was indicated the part-language accessory of these lexemes, their thematic grouping was proposed. It was found out the using conditions and manipulating potential of language units with prefix недо-. It was also analyzed emotional-expressive coloration and pragmatic direction of innovations with formant пост-. Used in the press, prefixal morphemes анти-, гіпер- are consider edas components with double function, since they can mark both negative and positive features due to the con text. Functional-psycholinguistic analysis has caused the differentiation of small group of lexemes with prefixes де-, контр-, which also have evaluating connotations, however un like mention edabove un its, are greatly specialized on explication of positive emotional-evaluating influence on the recipient. Different writing of analyzed innovations has caused the abusing of problem of their standardized forming.  In that case a specific dichotomy appears: from one side used in publicism words of mentioned sample shall comply with current norms of “Ukrainian orthography”, and from another – lexemes, formed with some orthographic faults, partly exacerbate the psychological impact on the recipient. It was madea conclusion, that in modern Ukrainian media-publicism, derivates, created with the help of prefixes, form one of the biggest group of secondary nominations, which, helping to reveal the main idea of the report, in the same time give it the emotional-expressive evaluation.

scholarly journals On the Trends of Learning the Russian (Native) Language

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (2) ◽  
pp. 182-189
Author(s):  
Larisa D. Bednarskaya
Keyword(s):  
Native Language ◽  
Educational Process ◽  
National Consciousness ◽  
System Activity ◽  
Modern Language ◽  
Language System ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Language Norms

In connection with the introduction of the «Sample program on the subject “Russian native language”» the article analyzes the typical mistakes made by school graduates in the materials of the exam and journalists in the media. Numerous mass violations of language norms occurring in the modern language element pass by the attention of methodists and teachers, they are not taken into account in the educational process. The article presents the facts of linguistic science, which help to realize the features of Russian mentality reflected in the language system, in order to educate the national consciousness, forming a picture of the Russian world. Theoretical positions which can become a basis for creation of series of project lessons on the basis of system-activity technologies are revealed.

Proceedings of The Modern Language Association of America

PMLA ◽  
1935 ◽  
Vol 50 (4) ◽  
pp. 1343-1343
Keyword(s):  
Modern Language Association ◽  
Modern Language ◽  
Local Committee ◽  
Tuesday Morning ◽  
University Of Cincinnati ◽  
The University ◽  
Plaza Hotel

The fifty-second meeting of the Modern Language Associationof America was held, on the invitation of the University of Cincinnati, at Cincinnati, Ohio, Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, December 30 and 31, 1935, and January 1, 1936. The Association headquarters were in the Netherland Plaza Hotel, where all meetings were held except those of Tuesday morning and afternoon. These took place at the University of Cincinnati. Registration cards at headquarters were signed by about 900, though a considerably larger number of members were in attendance. The Local Committee estimated the attendance at not less than 1400. This Committee consisted of Professor Frank W. Chandler, Chairman; Professor Edwin H. Zeydel; Professor Phillip Ogden; Mr. John J. Rowe (for the Directors); and Mr. Joseph S. Graydon (for the Alumni).

Language processing is not a race against time

2016 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giosuè Baggio ◽  
Carmelo M. Vicario
Keyword(s):  
Information Processing ◽  
Human Brain ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Cognitive Functions ◽  
Memory Systems ◽  
Language System ◽  
Moderating Factors

AbstractWe agree with Christiansen & Chater (C&C) that language processing and acquisition are tightly constrained by the limits of sensory and memory systems. However, the human brain supports a range of cognitive functions that mitigate the effects of information processing bottlenecks. The language system is partly organised around these moderating factors, not just around restrictions on storage and computation.

Multilinguistic Components of Spelling: An Overview

2013 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 124-128 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela Barber
Keyword(s):  
Integrated Model ◽  
Literacy Skills ◽  
Speech Language Pathologists ◽  
Language System ◽  
Adequate Information ◽  
Intervention Plan ◽  
Semantic Awareness

Spelling is a window into a student's individual language system and, therefore, canprovide clues into the student's understanding, use, and integration of underlyinglinguistic skills. Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) should be involved in improvingstudents' literacy skills, including spelling, though frequently available measures ofspelling do not provide adequate information regarding critical underlying linguistic skillsthat contribute to spelling. This paper outlines a multilinguistic, integrated model of wordstudy (Masterson & Apel, 2007) that highlights the important influences of phonemicawareness, orthographic pattern awareness, semantic awareness, morphologicalawareness and mental graphemic representations on spelling. An SLP can analyze anindividual's misspellings to identify impairments in specific linguistic components andthen develop an individualized, appropriate intervention plan tailored to a child's uniquelinguistic profile, thus maximizing intervention success.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document