7. Must, must not, need not
- Must = it is necessary that you do it
Example:
We have not got much time. We must hurry.
- Must not = it is necessary that you do not do it.
Example:
It’s essential that nobody hears us. We must not make any noise.
- Need not = it is not necessary that you do it; you do not to do it.
Example:
We’ve got plenty of time. We need not hurry. (= it is not necessary to hurry).
8. Should (1)
- Kata kerja should mempunyai arti sebaiknya (dipakai untuk mengekspresikan sesuatu yang sebaiknya dikerjakan).
- Kalimat yang menggunakan should membicarakan kegiatan/keadaan sekarang (bukan yang sudah lewat).
Contoh:
You should take some rest; you’ve been working very hard lately.
(sebaiknya kamu beristirahat, kamu bekerja berat sekali akhir-akhir ini).
9. Should (2)
- Should can be used after a number of verbs, especially:
Suggest propose recommend insist demand
Example:
a. They insisted that we should have dinner with them.
b. It’s essential that you should be here on time.
c. I demanded that he should apologize.
- Should can be used after a number of adjectives:
Strange odd funny typical natural interesting surprised surprising
Example:
a. It’s strange that he should be late. He is usually on time.
b. I was surprised that she should say a thing.
10. Had better…. It’s time…..
- Had better is similar to should but not exactly the same. We use had better only for a particular situation (not for thing in general).
- Should be used in all types of situations to give an opinion or to give advice.
- With had better, there is always have a danger or a problem if you do not follow the advice.
Example:
a. I think all drivers should wear seat belts.
b. It’s cold today. You had better wear a coat when you go out.
11. Can / could / would you…..? etc. (Request, offers, permission, and invitations)
- Asking people to do things: can, could, will, and would.
- Asking for things: can, may.
- Asking for and giving permission: could, may, can.
Note: may is formal and less usual than can or could.
- Offering to do something: can, will.
- Offering and inviting: would, I’d like.
16. We’ve got plenty of time. We …………………. Yet.
Answer: need not leave.
17. We have not got much time. We ………………….. Hurry.
Answer: must.
18. Liz needs a change. She…………………….. go away for a few days.
Answer: should.
19. Peter and Judy are planning to het married. You think its bad idea.
Answer: I do not think they should get married.
20. Margaret……………………..passes the exam.
Answer: should.
21. I am feeling sick. I ate too much. So………………………
Answer: I should not have eaten so much.
22. That man on the motorbike is not wearing a helmet. That is dangerous.
Answer: he should be wearing a helmet.
23. It is strange that she……………………late. She is usually on time.
Answer: should be.
24. Shall I leave now? No, I……………….. A bit longer.
Answer: should wait.
25. I need some money. I’d better……………….to the bank.
Answer: go.
26. I have an appointment in ten minutes. ……………………. Go now.
Answer: I’d better.
27. It is a great film. You ………………….go and see it.
Answer: should.
28. You think the children should be in a bed. So you say:………………….
Answer: it’s time the children were in bed.
29. I want borrow your car. So I say:……………………..
Answer: do you think I could borrow your car?
30. You are interest with the newspaper in front of your seat. So say:
Answer: may I read the newspaper please?
Senin, 28 Maret 2011
summary structure bahan buku exercise 73
EXERCISES
36.1 Read the situations and write questions beginning Can… or Could….
1. You’re carrying a lot of things. You can’t open the door yourself. There’s a man standing near the door. You say to him: Could you open the door, please?
2. You phone Ann but somebody else answers. Ann isn’t there. You want to leave a message for her. You say: Could you say to Ann that I call her?
3. You are a tourist. You want to go to the station but you don’t know where it is. You ask at your hotel. You say: Can you show me the way to go to the station, please?
4. You are in clothes sho[. You see some trousers you like and you want to try them on. You say to the shop assisstant: Could you help me to try some trousers, please?
5. you have a car. You have to go to the same place as john, who hasn’t got a car. You want to give him a lift. You say to John: Can I give you a lift?
36.2 Read the situations and write qustions beginning Do you think.......
1. You want to borrow your friend’s camera. What do you say to him?
Do you think I could borrow your camera?
2. You are at a friend’s house and you want to use her phone. What do you say?
Do you think I could use your phone?
3. You’ve written letter in English. Before you send it, you want an English friend to check it. What do you ask him : Do you think that you will check my letter?
4. You want to leave work early because you have some things to do. What do you ask your boss?
Do you think you will permit me to leave work early?
5. the woman in the next room is playing music. It’s very loud. You want her to turn it down. What do you say to her? Do you think you could turn your music down?
6. You are phoning the owner of a flat which was advertised in a newspaper. You are interested in the flat and you want to come and see it today. What do you say to the owner?
Do you think you will show me your flat?
36.3 What would you say in these situations?
1. John has come to see you in your flat. You offer him something to eat.
YOU : Can I get you some meals?
JOHN : No, thanks you. I am not hungry.
2. You need help to change the film in your camera. You ask Ann.
YOU : Ann, I do not know how to change the film. Can you help me?
ANN : Sure. It is easy. All you have to do is this.
3. You are on a train. The woman next to you has finished reading newspaper. Now you want to have a look at it. You ask her.
YOU : Excuse me; may I borrow your newspaper, please?
WOMAN : Yes, of course. I have finished with it.
4. You are on a bus. You have a seat but an elderly mas is standing. You offer him your seat.
YOU : I’d like to give my seat to you.
MAN : oh, that’s very kind of you. Thank you very much.
5. You are a passenger in a car. Your friend is drifing very fast. You ask her to show down.
YOU : You’re making me very nervous. Can you more slowly, please?
DRIVER : Oh, I’m sorry. I didn’t realise I was going so fast.
6. You’ve finished your meal in a erstaurant and now you want the bill. You ask the writer:
YOU : Can I get the bill, please?
WAITER : Right. I’ll get it for you now.
7. A friend of yours is interested in one of your books. You invite him to borrow it.
FRIEND : This book looks very interesting.
YOU : Yes, it’s very good. Would you borrow it?
36.1 Read the situations and write questions beginning Can… or Could….
1. You’re carrying a lot of things. You can’t open the door yourself. There’s a man standing near the door. You say to him: Could you open the door, please?
2. You phone Ann but somebody else answers. Ann isn’t there. You want to leave a message for her. You say: Could you say to Ann that I call her?
3. You are a tourist. You want to go to the station but you don’t know where it is. You ask at your hotel. You say: Can you show me the way to go to the station, please?
4. You are in clothes sho[. You see some trousers you like and you want to try them on. You say to the shop assisstant: Could you help me to try some trousers, please?
5. you have a car. You have to go to the same place as john, who hasn’t got a car. You want to give him a lift. You say to John: Can I give you a lift?
36.2 Read the situations and write qustions beginning Do you think.......
1. You want to borrow your friend’s camera. What do you say to him?
Do you think I could borrow your camera?
2. You are at a friend’s house and you want to use her phone. What do you say?
Do you think I could use your phone?
3. You’ve written letter in English. Before you send it, you want an English friend to check it. What do you ask him : Do you think that you will check my letter?
4. You want to leave work early because you have some things to do. What do you ask your boss?
Do you think you will permit me to leave work early?
5. the woman in the next room is playing music. It’s very loud. You want her to turn it down. What do you say to her? Do you think you could turn your music down?
6. You are phoning the owner of a flat which was advertised in a newspaper. You are interested in the flat and you want to come and see it today. What do you say to the owner?
Do you think you will show me your flat?
36.3 What would you say in these situations?
1. John has come to see you in your flat. You offer him something to eat.
YOU : Can I get you some meals?
JOHN : No, thanks you. I am not hungry.
2. You need help to change the film in your camera. You ask Ann.
YOU : Ann, I do not know how to change the film. Can you help me?
ANN : Sure. It is easy. All you have to do is this.
3. You are on a train. The woman next to you has finished reading newspaper. Now you want to have a look at it. You ask her.
YOU : Excuse me; may I borrow your newspaper, please?
WOMAN : Yes, of course. I have finished with it.
4. You are on a bus. You have a seat but an elderly mas is standing. You offer him your seat.
YOU : I’d like to give my seat to you.
MAN : oh, that’s very kind of you. Thank you very much.
5. You are a passenger in a car. Your friend is drifing very fast. You ask her to show down.
YOU : You’re making me very nervous. Can you more slowly, please?
DRIVER : Oh, I’m sorry. I didn’t realise I was going so fast.
6. You’ve finished your meal in a erstaurant and now you want the bill. You ask the writer:
YOU : Can I get the bill, please?
WAITER : Right. I’ll get it for you now.
7. A friend of yours is interested in one of your books. You invite him to borrow it.
FRIEND : This book looks very interesting.
YOU : Yes, it’s very good. Would you borrow it?
summary empat linguistic theory
EDWARD SAPIR
FRANZ BOAS
Sauusure had obtained a model for his linguistic work from a different field. Similarly the most important influence on Edward linguistic career was contact with his fellow anthropologist and linguist, franz boas. Boas was self-taught in linguistic. His first interest in his university years had been the physical science and it was primarily an interest in geoghraphy, with its anthropological implications, that took him to baffinland. There he found, contrary to the current teaching that it is the cultural tradition of peoples and not their environmental situation which is most influential in forming a society. He also appreciated that any description of culture made in ignorance of the language and literature of the people would likely be misleading and superficial.
Boas has worked out his own scheme for the orderly description of languages, and he outlined it in the introduction to the handbook of American Indian languages. This work called for three basic divisions in the descriptions:
1. The phonetic of the language
2. The meaning categories expressed in the languages
3. The grammatical processes of combination and modification by which these meanings must be expressed
PHONETIC
The number of sound which may be produced is unlimited. In our own language, we select only a limited number of all the possible sounds for instance, some sounds. Like p are produced by the closing and opening of the lips. Others, like the t by the tongue into contact with the anterior portion of the palate, and producing a closure at that point and by suddenly expelling the air. On the other hand, a sound might be produced by placing the tip of the tongue between the lips making a closure in that manner, and by expelling the air suddenly. This sound would to out ear partake of the character both of the t and p. while it would correspond to neither of these. A comparison of well-known European languages like German, French, and English of even of the various dialects of the languages. Like those of Scouth and of the various English dialect.
Unlike sauusure, Boas intended to focus on la parole. For him language is only “articulate speech: that is ….communication by means of groups of sounds produced by the articulating organs”. This sound can be accurately described for any language. He believed, and he thought that reports by some analysis that the speakers of primitive languages are sloppy in their pronunciations tell us about the analysis than the languages analyzed. Boas said that in fact, we can often determine the nationality of the analyst “from the system selected by him for rendering the sounds” which he will tend to hear terms of his own language sounds.
GRAMMATICAL CATEGORIES
Besides having its own peculiar phonetic system, Boas held that each language has its own grammatical system. Of all possible phonetic uses only some, those with which meanings are associated. The selection of meanings is as varied and autonomous as the phonetic individualities:
From experiences from Indian languages Boas concluded that we cannot impose the form of our language upon other language, but must look to see what kinds of forms they use and how they express relations among ideas. The kinds of classifications we find, he believed, are largely due to the peculiar interest of each culture. In additions, there translations are useless, since the translation process suggest that the language and the culture consist of isolated items. Languages all show both content forms and relational forms that have no meaning but relate those that do.
NOUNS
Inmost IE languages nouns are classified according to the categories of gender modified by forms expressing singularity and plurality and appear in synthetic in combinations in various cases. According to Boas, “none of these apparently fundamental aspects of the noun are necessary elements of articulate speech.” He pointed out that suppression of gender does not hamper clarity that it is not the same thing as sex and that order classifications (or none at all) are possible.
PRONOUNS
The IE classification of pronoun is quite arbitrary, Boas showed since it does not exhaust the logical possibilities inherent in the notion of person. American Indian languages vary in the number and nature of selections they make from among these possibilities and they often add other obligatory classifications besides. For example: Kwakiutl and others add the concept of visibility and invisibility, and Chinook adds present and past.
Boas concluded his introduction by saying that any description of a language should concentrate first on what “according to the morphology of the language should be expressed” and not just on what the language might say. This is an implicit critic of the traditional grammarians who imposed who IE scheme upon other languages. They found “nouns” and all the other parts of speech because the language in questions could express the same idea. But they did not inform us of what this language, because of its own morphological construction had to differentiate.
This is the same point that the sauusure approached in the distinctions we have labeled “signification”, “content” and “value”. The mistake of the traditional grammarians was to deal with all the languages in terms of significations. The sole positive fact of language ignoring the different in content which is a result of the linguistic value, which in turn is an expression of the structural relations of a term in its system.
These distinctions can also cut across some other misconceptions that have resulted from structural work. Even in de saussure’s own writings. One misconception is that languages are incomparable because they are systems of signs in which each terms entire definition is to be sought and its structural relations to the other co-existent terms of the system. The other misconception is seen in the so-called Sapir hypothesis. One expression of which is hinted at in the passages quoted from Boas. This view advanced in 1836 by Wilhelm in his ober die suggest that language introduces a principle of relativity. Because languages, being unique structures, either help or hinder their speakers in making certain observations or in perceiving certain relations.
EDWARD SAPIR
After his stimulating the encounter with Boas gave up his work in classical philology and following the methods developed by Boas, started on the analysis of Takelma, an American Indian language spoken in the Northwest. His own reputation as a master of many languages, both from a theoretical as well as a practical aspect, quickly grew. During his career, his published articles on linguistic aspects of the usual European languages, many of the classical langaugaes, Chinese and Gweabo an African language. But his principal work was with American Indian languages and the titles of his articles refer to Kwakiuth, Chinook, Yana, etc.
SAPIR’S LANGUAGE
On the preface of the language sapir made it clear that the book was not to be technical introduction to the description of language, but he hoped, a way of communicating some new insight into the nature of language for the general reader. He said that although he mentioned psychological factors involved in the language use, he had not intended to go very deeply into the psychological bases.
LANGUAGE DEFINED
The introductory chapter of language contains the definitions of the languages that at first seems to be nothing more than a summary of the traditional view: “language is a purely human and non-instinctive method of communicating ideas, emotions, and desires by means of a system of voluntarily produced symbols.”
From these two aspect to language—its indispensability for thought and the fact that the outward form of the language alone remains constant, Sapir drew the conclusions that:
1. Language form can and should be studied for it own sake
2. Meaning must be considered, at least as the highest latent potential, at each step in the formal analysis since the whole purpose of language is to communicate meanings.
The formal analysis therefore, requires identification of the element that is the vehicles of the communications.
THE ELEMENT OF SPEECH
Chapter 2 of languages discusses the most fundamental units of language, radicals, grammatical elements, word and sentences. Sapir did not use the term “morpheme” but his illustrations of radicals and grammatical elements indicate that they have the same function. By the element of speech he did not mean the traditional part of speech. He considered later in the book and rejects. Neither was he discussing the phonemes of the language, since an “element of speech” as Sapir used the term, must like the morpheme have a referential functions and not merely the differential function of the sounds the language. A subject discussed in chapter 3 of this book.
LANGAUGE COMPARED
The comparison of the languages, dialects of the same language of different historical stages of the same language will involve the same kinds of methods and criteria. It is the data that are accidentally different. Any language description is implicitly a comparison of that language with other languages that would respond in the same or in different fashion to the descriptive categories employed, we can therefore decide on the criteria by which we can classify languages and contrast their types in terms of the basic elements of linguistic form already discussed.
In erecting a linguistic typology the first problem that Sapir raised was that of the point of view. Too often, he thought others have tried to use too simple a principle of classification or have based their work on two examples. As a result, he found some terms that were currently being used to described language types to be too simplistic.
Languages can thus be distinguished into four types:
1. Those that express concepts of types 1,2 and four which can be cailed simple pure relational languages
2. Those that express concepts type I, II, and IV which can be called complex pure relational languages
3. Those that express concepts of types I and III called simple mixed relational languages, and
4. Those that express concepts of types I, II, III called complex mixed relational languages
This group can be subdivided according to the formal types, for example agglutinative, fusion, and symbolic subtypes, according to the prevailing method of modifying the radical element.
Using the basic classifications and the additional qualifications, three main criteria emerge:
1. The conceptual type
2. The technique the formal expression
The degree of fusion between radical and affix or modification
FRANZ BOAS
Sauusure had obtained a model for his linguistic work from a different field. Similarly the most important influence on Edward linguistic career was contact with his fellow anthropologist and linguist, franz boas. Boas was self-taught in linguistic. His first interest in his university years had been the physical science and it was primarily an interest in geoghraphy, with its anthropological implications, that took him to baffinland. There he found, contrary to the current teaching that it is the cultural tradition of peoples and not their environmental situation which is most influential in forming a society. He also appreciated that any description of culture made in ignorance of the language and literature of the people would likely be misleading and superficial.
Boas has worked out his own scheme for the orderly description of languages, and he outlined it in the introduction to the handbook of American Indian languages. This work called for three basic divisions in the descriptions:
1. The phonetic of the language
2. The meaning categories expressed in the languages
3. The grammatical processes of combination and modification by which these meanings must be expressed
PHONETIC
The number of sound which may be produced is unlimited. In our own language, we select only a limited number of all the possible sounds for instance, some sounds. Like p are produced by the closing and opening of the lips. Others, like the t by the tongue into contact with the anterior portion of the palate, and producing a closure at that point and by suddenly expelling the air. On the other hand, a sound might be produced by placing the tip of the tongue between the lips making a closure in that manner, and by expelling the air suddenly. This sound would to out ear partake of the character both of the t and p. while it would correspond to neither of these. A comparison of well-known European languages like German, French, and English of even of the various dialects of the languages. Like those of Scouth and of the various English dialect.
Unlike sauusure, Boas intended to focus on la parole. For him language is only “articulate speech: that is ….communication by means of groups of sounds produced by the articulating organs”. This sound can be accurately described for any language. He believed, and he thought that reports by some analysis that the speakers of primitive languages are sloppy in their pronunciations tell us about the analysis than the languages analyzed. Boas said that in fact, we can often determine the nationality of the analyst “from the system selected by him for rendering the sounds” which he will tend to hear terms of his own language sounds.
GRAMMATICAL CATEGORIES
Besides having its own peculiar phonetic system, Boas held that each language has its own grammatical system. Of all possible phonetic uses only some, those with which meanings are associated. The selection of meanings is as varied and autonomous as the phonetic individualities:
From experiences from Indian languages Boas concluded that we cannot impose the form of our language upon other language, but must look to see what kinds of forms they use and how they express relations among ideas. The kinds of classifications we find, he believed, are largely due to the peculiar interest of each culture. In additions, there translations are useless, since the translation process suggest that the language and the culture consist of isolated items. Languages all show both content forms and relational forms that have no meaning but relate those that do.
NOUNS
Inmost IE languages nouns are classified according to the categories of gender modified by forms expressing singularity and plurality and appear in synthetic in combinations in various cases. According to Boas, “none of these apparently fundamental aspects of the noun are necessary elements of articulate speech.” He pointed out that suppression of gender does not hamper clarity that it is not the same thing as sex and that order classifications (or none at all) are possible.
PRONOUNS
The IE classification of pronoun is quite arbitrary, Boas showed since it does not exhaust the logical possibilities inherent in the notion of person. American Indian languages vary in the number and nature of selections they make from among these possibilities and they often add other obligatory classifications besides. For example: Kwakiutl and others add the concept of visibility and invisibility, and Chinook adds present and past.
Boas concluded his introduction by saying that any description of a language should concentrate first on what “according to the morphology of the language should be expressed” and not just on what the language might say. This is an implicit critic of the traditional grammarians who imposed who IE scheme upon other languages. They found “nouns” and all the other parts of speech because the language in questions could express the same idea. But they did not inform us of what this language, because of its own morphological construction had to differentiate.
This is the same point that the sauusure approached in the distinctions we have labeled “signification”, “content” and “value”. The mistake of the traditional grammarians was to deal with all the languages in terms of significations. The sole positive fact of language ignoring the different in content which is a result of the linguistic value, which in turn is an expression of the structural relations of a term in its system.
These distinctions can also cut across some other misconceptions that have resulted from structural work. Even in de saussure’s own writings. One misconception is that languages are incomparable because they are systems of signs in which each terms entire definition is to be sought and its structural relations to the other co-existent terms of the system. The other misconception is seen in the so-called Sapir hypothesis. One expression of which is hinted at in the passages quoted from Boas. This view advanced in 1836 by Wilhelm in his ober die suggest that language introduces a principle of relativity. Because languages, being unique structures, either help or hinder their speakers in making certain observations or in perceiving certain relations.
EDWARD SAPIR
After his stimulating the encounter with Boas gave up his work in classical philology and following the methods developed by Boas, started on the analysis of Takelma, an American Indian language spoken in the Northwest. His own reputation as a master of many languages, both from a theoretical as well as a practical aspect, quickly grew. During his career, his published articles on linguistic aspects of the usual European languages, many of the classical langaugaes, Chinese and Gweabo an African language. But his principal work was with American Indian languages and the titles of his articles refer to Kwakiuth, Chinook, Yana, etc.
SAPIR’S LANGUAGE
On the preface of the language sapir made it clear that the book was not to be technical introduction to the description of language, but he hoped, a way of communicating some new insight into the nature of language for the general reader. He said that although he mentioned psychological factors involved in the language use, he had not intended to go very deeply into the psychological bases.
LANGUAGE DEFINED
The introductory chapter of language contains the definitions of the languages that at first seems to be nothing more than a summary of the traditional view: “language is a purely human and non-instinctive method of communicating ideas, emotions, and desires by means of a system of voluntarily produced symbols.”
From these two aspect to language—its indispensability for thought and the fact that the outward form of the language alone remains constant, Sapir drew the conclusions that:
1. Language form can and should be studied for it own sake
2. Meaning must be considered, at least as the highest latent potential, at each step in the formal analysis since the whole purpose of language is to communicate meanings.
The formal analysis therefore, requires identification of the element that is the vehicles of the communications.
THE ELEMENT OF SPEECH
Chapter 2 of languages discusses the most fundamental units of language, radicals, grammatical elements, word and sentences. Sapir did not use the term “morpheme” but his illustrations of radicals and grammatical elements indicate that they have the same function. By the element of speech he did not mean the traditional part of speech. He considered later in the book and rejects. Neither was he discussing the phonemes of the language, since an “element of speech” as Sapir used the term, must like the morpheme have a referential functions and not merely the differential function of the sounds the language. A subject discussed in chapter 3 of this book.
LANGAUGE COMPARED
The comparison of the languages, dialects of the same language of different historical stages of the same language will involve the same kinds of methods and criteria. It is the data that are accidentally different. Any language description is implicitly a comparison of that language with other languages that would respond in the same or in different fashion to the descriptive categories employed, we can therefore decide on the criteria by which we can classify languages and contrast their types in terms of the basic elements of linguistic form already discussed.
In erecting a linguistic typology the first problem that Sapir raised was that of the point of view. Too often, he thought others have tried to use too simple a principle of classification or have based their work on two examples. As a result, he found some terms that were currently being used to described language types to be too simplistic.
Languages can thus be distinguished into four types:
1. Those that express concepts of types 1,2 and four which can be cailed simple pure relational languages
2. Those that express concepts type I, II, and IV which can be called complex pure relational languages
3. Those that express concepts of types I and III called simple mixed relational languages, and
4. Those that express concepts of types I, II, III called complex mixed relational languages
This group can be subdivided according to the formal types, for example agglutinative, fusion, and symbolic subtypes, according to the prevailing method of modifying the radical element.
Using the basic classifications and the additional qualifications, three main criteria emerge:
1. The conceptual type
2. The technique the formal expression
The degree of fusion between radical and affix or modification
summary empat linguistic theory
EDWARD SAPIR
FRANZ BOAS
Sauusure had obtained a model for his linguistic work from a different field. Similarly the most important influence on Edward linguistic career was contact with his fellow anthropologist and linguist, franz boas. Boas was self-taught in linguistic. His first interest in his university years had been the physical science and it was primarily an interest in geoghraphy, with its anthropological implications, that took him to baffinland. There he found, contrary to the current teaching that it is the cultural tradition of peoples and not their environmental situation which is most influential in forming a society. He also appreciated that any description of culture made in ignorance of the language and literature of the people would likely be misleading and superficial.
Boas has worked out his own scheme for the orderly description of languages, and he outlined it in the introduction to the handbook of American Indian languages. This work called for three basic divisions in the descriptions:
1. The phonetic of the language
2. The meaning categories expressed in the languages
3. The grammatical processes of combination and modification by which these meanings must be expressed
PHONETIC
The number of sound which may be produced is unlimited. In our own language, we select only a limited number of all the possible sounds for instance, some sounds. Like p are produced by the closing and opening of the lips. Others, like the t by the tongue into contact with the anterior portion of the palate, and producing a closure at that point and by suddenly expelling the air. On the other hand, a sound might be produced by placing the tip of the tongue between the lips making a closure in that manner, and by expelling the air suddenly. This sound would to out ear partake of the character both of the t and p. while it would correspond to neither of these. A comparison of well-known European languages like German, French, and English of even of the various dialects of the languages. Like those of Scouth and of the various English dialect.
Unlike sauusure, Boas intended to focus on la parole. For him language is only “articulate speech: that is ….communication by means of groups of sounds produced by the articulating organs”. This sound can be accurately described for any language. He believed, and he thought that reports by some analysis that the speakers of primitive languages are sloppy in their pronunciations tell us about the analysis than the languages analyzed. Boas said that in fact, we can often determine the nationality of the analyst “from the system selected by him for rendering the sounds” which he will tend to hear terms of his own language sounds.
GRAMMATICAL CATEGORIES
Besides having its own peculiar phonetic system, Boas held that each language has its own grammatical system. Of all possible phonetic uses only some, those with which meanings are associated. The selection of meanings is as varied and autonomous as the phonetic individualities:
From experiences from Indian languages Boas concluded that we cannot impose the form of our language upon other language, but must look to see what kinds of forms they use and how they express relations among ideas. The kinds of classifications we find, he believed, are largely due to the peculiar interest of each culture. In additions, there translations are useless, since the translation process suggest that the language and the culture consist of isolated items. Languages all show both content forms and relational forms that have no meaning but relate those that do.
NOUNS
Inmost IE languages nouns are classified according to the categories of gender modified by forms expressing singularity and plurality and appear in synthetic in combinations in various cases. According to Boas, “none of these apparently fundamental aspects of the noun are necessary elements of articulate speech.” He pointed out that suppression of gender does not hamper clarity that it is not the same thing as sex and that order classifications (or none at all) are possible.
PRONOUNS
The IE classification of pronoun is quite arbitrary, Boas showed since it does not exhaust the logical possibilities inherent in the notion of person. American Indian languages vary in the number and nature of selections they make from among these possibilities and they often add other obligatory classifications besides. For example: Kwakiutl and others add the concept of visibility and invisibility, and Chinook adds present and past.
Boas concluded his introduction by saying that any description of a language should concentrate first on what “according to the morphology of the language should be expressed” and not just on what the language might say. This is an implicit critic of the traditional grammarians who imposed who IE scheme upon other languages. They found “nouns” and all the other parts of speech because the language in questions could express the same idea. But they did not inform us of what this language, because of its own morphological construction had to differentiate.
This is the same point that the sauusure approached in the distinctions we have labeled “signification”, “content” and “value”. The mistake of the traditional grammarians was to deal with all the languages in terms of significations. The sole positive fact of language ignoring the different in content which is a result of the linguistic value, which in turn is an expression of the structural relations of a term in its system.
These distinctions can also cut across some other misconceptions that have resulted from structural work. Even in de saussure’s own writings. One misconception is that languages are incomparable because they are systems of signs in which each terms entire definition is to be sought and its structural relations to the other co-existent terms of the system. The other misconception is seen in the so-called Sapir hypothesis. One expression of which is hinted at in the passages quoted from Boas. This view advanced in 1836 by Wilhelm in his ober die suggest that language introduces a principle of relativity. Because languages, being unique structures, either help or hinder their speakers in making certain observations or in perceiving certain relations.
EDWARD SAPIR
After his stimulating the encounter with Boas gave up his work in classical philology and following the methods developed by Boas, started on the analysis of Takelma, an American Indian language spoken in the Northwest. His own reputation as a master of many languages, both from a theoretical as well as a practical aspect, quickly grew. During his career, his published articles on linguistic aspects of the usual European languages, many of the classical langaugaes, Chinese and Gweabo an African language. But his principal work was with American Indian languages and the titles of his articles refer to Kwakiuth, Chinook, Yana, etc.
SAPIR’S LANGUAGE
On the preface of the language sapir made it clear that the book was not to be technical introduction to the description of language, but he hoped, a way of communicating some new insight into the nature of language for the general reader. He said that although he mentioned psychological factors involved in the language use, he had not intended to go very deeply into the psychological bases.
LANGUAGE DEFINED
The introductory chapter of language contains the definitions of the languages that at first seems to be nothing more than a summary of the traditional view: “language is a purely human and non-instinctive method of communicating ideas, emotions, and desires by means of a system of voluntarily produced symbols.”
From these two aspect to language—its indispensability for thought and the fact that the outward form of the language alone remains constant, Sapir drew the conclusions that:
1. Language form can and should be studied for it own sake
2. Meaning must be considered, at least as the highest latent potential, at each step in the formal analysis since the whole purpose of language is to communicate meanings.
The formal analysis therefore, requires identification of the element that is the vehicles of the communications.
THE ELEMENT OF SPEECH
Chapter 2 of languages discusses the most fundamental units of language, radicals, grammatical elements, word and sentences. Sapir did not use the term “morpheme” but his illustrations of radicals and grammatical elements indicate that they have the same function. By the element of speech he did not mean the traditional part of speech. He considered later in the book and rejects. Neither was he discussing the phonemes of the language, since an “element of speech” as Sapir used the term, must like the morpheme have a referential functions and not merely the differential function of the sounds the language. A subject discussed in chapter 3 of this book.
LANGAUGE COMPARED
The comparison of the languages, dialects of the same language of different historical stages of the same language will involve the same kinds of methods and criteria. It is the data that are accidentally different. Any language description is implicitly a comparison of that language with other languages that would respond in the same or in different fashion to the descriptive categories employed, we can therefore decide on the criteria by which we can classify languages and contrast their types in terms of the basic elements of linguistic form already discussed.
In erecting a linguistic typology the first problem that Sapir raised was that of the point of view. Too often, he thought others have tried to use too simple a principle of classification or have based their work on two examples. As a result, he found some terms that were currently being used to described language types to be too simplistic.
Languages can thus be distinguished into four types:
1. Those that express concepts of types 1,2 and four which can be cailed simple pure relational languages
2. Those that express concepts type I, II, and IV which can be called complex pure relational languages
3. Those that express concepts of types I and III called simple mixed relational languages, and
4. Those that express concepts of types I, II, III called complex mixed relational languages
This group can be subdivided according to the formal types, for example agglutinative, fusion, and symbolic subtypes, according to the prevailing method of modifying the radical element.
Using the basic classifications and the additional qualifications, three main criteria emerge:
1. The conceptual type
2. The technique the formal expression
The degree of fusion between radical and affix or modification
FRANZ BOAS
Sauusure had obtained a model for his linguistic work from a different field. Similarly the most important influence on Edward linguistic career was contact with his fellow anthropologist and linguist, franz boas. Boas was self-taught in linguistic. His first interest in his university years had been the physical science and it was primarily an interest in geoghraphy, with its anthropological implications, that took him to baffinland. There he found, contrary to the current teaching that it is the cultural tradition of peoples and not their environmental situation which is most influential in forming a society. He also appreciated that any description of culture made in ignorance of the language and literature of the people would likely be misleading and superficial.
Boas has worked out his own scheme for the orderly description of languages, and he outlined it in the introduction to the handbook of American Indian languages. This work called for three basic divisions in the descriptions:
1. The phonetic of the language
2. The meaning categories expressed in the languages
3. The grammatical processes of combination and modification by which these meanings must be expressed
PHONETIC
The number of sound which may be produced is unlimited. In our own language, we select only a limited number of all the possible sounds for instance, some sounds. Like p are produced by the closing and opening of the lips. Others, like the t by the tongue into contact with the anterior portion of the palate, and producing a closure at that point and by suddenly expelling the air. On the other hand, a sound might be produced by placing the tip of the tongue between the lips making a closure in that manner, and by expelling the air suddenly. This sound would to out ear partake of the character both of the t and p. while it would correspond to neither of these. A comparison of well-known European languages like German, French, and English of even of the various dialects of the languages. Like those of Scouth and of the various English dialect.
Unlike sauusure, Boas intended to focus on la parole. For him language is only “articulate speech: that is ….communication by means of groups of sounds produced by the articulating organs”. This sound can be accurately described for any language. He believed, and he thought that reports by some analysis that the speakers of primitive languages are sloppy in their pronunciations tell us about the analysis than the languages analyzed. Boas said that in fact, we can often determine the nationality of the analyst “from the system selected by him for rendering the sounds” which he will tend to hear terms of his own language sounds.
GRAMMATICAL CATEGORIES
Besides having its own peculiar phonetic system, Boas held that each language has its own grammatical system. Of all possible phonetic uses only some, those with which meanings are associated. The selection of meanings is as varied and autonomous as the phonetic individualities:
From experiences from Indian languages Boas concluded that we cannot impose the form of our language upon other language, but must look to see what kinds of forms they use and how they express relations among ideas. The kinds of classifications we find, he believed, are largely due to the peculiar interest of each culture. In additions, there translations are useless, since the translation process suggest that the language and the culture consist of isolated items. Languages all show both content forms and relational forms that have no meaning but relate those that do.
NOUNS
Inmost IE languages nouns are classified according to the categories of gender modified by forms expressing singularity and plurality and appear in synthetic in combinations in various cases. According to Boas, “none of these apparently fundamental aspects of the noun are necessary elements of articulate speech.” He pointed out that suppression of gender does not hamper clarity that it is not the same thing as sex and that order classifications (or none at all) are possible.
PRONOUNS
The IE classification of pronoun is quite arbitrary, Boas showed since it does not exhaust the logical possibilities inherent in the notion of person. American Indian languages vary in the number and nature of selections they make from among these possibilities and they often add other obligatory classifications besides. For example: Kwakiutl and others add the concept of visibility and invisibility, and Chinook adds present and past.
Boas concluded his introduction by saying that any description of a language should concentrate first on what “according to the morphology of the language should be expressed” and not just on what the language might say. This is an implicit critic of the traditional grammarians who imposed who IE scheme upon other languages. They found “nouns” and all the other parts of speech because the language in questions could express the same idea. But they did not inform us of what this language, because of its own morphological construction had to differentiate.
This is the same point that the sauusure approached in the distinctions we have labeled “signification”, “content” and “value”. The mistake of the traditional grammarians was to deal with all the languages in terms of significations. The sole positive fact of language ignoring the different in content which is a result of the linguistic value, which in turn is an expression of the structural relations of a term in its system.
These distinctions can also cut across some other misconceptions that have resulted from structural work. Even in de saussure’s own writings. One misconception is that languages are incomparable because they are systems of signs in which each terms entire definition is to be sought and its structural relations to the other co-existent terms of the system. The other misconception is seen in the so-called Sapir hypothesis. One expression of which is hinted at in the passages quoted from Boas. This view advanced in 1836 by Wilhelm in his ober die suggest that language introduces a principle of relativity. Because languages, being unique structures, either help or hinder their speakers in making certain observations or in perceiving certain relations.
EDWARD SAPIR
After his stimulating the encounter with Boas gave up his work in classical philology and following the methods developed by Boas, started on the analysis of Takelma, an American Indian language spoken in the Northwest. His own reputation as a master of many languages, both from a theoretical as well as a practical aspect, quickly grew. During his career, his published articles on linguistic aspects of the usual European languages, many of the classical langaugaes, Chinese and Gweabo an African language. But his principal work was with American Indian languages and the titles of his articles refer to Kwakiuth, Chinook, Yana, etc.
SAPIR’S LANGUAGE
On the preface of the language sapir made it clear that the book was not to be technical introduction to the description of language, but he hoped, a way of communicating some new insight into the nature of language for the general reader. He said that although he mentioned psychological factors involved in the language use, he had not intended to go very deeply into the psychological bases.
LANGUAGE DEFINED
The introductory chapter of language contains the definitions of the languages that at first seems to be nothing more than a summary of the traditional view: “language is a purely human and non-instinctive method of communicating ideas, emotions, and desires by means of a system of voluntarily produced symbols.”
From these two aspect to language—its indispensability for thought and the fact that the outward form of the language alone remains constant, Sapir drew the conclusions that:
1. Language form can and should be studied for it own sake
2. Meaning must be considered, at least as the highest latent potential, at each step in the formal analysis since the whole purpose of language is to communicate meanings.
The formal analysis therefore, requires identification of the element that is the vehicles of the communications.
THE ELEMENT OF SPEECH
Chapter 2 of languages discusses the most fundamental units of language, radicals, grammatical elements, word and sentences. Sapir did not use the term “morpheme” but his illustrations of radicals and grammatical elements indicate that they have the same function. By the element of speech he did not mean the traditional part of speech. He considered later in the book and rejects. Neither was he discussing the phonemes of the language, since an “element of speech” as Sapir used the term, must like the morpheme have a referential functions and not merely the differential function of the sounds the language. A subject discussed in chapter 3 of this book.
LANGAUGE COMPARED
The comparison of the languages, dialects of the same language of different historical stages of the same language will involve the same kinds of methods and criteria. It is the data that are accidentally different. Any language description is implicitly a comparison of that language with other languages that would respond in the same or in different fashion to the descriptive categories employed, we can therefore decide on the criteria by which we can classify languages and contrast their types in terms of the basic elements of linguistic form already discussed.
In erecting a linguistic typology the first problem that Sapir raised was that of the point of view. Too often, he thought others have tried to use too simple a principle of classification or have based their work on two examples. As a result, he found some terms that were currently being used to described language types to be too simplistic.
Languages can thus be distinguished into four types:
1. Those that express concepts of types 1,2 and four which can be cailed simple pure relational languages
2. Those that express concepts type I, II, and IV which can be called complex pure relational languages
3. Those that express concepts of types I and III called simple mixed relational languages, and
4. Those that express concepts of types I, II, III called complex mixed relational languages
This group can be subdivided according to the formal types, for example agglutinative, fusion, and symbolic subtypes, according to the prevailing method of modifying the radical element.
Using the basic classifications and the additional qualifications, three main criteria emerge:
1. The conceptual type
2. The technique the formal expression
The degree of fusion between radical and affix or modification
summary 3 linguistic theory
FERDINANT DE SAUSSURE
The study of language in any period of history has always reflected the predominant interest of the time. At one time or another rhetoric, logic, literature, psychology, philosophy, physics, and biology has stood as goals or models for the study of language. In some instances methods of others disciplines have been adapted to linguistic purposes. During his studies Ferdinant had become dissatisfied with the idea that the sole method of studying language scientifically is from a historical point of view. But he did not see how a study that does not take the historical development of language into consideration could be made accurate until he becomes acquainted with the work of Emile Durkheim (1858-1917) in sociology. It will be helpful to examine some of Durkheim’s basic ideas and to see how they can be applied in making the study of language a “science” without requiring an appeal to history.
Durkheim’s little book Rules of the Sociological Method is still considered a classic in the field of sociology, even thought its principles and findings have been challenged. What makes the work important is that it was among the first to raise the possibility of making sociology a social science that would be distinct from anthropology and psychology. To order to outline what such a science would encompass. Durkheim’s attempted to define social facts as “things”. Comparable to the “things” studied by the physical sciences. It was this idea that Ied de Saussure to see a new way of examining language.
Durkheim defines a social fact as:
Any kind of action, whether of a set, nature or not, capable of exercising external constraint over the individual..
One of the most general criticisms of Durkheim’s position was that he ad needlessly made things out of social facts. He therefore felt obliged to defend himself against this charge of “needless reification” in the Preface to the second edition of the Rules. He claimed that the source of this critics dissatisfaction with his calling social facts “things” was their naïve understanding of what a thing is. For him a thing is different from an idea in the same way that sensation is different from intellection. A thing includes all objects of knowledge that cannot be conceived without data from experience, observation, and experiment: it is not the consequence of purely internal mental activity. Thus when Durkheim dealt with objects of knowledge as things he did not consider this view to.
1
The application of these ideas to language study is obvious. Language can be considered a thing separate from our use of it as individuals, because it is inherited entire from the other speaker who teach it to us and is not our product. Language is a social fact, since it is general throughout a community and exercises a constraint on the speaker. This constraint is peculiar, since :
1. It consist in our lack of any alternatives, if we wish communicate thought it
2. It is imposed on us by education but when we master it, we are aware of no constraint.
We are not committed to saying what kind of a thing language is. We define it this way at the beginning of our study because we want to know what it is and because the formulation is presumed useful to relate it to other thing.
Although de Saussure’s fame rest principally on his work is synchronic, structural linguistics, the basic of this reputation in the learned world for a long time was based on his brilliant work in historical linguistics. He was born of a French refugee family in Switzerland, November 17, 1857 and took his elementary and secondary studies in Geneva. At the age of 18 he began his university studies in Leipzig as a student of G. Curtius. Among his fellow student were the future Junggrammatiker Leskien and Brugmann. These man were already attracting attention by the quality of their work, and in 1879, at the age of 22, de Saussure proved himself their equal in his memorable Memoire sur Ie Systeme primitive des voyeles dans les langues indo- europeennes. This work established his name immediately as one of the leading authorities of the day.
His studies completed, he went to the university of paris and took an active part in the society linguistic. From 1881 until 1889, beginning when he was 25, he lectured on comparative grammar in place of Breals. His pupil were greathly taken both by his manner and by the material he thought. After 1891 he lectured at the university of geneva. First on comparative grammar and then on general linguistics. When he died in 1913 his renowned Cours de Linguistique Generale had not yet been published. The book was assembled by some of his students by comparing their notes and some of the lecture outlines of the author.
In the Cours de Linguistique Generale we find that de Saussure had crystallized his objections to the Junggramatiker notion that restricted the scientific investigation to language to its historical aspects. In effect he proposed that an entirely different kind of study is the sole scientific approach to language. It can be said that he set himself three goals:
1. To make the synchronic study of language scientific
2
2. To show that linguistic facts exist
3. To establish the method for identifying and dealing linguistic facts
Some of his main contributions to linguistic can be summarized by examining the terms he either coined or to which he gave a characteristic stamp:
1. The distinctions among la language
2. The distinction between diachronic and synchronic language study
3. His definition of the “linguistic sign”
4. The distinction between associative and syntagmatic relations in language
5. The notion of content, as opposed to linguistic significant and language
6. His description of the concrete and abstract units of language
His reason to making these distinctions was that he wanted to define language in such a way that it could be considered a thing, an object that could be studied scientifically. One of the properties he required of this object was that it be investigable without references to its historical development. He proceeded, therefore, according to the principles of Durkheim, who said that we have social facts that can be studied scientifically when we “consider them from an aspect that is independent of their individual manifestation.”
If we could subtract the individual element from le language we could eliminate the capredictable. This will give us a definition of language that fits the notion of a social fact. One definition that de Saussure gave of la language is la language minus la parole. La language is the set of passively acquired habits we have been taught by our speech community, in terms of which understand other speakers and produce combinations other speakers of our community understand. When we hear la parole of another community we perceive the noises made, but not the social fact of language. We cannot connect the sounds produced and the social facts with which the other speech community associates the sounds. When we hear la parole within our own community we perceive the sound as associated with social facts, according to a set of rules. This rules, which can be called the convention, or grammar, of the language are habits that education has imposed upon us. They have the property of being general throughout the community (that is why all the speakers can understand each other) and they exercise constraint on the individual speakers (we are not given alternative ways of linking sounds with social factors for successful communication). Mature speakers of a language of course are not aware of any constraint. Children, however, are often
3
puzzled about why they must use one form instead of another.
Viewed in this way la language appears to be an abstraction. De Saussure was well aware of this, but he found it no invoconvinience for the scientific study of language. First, he held that the point of view crates the object we study. Second, no science can possibly study entities in their concrete reality, since such a study would involve an ichnite number of individual properties. In order to make many study scientific we require a conventional simplification of the data to be examined. That is, we must abstract from some of the undenied concrete properties of the things a sciences studies in order to have a precisely definable object.
For a synchronic study of language we abstract from the undeniable fact that language chances. Language can then be studied as thought it were a stable system or state, with neither a past nor a future. This view requires some justification, and he provided it by comparing the properties of la parole, as he defined it and la language.
1. Acts of speaking (la parole) are invariably individual, variable, wymsicle, and inventive. There is no principle of unity within speech considered in this way, and, therefore, it is not amenable to scientific study.
2. For a scientific study of anything we must have an object that “holds still” since we want to count and measure it; la parole consist of an infinitive number of individual choices, acts of articulation, and novel combinations. Its descriptions must therefore be infinitive.
3. La parole is not a collective instrument; all its manifestations are individual, heterogeneous, and momentary; it is only the sum of individual acts, expressible in the formula.
4. La language, however, is a collective pattern; it is something common to all the speakers, and therefore can be expressed in a different formula.
5. La language exist in the form of a sum of impressions deposited in the brain of each individual, which are almost like a dictionary of which identical copies have been constributed to each individual.
6. La language is both, a social product of the faculty of language and an esemble of the necessary convention adopted by the social body to permit the exercise of that faculty.
7. Since la language is a deposit of sign which individual has received from other speakers to the community, it is a essentially a passive thing, as opposed to la parole, which is active.
8. La language is a set of convention that we all receive, ready made, from previous speakers of the language. It would appeared that language changes so slowly that we are justified in studying it as though there were no change.
The linguistics sign
So far we have seen that for De S scientific linguistics must study the pattern that make individual utterances conform to the social restraint imposed by a speech community. We have also seen that, according to De S, diachronic linguistic, far from being the only scientific study of language, can be considered scientific only in a derivative sense, since it presupposed the finding of synchronic linguistics. It is at this point that we must examine De S definition of the concrete and integral objects of linguistic science. This object is la language, of course, but not in the all inclusive sense in which are expressions could be understood.
ASSOCIATIVE RELATIONS
Any link in the chain of speech will suggest other language units to us, because the units either resemble or differ from each other in form or meaning. De S illustrated this point by his example of the French expression enseignement, which can be equally well exemplified by its Englsih equivalent, ‘ teaching’. This word can remind us of others that have a similar form. For example, any word ending in –ing.
SYNTACMATIC RELATIONS
Syntacmatic relations, which hold between the successive members of given chain, are called relations in praesentia, since the term of the relations are actually co-occurent items.
LINGUISTIC IDENTITIES
Linguistic valued should therefore be studied from two point of view conceptual and material. For de Saussure, thought is a shapeless and indistinct mass apart from its expression in words. It is therefore impossible to discover entities, or units of thought, except through language. It is equally impossible to discover entities language by studying sounds alone.
He proceeded, therefore, according to the principles of Durkheim, who said that we have social facts that can be studied scientifically when we “consider them from an aspect that is independent of their individual manifestation
5
The study of language in any period of history has always reflected the predominant interest of the time. At one time or another rhetoric, logic, literature, psychology, philosophy, physics, and biology has stood as goals or models for the study of language. In some instances methods of others disciplines have been adapted to linguistic purposes. During his studies Ferdinant had become dissatisfied with the idea that the sole method of studying language scientifically is from a historical point of view. But he did not see how a study that does not take the historical development of language into consideration could be made accurate until he becomes acquainted with the work of Emile Durkheim (1858-1917) in sociology. It will be helpful to examine some of Durkheim’s basic ideas and to see how they can be applied in making the study of language a “science” without requiring an appeal to history.
Durkheim’s little book Rules of the Sociological Method is still considered a classic in the field of sociology, even thought its principles and findings have been challenged. What makes the work important is that it was among the first to raise the possibility of making sociology a social science that would be distinct from anthropology and psychology. To order to outline what such a science would encompass. Durkheim’s attempted to define social facts as “things”. Comparable to the “things” studied by the physical sciences. It was this idea that Ied de Saussure to see a new way of examining language.
Durkheim defines a social fact as:
Any kind of action, whether of a set, nature or not, capable of exercising external constraint over the individual..
One of the most general criticisms of Durkheim’s position was that he ad needlessly made things out of social facts. He therefore felt obliged to defend himself against this charge of “needless reification” in the Preface to the second edition of the Rules. He claimed that the source of this critics dissatisfaction with his calling social facts “things” was their naïve understanding of what a thing is. For him a thing is different from an idea in the same way that sensation is different from intellection. A thing includes all objects of knowledge that cannot be conceived without data from experience, observation, and experiment: it is not the consequence of purely internal mental activity. Thus when Durkheim dealt with objects of knowledge as things he did not consider this view to.
1
The application of these ideas to language study is obvious. Language can be considered a thing separate from our use of it as individuals, because it is inherited entire from the other speaker who teach it to us and is not our product. Language is a social fact, since it is general throughout a community and exercises a constraint on the speaker. This constraint is peculiar, since :
1. It consist in our lack of any alternatives, if we wish communicate thought it
2. It is imposed on us by education but when we master it, we are aware of no constraint.
We are not committed to saying what kind of a thing language is. We define it this way at the beginning of our study because we want to know what it is and because the formulation is presumed useful to relate it to other thing.
Although de Saussure’s fame rest principally on his work is synchronic, structural linguistics, the basic of this reputation in the learned world for a long time was based on his brilliant work in historical linguistics. He was born of a French refugee family in Switzerland, November 17, 1857 and took his elementary and secondary studies in Geneva. At the age of 18 he began his university studies in Leipzig as a student of G. Curtius. Among his fellow student were the future Junggrammatiker Leskien and Brugmann. These man were already attracting attention by the quality of their work, and in 1879, at the age of 22, de Saussure proved himself their equal in his memorable Memoire sur Ie Systeme primitive des voyeles dans les langues indo- europeennes. This work established his name immediately as one of the leading authorities of the day.
His studies completed, he went to the university of paris and took an active part in the society linguistic. From 1881 until 1889, beginning when he was 25, he lectured on comparative grammar in place of Breals. His pupil were greathly taken both by his manner and by the material he thought. After 1891 he lectured at the university of geneva. First on comparative grammar and then on general linguistics. When he died in 1913 his renowned Cours de Linguistique Generale had not yet been published. The book was assembled by some of his students by comparing their notes and some of the lecture outlines of the author.
In the Cours de Linguistique Generale we find that de Saussure had crystallized his objections to the Junggramatiker notion that restricted the scientific investigation to language to its historical aspects. In effect he proposed that an entirely different kind of study is the sole scientific approach to language. It can be said that he set himself three goals:
1. To make the synchronic study of language scientific
2
2. To show that linguistic facts exist
3. To establish the method for identifying and dealing linguistic facts
Some of his main contributions to linguistic can be summarized by examining the terms he either coined or to which he gave a characteristic stamp:
1. The distinctions among la language
2. The distinction between diachronic and synchronic language study
3. His definition of the “linguistic sign”
4. The distinction between associative and syntagmatic relations in language
5. The notion of content, as opposed to linguistic significant and language
6. His description of the concrete and abstract units of language
His reason to making these distinctions was that he wanted to define language in such a way that it could be considered a thing, an object that could be studied scientifically. One of the properties he required of this object was that it be investigable without references to its historical development. He proceeded, therefore, according to the principles of Durkheim, who said that we have social facts that can be studied scientifically when we “consider them from an aspect that is independent of their individual manifestation.”
If we could subtract the individual element from le language we could eliminate the capredictable. This will give us a definition of language that fits the notion of a social fact. One definition that de Saussure gave of la language is la language minus la parole. La language is the set of passively acquired habits we have been taught by our speech community, in terms of which understand other speakers and produce combinations other speakers of our community understand. When we hear la parole of another community we perceive the noises made, but not the social fact of language. We cannot connect the sounds produced and the social facts with which the other speech community associates the sounds. When we hear la parole within our own community we perceive the sound as associated with social facts, according to a set of rules. This rules, which can be called the convention, or grammar, of the language are habits that education has imposed upon us. They have the property of being general throughout the community (that is why all the speakers can understand each other) and they exercise constraint on the individual speakers (we are not given alternative ways of linking sounds with social factors for successful communication). Mature speakers of a language of course are not aware of any constraint. Children, however, are often
3
puzzled about why they must use one form instead of another.
Viewed in this way la language appears to be an abstraction. De Saussure was well aware of this, but he found it no invoconvinience for the scientific study of language. First, he held that the point of view crates the object we study. Second, no science can possibly study entities in their concrete reality, since such a study would involve an ichnite number of individual properties. In order to make many study scientific we require a conventional simplification of the data to be examined. That is, we must abstract from some of the undenied concrete properties of the things a sciences studies in order to have a precisely definable object.
For a synchronic study of language we abstract from the undeniable fact that language chances. Language can then be studied as thought it were a stable system or state, with neither a past nor a future. This view requires some justification, and he provided it by comparing the properties of la parole, as he defined it and la language.
1. Acts of speaking (la parole) are invariably individual, variable, wymsicle, and inventive. There is no principle of unity within speech considered in this way, and, therefore, it is not amenable to scientific study.
2. For a scientific study of anything we must have an object that “holds still” since we want to count and measure it; la parole consist of an infinitive number of individual choices, acts of articulation, and novel combinations. Its descriptions must therefore be infinitive.
3. La parole is not a collective instrument; all its manifestations are individual, heterogeneous, and momentary; it is only the sum of individual acts, expressible in the formula.
4. La language, however, is a collective pattern; it is something common to all the speakers, and therefore can be expressed in a different formula.
5. La language exist in the form of a sum of impressions deposited in the brain of each individual, which are almost like a dictionary of which identical copies have been constributed to each individual.
6. La language is both, a social product of the faculty of language and an esemble of the necessary convention adopted by the social body to permit the exercise of that faculty.
7. Since la language is a deposit of sign which individual has received from other speakers to the community, it is a essentially a passive thing, as opposed to la parole, which is active.
8. La language is a set of convention that we all receive, ready made, from previous speakers of the language. It would appeared that language changes so slowly that we are justified in studying it as though there were no change.
The linguistics sign
So far we have seen that for De S scientific linguistics must study the pattern that make individual utterances conform to the social restraint imposed by a speech community. We have also seen that, according to De S, diachronic linguistic, far from being the only scientific study of language, can be considered scientific only in a derivative sense, since it presupposed the finding of synchronic linguistics. It is at this point that we must examine De S definition of the concrete and integral objects of linguistic science. This object is la language, of course, but not in the all inclusive sense in which are expressions could be understood.
ASSOCIATIVE RELATIONS
Any link in the chain of speech will suggest other language units to us, because the units either resemble or differ from each other in form or meaning. De S illustrated this point by his example of the French expression enseignement, which can be equally well exemplified by its Englsih equivalent, ‘ teaching’. This word can remind us of others that have a similar form. For example, any word ending in –ing.
SYNTACMATIC RELATIONS
Syntacmatic relations, which hold between the successive members of given chain, are called relations in praesentia, since the term of the relations are actually co-occurent items.
LINGUISTIC IDENTITIES
Linguistic valued should therefore be studied from two point of view conceptual and material. For de Saussure, thought is a shapeless and indistinct mass apart from its expression in words. It is therefore impossible to discover entities, or units of thought, except through language. It is equally impossible to discover entities language by studying sounds alone.
He proceeded, therefore, according to the principles of Durkheim, who said that we have social facts that can be studied scientifically when we “consider them from an aspect that is independent of their individual manifestation
5
movie 2010
A
• Alice in Wonderland (film 2010)
C
• Clash of the Titans (film 2010)
D
• Daftar film Amerika Serikat tahun 2010
• Dear John (film)
• Despicable Me
• Diary of a Wimpy Kid (film)
E
• Eat Pray Love
F
• Free Willy 4: Escape from Pirate's Cove
• Furry Vengeance
G
• Green Zone (film)
I
• Inception
• Iron Man 2
K
• Killers (film 2010)
M
• Master Harold...and the Boys (film 2010)
• Megamind
• My Soul to Take
P
• Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief
• Piranha 3D
• Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time (film)
R
• Remember Me
• Robin Hood (film 2010)
S
• Shrek Forever After
• Shutter Island (film)
T
• Tangled
• The Back-Up Plan
• The Book of Eli
T samb.
• The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader
• The Kids are All Right
• The Last Airbender
• The Last Exorcism
• The Social Network
• The Spy Next Door
• The Town (film 2010)
• The Wolfman (film 2010)
• Toy Story 3
V
• Valentine's Day (film)
Y
• Youth in Revolt (film)
P
• Piranha 3D
T
• The Last Airbender
• Alice in Wonderland (film 2010)
C
• Clash of the Titans (film 2010)
D
• Daftar film Amerika Serikat tahun 2010
• Dear John (film)
• Despicable Me
• Diary of a Wimpy Kid (film)
E
• Eat Pray Love
F
• Free Willy 4: Escape from Pirate's Cove
• Furry Vengeance
G
• Green Zone (film)
I
• Inception
• Iron Man 2
K
• Killers (film 2010)
M
• Master Harold...and the Boys (film 2010)
• Megamind
• My Soul to Take
P
• Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief
• Piranha 3D
• Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time (film)
R
• Remember Me
• Robin Hood (film 2010)
S
• Shrek Forever After
• Shutter Island (film)
T
• Tangled
• The Back-Up Plan
• The Book of Eli
T samb.
• The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader
• The Kids are All Right
• The Last Airbender
• The Last Exorcism
• The Social Network
• The Spy Next Door
• The Town (film 2010)
• The Wolfman (film 2010)
• Toy Story 3
V
• Valentine's Day (film)
Y
• Youth in Revolt (film)
P
• Piranha 3D
T
• The Last Airbender
title RM Literature 71-80
71 A320080151 AMERICAN DREAM AS REFLECTED IN ARTHUR MILLER’S DEATH OF A SALESMAN DRAMA (1949): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
72 A320080098 REVENGE AGAINTS AMERICA IN PHILIP NOYCE’S SALT MOVIE (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
73 A320080003 NEEDS FOR LOVE AND BELONGINESS OF SCHAHRIAR IN STEVEN BARRON’S ARABIAN NIGHTS MOVIE (2004): A HUMANISTIC PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
74 A320080178 TRAUMA AND THE SPECTERS OF ENSLAVEMENT IN TONI MORRISON’S BELOVED (1988): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
75 A320080095 JEALOUSY IN THE SHOOTING STAR IN DECKERTS’ THE GREEN-EYED MONSTER ENGLISH TEENLIT NOVEL (2005): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
76 A320080039 RACIAL INEQUALITY IN THE SOTHERN STATE IN AMERICA IN THE MID 1930S IN TO KILL A MOCKING BIRD NOVEL WRITTEN BY HARPERLEE: A SOCIOLOGICAL APPROACH
77 A320080004 POWER OF WIKUS’ LOVE IN NEILL BLOMKAMP’S DISTRICT 9 MOVIE (2009): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
78 A320080089 CHUN-LIZ AMBITION TO BEAT DOWN BISON IN STREET FIGHTER MOVIE (2009): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
79 A320080192 SAVING THE CHILDREN’S SOUL IN NICK MY SISTER’S KEEPER (2009): A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
80 A320080016 THE POWER OF MICHAELA’S LOVE IN STEVEN TRANSFORMER: REVENGE OF THE FALLEN MOVIE (2009): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
72 A320080098 REVENGE AGAINTS AMERICA IN PHILIP NOYCE’S SALT MOVIE (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
73 A320080003 NEEDS FOR LOVE AND BELONGINESS OF SCHAHRIAR IN STEVEN BARRON’S ARABIAN NIGHTS MOVIE (2004): A HUMANISTIC PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
74 A320080178 TRAUMA AND THE SPECTERS OF ENSLAVEMENT IN TONI MORRISON’S BELOVED (1988): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
75 A320080095 JEALOUSY IN THE SHOOTING STAR IN DECKERTS’ THE GREEN-EYED MONSTER ENGLISH TEENLIT NOVEL (2005): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
76 A320080039 RACIAL INEQUALITY IN THE SOTHERN STATE IN AMERICA IN THE MID 1930S IN TO KILL A MOCKING BIRD NOVEL WRITTEN BY HARPERLEE: A SOCIOLOGICAL APPROACH
77 A320080004 POWER OF WIKUS’ LOVE IN NEILL BLOMKAMP’S DISTRICT 9 MOVIE (2009): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
78 A320080089 CHUN-LIZ AMBITION TO BEAT DOWN BISON IN STREET FIGHTER MOVIE (2009): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
79 A320080192 SAVING THE CHILDREN’S SOUL IN NICK MY SISTER’S KEEPER (2009): A PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
80 A320080016 THE POWER OF MICHAELA’S LOVE IN STEVEN TRANSFORMER: REVENGE OF THE FALLEN MOVIE (2009): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
title RM Literature 51-70
51 A320080324 PERSUING HAPPINESS IN EAT PRAY LOVE MOVIE (2010) DIRECTED BY RYAN MURPHY: A PSICHOANALYTIC APPROACH
52 A320080165 THE GOODNESS OF AANG IN SHYAMALAN’S THE LAST AIRBENDER MOVIE (2010): A FEMINIST APPROACH
53 A320080131 AFFECTION OF NINA’S MOTHER IN DARREN ‘S BLACK SWAN MOVIE (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
54 A320080152 APPRESSION OF CHILDREN IN A CHILD CALLED IT DAVE PELZER’S NOVEL (1995): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
55 A320080172 SADNEDD OF TOM IN MARCH WEBB MOVIE 500 DAYS OF SUMMER (2009): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
56 A320080042 DESIRE OF OBTAINING AFFECTION IN THE PROPOSAL’S MOVIE (2009): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
57 A320080135 AFFECTION AND BREVITY IN JOHN’S SALT MOVIE (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
58 A320080155 SEXUAL HARRASMENT IN I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE’S MOVIE (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
59 A320080015 HOPELESSNESS IN MARC WEBB’S 500 DAY OF SUMMER MOVIE (200(:AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
60 A320080117 PSYCHOLOGICAL CONFLICT OF A PRIEST IN THE SCARLET LETTER NOVEL BY NATHANIEL HAWTHORNE (2009): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
61 A320080025 LOOTING OF NATIONAL TREASURE IN SHARPE’S PERIL MOVIE (2010): A SOCIOLOGICAL APPROACH
62 A320080008 FROM ZERO TO HERO IN THE BLIND SIDE MOVIE (2009) BY SANDRA BULLOCK: AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
63 A320080011 HOPELESSNESS OF ZAIRA IN ZARA ZETTIRES’ ZR’S EVERY SILENCE HAS STORY NOVEL (2008): AN EXISTENTIALIST APPROACH
64 A320070030 AGAINTS SHERLOCK HOLMES LOGIC IN GUY RICHIES’ SHERLOCK HOLMES MOVIE (2009): A MARXIST APPROACH
65 A320080082 NEEDS FOR LOVE AND BELONGINESS IN THE CHARACTER OF WILLY MAITLAND IN NEVER SAY DRE’S NOVEL: A HUMANISTIC PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
66 A320080107 NEEDS OF LOVE IN TRANSPORTER 3 MOVIE DIRECTED BY OLIVIER MEGATON (2008): A HUMANISTIC APPROACH
67 A320080013 EXPRESSION OF LOVE IN ROBERT BROWNING’S MEETING AT NIGHT; ROBERT BURN’S A RED, RED ROSE; EE. CUMMINGS’ I CARRY YOUR HEART WITH ME: A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
68 A3200800001 PERSONALITY DEVELOPMENT OF TYLER IN DAVID NIXON’S LETTER TO GOD MOVIE (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
69 A320080103 WOMAN’S AMBITION TO FIGHT AGAINTS NAZI IN FEMALE AGENT MOVIE (2008) DIRECTED BY JEAN PAUL SALOME: A FEMINIST APPROACH
70 A320080174 PORTRAYAL OF RACIAL SEGREGATION IN RICHARD WRIGHT’S THE BLACK BOY (1966): A SOSIOLOGICAL APPROACH
52 A320080165 THE GOODNESS OF AANG IN SHYAMALAN’S THE LAST AIRBENDER MOVIE (2010): A FEMINIST APPROACH
53 A320080131 AFFECTION OF NINA’S MOTHER IN DARREN ‘S BLACK SWAN MOVIE (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
54 A320080152 APPRESSION OF CHILDREN IN A CHILD CALLED IT DAVE PELZER’S NOVEL (1995): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
55 A320080172 SADNEDD OF TOM IN MARCH WEBB MOVIE 500 DAYS OF SUMMER (2009): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
56 A320080042 DESIRE OF OBTAINING AFFECTION IN THE PROPOSAL’S MOVIE (2009): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
57 A320080135 AFFECTION AND BREVITY IN JOHN’S SALT MOVIE (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
58 A320080155 SEXUAL HARRASMENT IN I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE’S MOVIE (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
59 A320080015 HOPELESSNESS IN MARC WEBB’S 500 DAY OF SUMMER MOVIE (200(:AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
60 A320080117 PSYCHOLOGICAL CONFLICT OF A PRIEST IN THE SCARLET LETTER NOVEL BY NATHANIEL HAWTHORNE (2009): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
61 A320080025 LOOTING OF NATIONAL TREASURE IN SHARPE’S PERIL MOVIE (2010): A SOCIOLOGICAL APPROACH
62 A320080008 FROM ZERO TO HERO IN THE BLIND SIDE MOVIE (2009) BY SANDRA BULLOCK: AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
63 A320080011 HOPELESSNESS OF ZAIRA IN ZARA ZETTIRES’ ZR’S EVERY SILENCE HAS STORY NOVEL (2008): AN EXISTENTIALIST APPROACH
64 A320070030 AGAINTS SHERLOCK HOLMES LOGIC IN GUY RICHIES’ SHERLOCK HOLMES MOVIE (2009): A MARXIST APPROACH
65 A320080082 NEEDS FOR LOVE AND BELONGINESS IN THE CHARACTER OF WILLY MAITLAND IN NEVER SAY DRE’S NOVEL: A HUMANISTIC PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
66 A320080107 NEEDS OF LOVE IN TRANSPORTER 3 MOVIE DIRECTED BY OLIVIER MEGATON (2008): A HUMANISTIC APPROACH
67 A320080013 EXPRESSION OF LOVE IN ROBERT BROWNING’S MEETING AT NIGHT; ROBERT BURN’S A RED, RED ROSE; EE. CUMMINGS’ I CARRY YOUR HEART WITH ME: A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
68 A3200800001 PERSONALITY DEVELOPMENT OF TYLER IN DAVID NIXON’S LETTER TO GOD MOVIE (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
69 A320080103 WOMAN’S AMBITION TO FIGHT AGAINTS NAZI IN FEMALE AGENT MOVIE (2008) DIRECTED BY JEAN PAUL SALOME: A FEMINIST APPROACH
70 A320080174 PORTRAYAL OF RACIAL SEGREGATION IN RICHARD WRIGHT’S THE BLACK BOY (1966): A SOSIOLOGICAL APPROACH
title RM Literature 21-50
21 A320080169 MORAL ANXIETY IN 2012 MOVIE BY ROLAND EMMERICH (2009): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
22 A320080184 OVERCOMING SPEECH DISABILITY IN THE KING’S SPEECH MOVIE (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
23 A320080112 VALIANT PRINCIPLE OF LIVE IN OLIVER MEGATON’S TRANSPORTER 3 MOVIE (2009): AN INDIVIDUAL APPROACH
24 A320080327 ROMANCE BETWEEN JULIAN AND NATALIE IN STEP UP 3D BY EMILY MEYER (2010): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
25 A320080332 INTIMATE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LUKE KUTCHER AND PIRATES DANCER’S IN STEP UP 3D MOVIE BY EMILY MEYER (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
26 A320080328 DISCOVERING THE SELF OF ELIZABETH GILBERT IN “ EAT PRAY LOVE” BY RYAN MURPHY (2010): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
27 A320080355 SPLIT PERSONALITY OF JULIAN IN STEP UP 3D MOVIE DIRECTED BY EMILY MEYER (2010): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
28 A320080144 FEAR AND HESITANCE IN ECLIPSE MOVIE DIRECTED BY DAVID SLADE (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
29 A320080291 ANNA FITSGERALD’S CONTRADICTORY FEELING IN JODY PICOULT’S MY SISTER KEEPER (2004): AN INDIVIDUAL APPROACH
30 A320080292 GREONUILLE’S DEPRESSION AND DESPAIR IN TOM TYKWER’S PERFUME MOVIE (2006): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
31 A320080289 LIBERATING THE NOTION FROM OPRESSION IN TEKKEN MOVIE DIRECTED BY DWIGHT H LITTLE (2010): A SOCIOLOGICAL APPROACH
32 A320080241 SEARCHING FOR IDENTITY OF ELIZABETH GILBERT IN RYAN MURPHY’S EAT PRAY LOVE MOVIE (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
33 A320080254 CONFLICT OF LOVE OF SUMMER LYNDON IN NORA ROBERTS’ TABLE FOR TWO NOVEL (2002): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
34 A320080259 POST INDUSTRIAL ENGLAND IN OLIVER TWIST BY CHARLES DICKENS (1837): A SOSIOLOGY APPROACH
35 A320080109 AGAINST THE PATHRIARCHY IN THE WHOLED HOSSEINI’S A SPLENDID THOUSAND SUNS (2007): A FEMINIST APPROACH
36 A320080146 SAVING ALAGESIA IN ELDEST NOVEL 2005 BY CHRISTOPHER PAOLINI: AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
37 A320080113 POWER OF LOVE IN JEAN-MARK VELEE’S MOVIE THE YOUNG VICTORIA (2009) :A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
38 A320080248 FAITHFULLNESS IN DH. LAWRENCE’S THE ROCKING HORSE WINNER (1926): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
39 A320080118 PERSISTENCE OF THE DASTNA’S PRINCE IN THE PRINCE OF THE PERSIA MOVIE (2010) BY MIKE NEWELL: A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
40 A320080287 BETWEEN THE KING AND THE FATHERLESS CHILD IN THE PRINCE OF THE PERSIA (2010) MOVIE DIRECTED BY MIKE NEWELL: A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
41 A320080031 PERSONALITY OF DASTAN IN PRINCE OF PERSIA: THE SAND OF THE TIME DIRECTED BY MIKE NEWELL (2010): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
42 A320080141 DREAM OF EX-WIFE BEING CHASED BY HER FORMER HUSBAND IN BOUNTY HUNTER MOVIE DIRECTED BY ANDY TENNONT (2010): A FEMINIST APPROACH
43 A320080271 PERSEFERANCE OF LIFE IN UPTON SINLAIR’S THE JUNGLE NOVEL (2009): A SOCIOLOGICAL APPROACH
44 A 320080074 WOMAN EFFORT TO GET FREEDOM IN JEAN PAUL SOLOME’S FEMALE AGENT MOVIE (2010): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
45 A320080081 EXPRESSION OF EMOTIONAL FLUCTUATIONAL OF FRANK MARTIN IN OLIVER MEGATON’S MOVIE TRANSPORTER 3 (2009): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
46 A320080265 PRESEVERANCE OF MARIA MARRY WEATHER TO END HOSTILITY IN GABOR CSUPO’S THE SECRET OF MOONACRE MOVIE (2009): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
47 A320080160 SELF-DISCOVERY IN RYAN MURPHY EAT PRAY LOVE’S MOVIE (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
48 A320080097 ABUSE OF POWER IN LORENZO DE BONAVENTURA’S R.E.D MOVIE (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
49 A320080123 HUMAN AMBITION IN MIKE NEWELL’S PRINCE OF PERSIA MOVIE (2010): A HUMANISTIC APPROACH
50 A320080268 OBESSION OF KATE COLEMAN TO UNLOAD ESHTER’S SECREAT IN JAUME COLLECT-SERRA’S ORPHAN MOVIE (2009): A PSYCHOANALITYC APPROACH
22 A320080184 OVERCOMING SPEECH DISABILITY IN THE KING’S SPEECH MOVIE (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
23 A320080112 VALIANT PRINCIPLE OF LIVE IN OLIVER MEGATON’S TRANSPORTER 3 MOVIE (2009): AN INDIVIDUAL APPROACH
24 A320080327 ROMANCE BETWEEN JULIAN AND NATALIE IN STEP UP 3D BY EMILY MEYER (2010): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
25 A320080332 INTIMATE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LUKE KUTCHER AND PIRATES DANCER’S IN STEP UP 3D MOVIE BY EMILY MEYER (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
26 A320080328 DISCOVERING THE SELF OF ELIZABETH GILBERT IN “ EAT PRAY LOVE” BY RYAN MURPHY (2010): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
27 A320080355 SPLIT PERSONALITY OF JULIAN IN STEP UP 3D MOVIE DIRECTED BY EMILY MEYER (2010): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
28 A320080144 FEAR AND HESITANCE IN ECLIPSE MOVIE DIRECTED BY DAVID SLADE (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
29 A320080291 ANNA FITSGERALD’S CONTRADICTORY FEELING IN JODY PICOULT’S MY SISTER KEEPER (2004): AN INDIVIDUAL APPROACH
30 A320080292 GREONUILLE’S DEPRESSION AND DESPAIR IN TOM TYKWER’S PERFUME MOVIE (2006): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
31 A320080289 LIBERATING THE NOTION FROM OPRESSION IN TEKKEN MOVIE DIRECTED BY DWIGHT H LITTLE (2010): A SOCIOLOGICAL APPROACH
32 A320080241 SEARCHING FOR IDENTITY OF ELIZABETH GILBERT IN RYAN MURPHY’S EAT PRAY LOVE MOVIE (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
33 A320080254 CONFLICT OF LOVE OF SUMMER LYNDON IN NORA ROBERTS’ TABLE FOR TWO NOVEL (2002): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
34 A320080259 POST INDUSTRIAL ENGLAND IN OLIVER TWIST BY CHARLES DICKENS (1837): A SOSIOLOGY APPROACH
35 A320080109 AGAINST THE PATHRIARCHY IN THE WHOLED HOSSEINI’S A SPLENDID THOUSAND SUNS (2007): A FEMINIST APPROACH
36 A320080146 SAVING ALAGESIA IN ELDEST NOVEL 2005 BY CHRISTOPHER PAOLINI: AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
37 A320080113 POWER OF LOVE IN JEAN-MARK VELEE’S MOVIE THE YOUNG VICTORIA (2009) :A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
38 A320080248 FAITHFULLNESS IN DH. LAWRENCE’S THE ROCKING HORSE WINNER (1926): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
39 A320080118 PERSISTENCE OF THE DASTNA’S PRINCE IN THE PRINCE OF THE PERSIA MOVIE (2010) BY MIKE NEWELL: A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
40 A320080287 BETWEEN THE KING AND THE FATHERLESS CHILD IN THE PRINCE OF THE PERSIA (2010) MOVIE DIRECTED BY MIKE NEWELL: A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
41 A320080031 PERSONALITY OF DASTAN IN PRINCE OF PERSIA: THE SAND OF THE TIME DIRECTED BY MIKE NEWELL (2010): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
42 A320080141 DREAM OF EX-WIFE BEING CHASED BY HER FORMER HUSBAND IN BOUNTY HUNTER MOVIE DIRECTED BY ANDY TENNONT (2010): A FEMINIST APPROACH
43 A320080271 PERSEFERANCE OF LIFE IN UPTON SINLAIR’S THE JUNGLE NOVEL (2009): A SOCIOLOGICAL APPROACH
44 A 320080074 WOMAN EFFORT TO GET FREEDOM IN JEAN PAUL SOLOME’S FEMALE AGENT MOVIE (2010): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
45 A320080081 EXPRESSION OF EMOTIONAL FLUCTUATIONAL OF FRANK MARTIN IN OLIVER MEGATON’S MOVIE TRANSPORTER 3 (2009): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
46 A320080265 PRESEVERANCE OF MARIA MARRY WEATHER TO END HOSTILITY IN GABOR CSUPO’S THE SECRET OF MOONACRE MOVIE (2009): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
47 A320080160 SELF-DISCOVERY IN RYAN MURPHY EAT PRAY LOVE’S MOVIE (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
48 A320080097 ABUSE OF POWER IN LORENZO DE BONAVENTURA’S R.E.D MOVIE (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
49 A320080123 HUMAN AMBITION IN MIKE NEWELL’S PRINCE OF PERSIA MOVIE (2010): A HUMANISTIC APPROACH
50 A320080268 OBESSION OF KATE COLEMAN TO UNLOAD ESHTER’S SECREAT IN JAUME COLLECT-SERRA’S ORPHAN MOVIE (2009): A PSYCHOANALITYC APPROACH
title RM Literature 1-20
No Student Number Title
1 A320070081 Anxiety and hope in Emily Bronte’s Poems: An Individual Approach
2 A320080225 DEVELOPMENT OF WIFE’S PSYCHOPERSONALITY DEVELOPMENT OF EVELYN AS WIFE IN PHILIP NOYCE’S SALT MOVIE (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYICHOLOGICAL APPROACH
3 A320080180 TRADITIONAL VS MODERN PERSPECTIVE OF WOMAN REFLECTE DIN FATIMA MERNISSI’S DREAMS OF TRESSPASS (1994): A SOCIOLOGICAL APPROACH
4 A320080163 PERSONALITY DEVELOPMENT IN TOM HEOPER’S THE KING’S SPEECH MOVIE (2010): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
5 A320080168 BEING IN EAT PRAY LOVE MOVIE DIRECTED NY RYAN MURPHY (2010): AN EXISTENSIALIST APPROACH
6 A320080344 AGAINST THE KING’S WILL IN SOPHOCLE’S ANTIGONE (406/5 BC): A FEMINIST APPROACH
7 A320080326 ROLE OF INDONESIAN MOWAN IN K’TUT TANTRI’S REVOLT IN PARADISE NOVEL (2006): A FEMINIST APPROACH
8 A320080170 AENESTHETIC MALPRACTICE IN JOBY HAROLD’S AWAKE MOVIE (2007): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
9 A320080320 EXISTENCE TO BE A WOMAN IN PHILIP NOYCE’S SALT MOVIE (2010): A FEMINIST APPROACH
10 A320080315 DEPRESSION EXPERIENCES OF PHILIP SEYMOUR HOFFMAN IN SYNECDOCHE NEW YORK MOVIE DIRECTED BY CHARLIE KAUFMAN (2008): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
11 A320080166 AGAINST THE BLACK MAGIC IN NARNIA 3 MOVIE (2010) DIRECTED BY MICHAEL APATED: AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
12 A320090078 MISSION OF REVENGE IN EMILY BRONTE’S WUTHERING HEIGHTS NOVEL (1847): A BEHAVIORIST APPROACH
13 A320080228 NINA’S DESIRE TO BE MAJOR PLAYER IN DARREN ARONOFSKY’S BLACK SWAN MOVIE (2010): A PSYICHOANALYTIC APPROACH
14 A320080176 MEANING OF SISTERHOOD IN GARY WINICK’S LETTERS TO JULIET MOVIE (2010): A FEMINIST APPROACH
15 A320080187 SCANDAL OF LOVE IN JOHN GALSWORTHY’S THE MAN OF PROPERTY RETOLD BY MARGARET TARNER (2003): A PSYCHOANALITIC APPROACH
16 A320080114 HIDDEN DESIRE OF ERNEST IN JAUME COLLETSERRA’S MOVIE ORPHAN (2009): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
17 A320080053 SINCERITY IN NICK CASSAVETES MOVIE “MY SISTER KEEPER” (2009): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
18 A320080171 ADAPTING TO BE EASTERNER IN HARALD ZWAR’S KUNGFU KID MOVIE (2010): A SOCIOLOGICAL APPROACH
19 A320080305 WOMAN’S MOVEMENT IN DANIEL STEEL’S JOURNEY NOVEL (2001): A SOCIOLOGICAL APPROACH
20 A320080314 MORAL ANXIETY OD MADELINE IN DANIEL STEEL’S JOURNEY NOVEL (2001): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
1 A320070081 Anxiety and hope in Emily Bronte’s Poems: An Individual Approach
2 A320080225 DEVELOPMENT OF WIFE’S PSYCHOPERSONALITY DEVELOPMENT OF EVELYN AS WIFE IN PHILIP NOYCE’S SALT MOVIE (2010): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYICHOLOGICAL APPROACH
3 A320080180 TRADITIONAL VS MODERN PERSPECTIVE OF WOMAN REFLECTE DIN FATIMA MERNISSI’S DREAMS OF TRESSPASS (1994): A SOCIOLOGICAL APPROACH
4 A320080163 PERSONALITY DEVELOPMENT IN TOM HEOPER’S THE KING’S SPEECH MOVIE (2010): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
5 A320080168 BEING IN EAT PRAY LOVE MOVIE DIRECTED NY RYAN MURPHY (2010): AN EXISTENSIALIST APPROACH
6 A320080344 AGAINST THE KING’S WILL IN SOPHOCLE’S ANTIGONE (406/5 BC): A FEMINIST APPROACH
7 A320080326 ROLE OF INDONESIAN MOWAN IN K’TUT TANTRI’S REVOLT IN PARADISE NOVEL (2006): A FEMINIST APPROACH
8 A320080170 AENESTHETIC MALPRACTICE IN JOBY HAROLD’S AWAKE MOVIE (2007): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
9 A320080320 EXISTENCE TO BE A WOMAN IN PHILIP NOYCE’S SALT MOVIE (2010): A FEMINIST APPROACH
10 A320080315 DEPRESSION EXPERIENCES OF PHILIP SEYMOUR HOFFMAN IN SYNECDOCHE NEW YORK MOVIE DIRECTED BY CHARLIE KAUFMAN (2008): AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
11 A320080166 AGAINST THE BLACK MAGIC IN NARNIA 3 MOVIE (2010) DIRECTED BY MICHAEL APATED: AN INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH
12 A320090078 MISSION OF REVENGE IN EMILY BRONTE’S WUTHERING HEIGHTS NOVEL (1847): A BEHAVIORIST APPROACH
13 A320080228 NINA’S DESIRE TO BE MAJOR PLAYER IN DARREN ARONOFSKY’S BLACK SWAN MOVIE (2010): A PSYICHOANALYTIC APPROACH
14 A320080176 MEANING OF SISTERHOOD IN GARY WINICK’S LETTERS TO JULIET MOVIE (2010): A FEMINIST APPROACH
15 A320080187 SCANDAL OF LOVE IN JOHN GALSWORTHY’S THE MAN OF PROPERTY RETOLD BY MARGARET TARNER (2003): A PSYCHOANALITIC APPROACH
16 A320080114 HIDDEN DESIRE OF ERNEST IN JAUME COLLETSERRA’S MOVIE ORPHAN (2009): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
17 A320080053 SINCERITY IN NICK CASSAVETES MOVIE “MY SISTER KEEPER” (2009): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
18 A320080171 ADAPTING TO BE EASTERNER IN HARALD ZWAR’S KUNGFU KID MOVIE (2010): A SOCIOLOGICAL APPROACH
19 A320080305 WOMAN’S MOVEMENT IN DANIEL STEEL’S JOURNEY NOVEL (2001): A SOCIOLOGICAL APPROACH
20 A320080314 MORAL ANXIETY OD MADELINE IN DANIEL STEEL’S JOURNEY NOVEL (2001): A PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
Selasa, 22 Maret 2011
groups of literature
Groups of RMLITERATURE
GROUP NAME STUDENT NUMBER
1 Ida nuria A320080301
Vella ariska A320080013
Sri iriyani A320080345
2 Tri m A32008096
Vima s A32008098
Rith cahya A320080200
3 Arum dwi h A320080135
Risky d A320080123
Retno p A320080131
4 Agus s A320080183
Ardi s A320080165
M david A32007015
6 setyowati A320080325
Esti p A32008066
utami A32008328
7 Hanung l A32007030
Sri m A32008034
Nur rahman A32007040
8 Yusuf p A32007288
Fitria m A32007279
Sri wahyuni A32008196
9 Riska dian ayu A320080264
Anita h A320080268
Yuliana s A320080265
Puji L A320080271
10 Iva armita A32008014
Aris sn A32008020
Dewi em A32008029
11 Dharista a A32008002
Karlina i A32008015
Karina d A32008030
12 Sabar n A32008021
Rusihan p A32008032
Yogi a A32008031
GROUP NAME STUDENT NUMBER
1 Ida nuria A320080301
Vella ariska A320080013
Sri iriyani A320080345
2 Tri m A32008096
Vima s A32008098
Rith cahya A320080200
3 Arum dwi h A320080135
Risky d A320080123
Retno p A320080131
4 Agus s A320080183
Ardi s A320080165
M david A32007015
6 setyowati A320080325
Esti p A32008066
utami A32008328
7 Hanung l A32007030
Sri m A32008034
Nur rahman A32007040
8 Yusuf p A32007288
Fitria m A32007279
Sri wahyuni A32008196
9 Riska dian ayu A320080264
Anita h A320080268
Yuliana s A320080265
Puji L A320080271
10 Iva armita A32008014
Aris sn A32008020
Dewi em A32008029
11 Dharista a A32008002
Karlina i A32008015
Karina d A32008030
12 Sabar n A32008021
Rusihan p A32008032
Yogi a A32008031
analisis discourse text 1
Analysis Commuters prefer staying in town to battling traffic
a. General analysis that can be found:
The background knowledge of this text is as everybody knows that in big town like Jakarta always traffic jam every day. So, the writer discuss this problem with the participants of the text are Ardy (a consultant in Jakarta who be a source of news or informant), Vera (an employee at a private company who be informant), and Alfian (who rents a room in Kebon Kacang who be informant). The setting is in Jakarta in the situation of Traffic Jam problem. The channel that be used by the writer to shown of the text is written in newspaper. The type of the paragraph is argumentative paragraph, so he purpose of the text is to persuade commuters in Jakarta to stay in town. The form and the content of the text is act sequence that devided into Introduction in paragraph 1, explaination is in next paragraph and the last paragraph is the Closing which content persuading act. From the information the readers who are the commuter can get the opportunity of staying in town. Like what I got when I stay in Jakarta for an event. Traffic jams really our close friend in there. So, I believe that staying near the office is the best solution to battling the traffic jam in Jakarta.
b. Deixis analysis each paragraph
I found some deixis and the I tried to analyse it. This is the result for each paragraph:
It appears Jakarta’s ever-worsening traffic and the high cost of commuting is prompting some commuting Jakartans to stay in the center of town, separated from their loved ones.
- Jakarta’s = spatial deixis/place
Paragraph 1, line 1
- Jakartans = spatial deixis/location
Paragraph 1, line 2
- Their = commuters Jakartan
Paragraph 1, line 2
- Loved ones = commuter’s family or commuter’s house
Paragraph 1, line 3
It tells about general condition in Jakarta that ever-worsening traffic and has high cost to live there. To battling it, the commuters choose to stay in the center of town.
Ardy Putra a consultant with a family living in Sunter, North Jakarta, stays in a rented room in Sudirman, Central Jakarta. He said, he made the move to reduce commuting costs and avoid the terrible snarls on the roads to downtown Jakarta. “I decided to rent a room at a boarding house in Sudirman a year ago so I could save time and money”. He told The Jakarta Post recently. The 30-year-old Ardy said that from the rented room He only had to walk 10 minutes to get to his office , his “Imagine if I had to leave everyday from my house in Sunter, it might take one or two hours to get here,” he said. The move actually may not have reduced his overall cost of living, but it has saved him a lot of time, Ardy said. “At least I don’t get old on the street,” he said. Traffic in the city is a major headache for the majority of Jakartans.
- ardy putra = personal deixis
paragraph 2, line 1
- sunter north Jakarta = spatial deixis
paragraph 2, line 1
- sudirman central Jakarta = spatial deixis
paragraph 2, line 2
- he = personal deixis
paragraph 2, line 2
- he = personal deixis
paragraph 2, line 2
- I = personal deixis
Paragraph 2, line3
- Sudirman = spatial deixis
Paragraph 2, line four
- A year ago = spatial deixis
Paragraph 2, line four
- I = personal deixis
Paragraph 2, line four
- He = personal deixis
Paragraph 2, line 5
- The Jakarta post = the newspaper which show the news
Paragraph 2, line 5
- The 30-year-old = temporal deixis (ardy’s age when conversation is written)
Paragraph 2, line 5
- He = personal deixis (ardy)
Paragraph 2, line 5
- His = personal deixis (ardy)
Paragraph 2, line 6
- His = personal deixis (ardy)
Paragraph 2, line 6
- I = personal deixis (ardy)
Paragraph 2, line 6
- Everyday = temporal deixis (Monday up to Friday)
Paragraph 2, line 6
- My = personal deixis (ardy)
Paragraph 2, line 7
- Sunter = spatial deixis
Paragraph 2, line 7
- It = the time which is needed to move from ardi’s house to ardi’s office
Paragraph 2, line 7
- One or two hours = temporal deixis
Paragraph 2, line 7
- Here = spatial deixis (ardy’s office)
Paragraph 2, line 7
- He = personal deixis (ardy)
Paragraph 2, line 7
- The move = the change from ardi’s house to ardy’s rent a room
Paragraph 2, line 7
- His = personal deixis (ardy)
Paragraph 2, line 8
- It = the movement to a rent room
Paragraph 2, line 8
- Him = personal deixis (ardy)
Paragraph 2, line 8
- At least = temporal deixis
Paragraph 2, line 9
- I = personal deixis (ardy)
Paragraph 2, line 9
- Do not get old on the street = membuang waktu dengan percuma karena macet di jalanan.
Paragraph 2, line 9
- Jakartans = personal deixis (people who live or work in Jakarta)
Paragraph 2, line 10
This paragraph tells us about rdy who lving in Sunter choose to stay in Jakarta to save time and money.
As of December 2010, there were more than 11 million vehicles in Jakarta: 9 million motorbikes, 3 million cars and 63.000 vehicles for public transportation. According to one’s estimation, 1.500 new motorcycles and more than 500 new cars are introduced to city’s streets every day. It has been predicted that by some time in 2011 there will be 12 million privately owned vehicles clogging the capital’s roads. Experts have warned that total gridlock could occur by 2014 if the rate of vehicle ownership continuous at current rates.
- December 2010 = temporal deixis
- Jakarta = spatial deixis
- every day = temporal deixis
- it = the amount of transportation
- in 2011 = temporal deixis
- by 2014 = temporal deixis
this paragraph tells us about the fact that of December 2010, there were more than 11 million vehicles in Jakarta: 9 million motorbikes, 3 million cars and 63.000 vehicles for public transportation and predicated that in 2011 there will be 12 million privately owned vehicles clogging the capital’s roads. Experts have warned that total gridlock could occur by 2014 if the rate of vehicle ownership continuous at current rates
Traffic in Jakarta is said to cost the city between Rp. 281 trillion (US$3 billion) and Rp. 46 trillion. The motorious congestion also causes losses of at least Rp. 9,7 trillion because of lost productivity, while looses related to health reached Rp. 5,8 trillion and public transportation owners suffered Rp. 1,9 trillion in losses.
- Traffic = main problem in Jakarta
Paragraph four, line 1
- Jakarta = spatial deixis/location
Paragraph four, line 1
This paragraph tells us that many affect that cause by traffic jam in Jakarta.
Vera Y.S., an employee at a private company in Central Jakarta , said She decided to rent near her office in Karet because she had given up after the traffic seemed to get worse by the day. “My family family lives in Cinere, Depok, which is actually not too far from Jakarta but you know I had to spent four and a half hours each day to drive to and from my office. I was exhausted from just driving to and from the city,” she said. Four years ago She decided that enough was enough and moved into a boarding house near her office The move was simply to save time and money, she said. She is single after all. But the money Vera saves from her shorter commute goes to financing the high cost of living in downtown Jakarta. “This is like a cross subsidy,” she said. For others, money is not an issue.
- Vera = personal deixis (subject)
Paragraph 1, line 1
- Central Jakarta = spatial deixis
Paragraph 1, line 1
- She = personal deixis (vera)
Paragraph 1, line 1
- Her = personal deixis (vera)
Paragraph 1, line 2
- Karet = spatial deixis (vera’s office)
Paragraph 1, line 2
- She = personal deixis (vera)
Paragraph 1, line 2
- My family = personal deixis (vera’s family)
Paragraph 1, line 3
- Cinere Depok = spatial deixis (place)
Paragraph 1, line 3
- Jakarta = spatial deixis (place)
Paragraph 1, line four
- You = personal deixis (irawati or writer)
Paragraph 1, line four
- I = personal deixis (vera)
Paragraph 1, line four
- My office = personal deixis (vera’s office)
Paragraph 1, line four
- I = personal deixis (vera)
Paragraph 1, line 5
- She = personal deixis (vera)
Paragraph 1, line 5
- Four years ago = spatial deixis (in 1997)
Paragraph 1, line 5
- She = personal deixis (vera)
Paragraph 1, line 5
- Her = personal deixis (vera)
Paragraph 1, line 6
- The move = change from vera’s house to vera’s boarding house
Paragraph 1, line 6
- She = personal deixis (vera)
Paragraph 1, line 7
- She = personal deixis (vera)
Paragraph 1, line 7
- Her = vera
Paragraph 1, line 8
- She = vera
Paragraph 1, line 9
- Money is not an issue = money is real and need by every people.
Paragraph 1, line9
This paragraph tells us about Vera who chooses moving near her office to save tima and money.
Alfian, who rents a room in Kebon Kacang, Central jakarta, said he was not really concerned about saving money living in downtown Jakarta. “I am more concerned with the energy that I can save compared with if I go on living in Depok,” he said said. It now takes only 15 minutes of walking for him to get to the office, and living in downtown also offers a lot of perks, Alfian said. “Jakarta certainly has more places to hang out than Depok,”he said. =alfian said –JP/IRAWATY WARDANY-
- Alfian = personal deixis
Paragraph 6, line 1
- He = personal deixis (alfian)
Paragraph 6, line 1
- I am = personal deixis (alfian)
Paragraph 6, line 2
- I = personal deixis (alfian)
Paragraph 6, line 3
- I = personal deixis (alfian)
Paragraph 6, line 3
- He = personal deixis (alfian)
Paragraph 6, line 3
- It = the moving from alfian’s room to alfian’s office
Paragraph 6, line 3
- Him = personal deixis (alfian)
Paragraph 6, line four
- He = personal deixis (alfian)
Paragraph 6, line 5
This paragraph tells us about one of the commuters Jakartans, alfian, more concerned to energy that can save compare than when alfian living in Depok. Another reason why alfian choose to staying near his office in Jakarta is a lot of parks in Jakarta than Depok.
a. General analysis that can be found:
The background knowledge of this text is as everybody knows that in big town like Jakarta always traffic jam every day. So, the writer discuss this problem with the participants of the text are Ardy (a consultant in Jakarta who be a source of news or informant), Vera (an employee at a private company who be informant), and Alfian (who rents a room in Kebon Kacang who be informant). The setting is in Jakarta in the situation of Traffic Jam problem. The channel that be used by the writer to shown of the text is written in newspaper. The type of the paragraph is argumentative paragraph, so he purpose of the text is to persuade commuters in Jakarta to stay in town. The form and the content of the text is act sequence that devided into Introduction in paragraph 1, explaination is in next paragraph and the last paragraph is the Closing which content persuading act. From the information the readers who are the commuter can get the opportunity of staying in town. Like what I got when I stay in Jakarta for an event. Traffic jams really our close friend in there. So, I believe that staying near the office is the best solution to battling the traffic jam in Jakarta.
b. Deixis analysis each paragraph
I found some deixis and the I tried to analyse it. This is the result for each paragraph:
It appears Jakarta’s ever-worsening traffic and the high cost of commuting is prompting some commuting Jakartans to stay in the center of town, separated from their loved ones.
- Jakarta’s = spatial deixis/place
Paragraph 1, line 1
- Jakartans = spatial deixis/location
Paragraph 1, line 2
- Their = commuters Jakartan
Paragraph 1, line 2
- Loved ones = commuter’s family or commuter’s house
Paragraph 1, line 3
It tells about general condition in Jakarta that ever-worsening traffic and has high cost to live there. To battling it, the commuters choose to stay in the center of town.
Ardy Putra a consultant with a family living in Sunter, North Jakarta, stays in a rented room in Sudirman, Central Jakarta. He said, he made the move to reduce commuting costs and avoid the terrible snarls on the roads to downtown Jakarta. “I decided to rent a room at a boarding house in Sudirman a year ago so I could save time and money”. He told The Jakarta Post recently. The 30-year-old Ardy said that from the rented room He only had to walk 10 minutes to get to his office , his “Imagine if I had to leave everyday from my house in Sunter, it might take one or two hours to get here,” he said. The move actually may not have reduced his overall cost of living, but it has saved him a lot of time, Ardy said. “At least I don’t get old on the street,” he said. Traffic in the city is a major headache for the majority of Jakartans.
- ardy putra = personal deixis
paragraph 2, line 1
- sunter north Jakarta = spatial deixis
paragraph 2, line 1
- sudirman central Jakarta = spatial deixis
paragraph 2, line 2
- he = personal deixis
paragraph 2, line 2
- he = personal deixis
paragraph 2, line 2
- I = personal deixis
Paragraph 2, line3
- Sudirman = spatial deixis
Paragraph 2, line four
- A year ago = spatial deixis
Paragraph 2, line four
- I = personal deixis
Paragraph 2, line four
- He = personal deixis
Paragraph 2, line 5
- The Jakarta post = the newspaper which show the news
Paragraph 2, line 5
- The 30-year-old = temporal deixis (ardy’s age when conversation is written)
Paragraph 2, line 5
- He = personal deixis (ardy)
Paragraph 2, line 5
- His = personal deixis (ardy)
Paragraph 2, line 6
- His = personal deixis (ardy)
Paragraph 2, line 6
- I = personal deixis (ardy)
Paragraph 2, line 6
- Everyday = temporal deixis (Monday up to Friday)
Paragraph 2, line 6
- My = personal deixis (ardy)
Paragraph 2, line 7
- Sunter = spatial deixis
Paragraph 2, line 7
- It = the time which is needed to move from ardi’s house to ardi’s office
Paragraph 2, line 7
- One or two hours = temporal deixis
Paragraph 2, line 7
- Here = spatial deixis (ardy’s office)
Paragraph 2, line 7
- He = personal deixis (ardy)
Paragraph 2, line 7
- The move = the change from ardi’s house to ardy’s rent a room
Paragraph 2, line 7
- His = personal deixis (ardy)
Paragraph 2, line 8
- It = the movement to a rent room
Paragraph 2, line 8
- Him = personal deixis (ardy)
Paragraph 2, line 8
- At least = temporal deixis
Paragraph 2, line 9
- I = personal deixis (ardy)
Paragraph 2, line 9
- Do not get old on the street = membuang waktu dengan percuma karena macet di jalanan.
Paragraph 2, line 9
- Jakartans = personal deixis (people who live or work in Jakarta)
Paragraph 2, line 10
This paragraph tells us about rdy who lving in Sunter choose to stay in Jakarta to save time and money.
As of December 2010, there were more than 11 million vehicles in Jakarta: 9 million motorbikes, 3 million cars and 63.000 vehicles for public transportation. According to one’s estimation, 1.500 new motorcycles and more than 500 new cars are introduced to city’s streets every day. It has been predicted that by some time in 2011 there will be 12 million privately owned vehicles clogging the capital’s roads. Experts have warned that total gridlock could occur by 2014 if the rate of vehicle ownership continuous at current rates.
- December 2010 = temporal deixis
- Jakarta = spatial deixis
- every day = temporal deixis
- it = the amount of transportation
- in 2011 = temporal deixis
- by 2014 = temporal deixis
this paragraph tells us about the fact that of December 2010, there were more than 11 million vehicles in Jakarta: 9 million motorbikes, 3 million cars and 63.000 vehicles for public transportation and predicated that in 2011 there will be 12 million privately owned vehicles clogging the capital’s roads. Experts have warned that total gridlock could occur by 2014 if the rate of vehicle ownership continuous at current rates
Traffic in Jakarta is said to cost the city between Rp. 281 trillion (US$3 billion) and Rp. 46 trillion. The motorious congestion also causes losses of at least Rp. 9,7 trillion because of lost productivity, while looses related to health reached Rp. 5,8 trillion and public transportation owners suffered Rp. 1,9 trillion in losses.
- Traffic = main problem in Jakarta
Paragraph four, line 1
- Jakarta = spatial deixis/location
Paragraph four, line 1
This paragraph tells us that many affect that cause by traffic jam in Jakarta.
Vera Y.S., an employee at a private company in Central Jakarta , said She decided to rent near her office in Karet because she had given up after the traffic seemed to get worse by the day. “My family family lives in Cinere, Depok, which is actually not too far from Jakarta but you know I had to spent four and a half hours each day to drive to and from my office. I was exhausted from just driving to and from the city,” she said. Four years ago She decided that enough was enough and moved into a boarding house near her office The move was simply to save time and money, she said. She is single after all. But the money Vera saves from her shorter commute goes to financing the high cost of living in downtown Jakarta. “This is like a cross subsidy,” she said. For others, money is not an issue.
- Vera = personal deixis (subject)
Paragraph 1, line 1
- Central Jakarta = spatial deixis
Paragraph 1, line 1
- She = personal deixis (vera)
Paragraph 1, line 1
- Her = personal deixis (vera)
Paragraph 1, line 2
- Karet = spatial deixis (vera’s office)
Paragraph 1, line 2
- She = personal deixis (vera)
Paragraph 1, line 2
- My family = personal deixis (vera’s family)
Paragraph 1, line 3
- Cinere Depok = spatial deixis (place)
Paragraph 1, line 3
- Jakarta = spatial deixis (place)
Paragraph 1, line four
- You = personal deixis (irawati or writer)
Paragraph 1, line four
- I = personal deixis (vera)
Paragraph 1, line four
- My office = personal deixis (vera’s office)
Paragraph 1, line four
- I = personal deixis (vera)
Paragraph 1, line 5
- She = personal deixis (vera)
Paragraph 1, line 5
- Four years ago = spatial deixis (in 1997)
Paragraph 1, line 5
- She = personal deixis (vera)
Paragraph 1, line 5
- Her = personal deixis (vera)
Paragraph 1, line 6
- The move = change from vera’s house to vera’s boarding house
Paragraph 1, line 6
- She = personal deixis (vera)
Paragraph 1, line 7
- She = personal deixis (vera)
Paragraph 1, line 7
- Her = vera
Paragraph 1, line 8
- She = vera
Paragraph 1, line 9
- Money is not an issue = money is real and need by every people.
Paragraph 1, line9
This paragraph tells us about Vera who chooses moving near her office to save tima and money.
Alfian, who rents a room in Kebon Kacang, Central jakarta, said he was not really concerned about saving money living in downtown Jakarta. “I am more concerned with the energy that I can save compared with if I go on living in Depok,” he said said. It now takes only 15 minutes of walking for him to get to the office, and living in downtown also offers a lot of perks, Alfian said. “Jakarta certainly has more places to hang out than Depok,”he said. =alfian said –JP/IRAWATY WARDANY-
- Alfian = personal deixis
Paragraph 6, line 1
- He = personal deixis (alfian)
Paragraph 6, line 1
- I am = personal deixis (alfian)
Paragraph 6, line 2
- I = personal deixis (alfian)
Paragraph 6, line 3
- I = personal deixis (alfian)
Paragraph 6, line 3
- He = personal deixis (alfian)
Paragraph 6, line 3
- It = the moving from alfian’s room to alfian’s office
Paragraph 6, line 3
- Him = personal deixis (alfian)
Paragraph 6, line four
- He = personal deixis (alfian)
Paragraph 6, line 5
This paragraph tells us about one of the commuters Jakartans, alfian, more concerned to energy that can save compare than when alfian living in Depok. Another reason why alfian choose to staying near his office in Jakarta is a lot of parks in Jakarta than Depok.
Jumat, 11 Maret 2011
traditional grammar summary
Arum Dwi H
A320080135 Summary 1
Friday, March 04, 2011
TRADITIONAL GRAMMAR
In this section we will follow the development of some of these fundamental ideas and see that it was the medieval that developed a more sophisticated semantic theory.
A. Medieval Linguistic Theory
The world of thrax, discolus was a comparatively orderly one, which favored the flow of informational and the development of the scholarly idea of one’s predecessor. This continuity was broken with the fall of the Roman Empire, which resulted in a period of political and intellectual chaos. There was a brief revival of learning in Europe during the Carolingian renaissance of the ninth century, but it lost its impetus with the death of Charlemagne. Another intellectual revival gathered momentum in the elevens and the twelve centuries when works in Aris Totle.
Peter helias
The most respected grammar of the medieval period was that of Priscian. His based his grammatical descriptions on the writing and speech of the best models available to him. in the twelfth century a new method of explaining the regularities of Latin was introduced. Beginning with the Peter Helies, commentary on Priscian’s grammar. The time was favorable for change. Both Latin pronunciations and usage different from the classic models, since in the universities, which were open to students from many countries. Latin was a living language for international communication. The new pronunciation and grammar were preferred in spite the lack of correspondence with classical norms. Instead of basing their rules for correct usage on the ancients, the medieval under the influence of the logical approach to all problems, began to appeal to what they considered the inherent logic of their language. For this reason this period was called that of the “legalization of grammar”.
Petrus hispanus
As the work of helias’s indicates, little progress was made in the twelve century in the formal analysis of language with the exception of the breaking up and substantial and adjectival nouns into the more familiar classifications of nouns and adjectives. What the logicians added, however, was a more refined way of discussing the semantic aspect of language. Grammarians of his period, following aris totle and the stoics, gave positive class meaning to the part of speech in term of aris totle’s categories: the noun means “substance” or “quality”, the verbs meant “action” or “passivity”, and so on. With the development of further logical studies there came a subtle but important shift in emphasis, which can be accounted for in terms of linguistic form. Instead a discussing what a part means, the logician began to discuss how a part signifies something. This shift was a consequence of two developments: a more refined psychological theory and a more detail method of studying how expressions have meaning when they are constructions with the other expressions of the language.
MEANING
The general term that Hispanic used which corresponds to our vague expression “meaning is “signification”, define as “the representation of a thing through a conventional vocal sound”. Of course, this is a paraphrase of Aristotle definition of “voice”, but because of the more developed psychological theories of Hispanus’s day, the “representation” was not restricted to that of sensitive imagery. The “things” that could be represented were any of the products in the various stage of knowledge discussed earlier in this chapter.
TYPES OF SUPPOSITION
After distinguishing of two basic types of meaningful expression in the kind of language he examined (that is, categorematic and syncatagorematic). Hispanic review some facets of “meaning modification” for the categorematic terms. He distinguished: first: between formal and material supposition. This distinction is readily appreciated by comparing the use of John in the two sentences “John is my friend” and “John is a noun”. In the first example John represent formal, or personal, supposition, since in the expression is interpreted for the object it was intended to designate. In the second example, John is taken in material supposition, that is, as a name not for a noun linguistics object but for itself.
Hispanus studies were undertaken for a limited goal, which concerned the formalization of Latin for the purposes of logic, and especially for dialectic. As a result, he studied only a limited number of the total constructions of the language. But because of the nature of his work he came to show very clearly that the parts of speech could not be studied profitably in insulation but only in constructions in which they actually occurred. He also showed, in his examination of sophisms, that constructions with identical grammatical relations could be interpreted in more than one way, so that neither the pretended lexical definitions of the parts of speech (“a noun is the name of a person, place or thing”) nor the mere grammatical discussions of the functions each part typically assumed (the so-called modes of meaning) could solve problems of ambiguity.
Because they concerned themselves with these “modes” of being, understanding, and signifying, those who wrote the speculative grammars, which were entitled “on the modes of signification,” were called Modistae. They flourished in the late thirteenth and fourth teen centuries at the height of the scholastic period. What they had in common was not, as in often thought, a coherent and agreed on philosophy but a common logical and dialectic method. Just as there was no single philosophy that could be called “scholastic” as far as content was concerned, there was no common doctrine concerning how the various modes are related. The manner in which the modes are related were seen to depend on the particular kind of ontology (what there is to know), psychology (how we know what we know), and semantics (how we signify what we know) that was held. The modistae were in agreement about two things:
1. The basic kinds of modes there are and
2. How these modes are principally expressed.
The different sorts of modes were expressed in terms in Aristotles’ catagories, and there were only ten of them: the typical expressions of these modes were to be sought in the Latin language, as analyzed by Priscian.
ETYMOLOGY
One way in which the meaning of an expression was assigned by the medieval – a method skill often used today- was to consider its etymology. There was a little accurate information about the history and development of language at the time, although Latin and Greek texts from various periods were available for comparison. It was simply a known that language did change. In particular that the medieval form of Latin was not that of the classic period. The medieval were also well aware of the existence of many other languages, but few were interested in learning language other than those in which the Scriptures had been written or into which they had been translated. It should be clear then that the definition the medieval gave “etymology” was not what we would expect to find in a modern dictionary.
Further quotations from Isidore’s work will indicate the kind of information it’s contain. We can also see how little “folk etymology” has progress over the centuries:
- Different language
- Different nations
- Grammar
PRESCRIPTIVE GRAMMAR
When we discussing traditional grammar in America or England we are referring to two main sets of data: the general and speculative views about the nature of the language, which we have seen developed from the Greek period and the work of a number of English grammarians in the eighteenth century who subscribed to these views. It will be useful to inquire about the kind of information of they had about language and the work that had been done before the definitive character was given of English grammar in the eighteenth century.
TRADITIONAL GRAMMAR VERSUS LINGUISTIC
We can briefly compare the position of the traditional grammarians and the linguistics in the following outline. By traditional grammar is meant the basically Aristotelian orientations toward the nature of language as exemplified in the work of the ancient Greek and Roman, the speculative work of the medieval, and the prenscriptive approach of eighteenth century grammarians. By linguistic is meant the empirical, structural approach to language as represented principally by American linguistics during the period of the early 1930s to mid 1950s, since this is the work best known to those of the traditional approach. Since the comparison focuses on the extremes of both groups, it is probably fair to no single worker.
Differences between structural and traditional grammar
1. By defining classes and assigning rules for language based on meaning. Traditional grammars proceed, subjectively, explaining how important features of language can be related to me.
2. Traditional grammars appear to assign the reason why certain grammatical features of a language occur, and how they must behave.
3. Traditional grammar confuses levels of analysis that can be easily distinguished by using expressions such as “understood as” or “used in place of” to describe the overlap in the class membership of morphologically defined classes. In a sentence like “walking is healthful”. Walking is often said to be “considered as a noun”
4. The fact that traditional grammar is generally understood is due to its cultural history.
5. Because the Greek investigations of language started with logic. Traditional grammar has unthinkingly taken the declarative sentence as “basic.”
6. Traditional grammarians accuse the structuralism of giving no explanations of language.
It has the strength case each others:
A. The strength of traditional grammar
1. It is the most widespread, influential, and best understood method of discussing Indo-European language in the western world.
2. It is fairly well understood and consistently applied by most of those who teach it and have studied it. Many grammars of many languages are available.
3. It is humanistic in origin and therefore an answer, however, inadequate, to the kind of problems it raises.
4. It distinguishes rational, emotional, automatic and purely conventional types of discourse in theory, if not in grammatical practice.
5. It gives a fairly thorough and consistent analysis of the declarative sentence, the most frequently used type in written and spoken discourse.
6. It contains a theory of reference by which the meaning of declarative sentences can be explained and to which other uses may be reduced.
7. It is the vehicles by meant of which ordinary students and scholars have mastered many languages successfully for centuries.
B. The weakness:
1. It is normative
2. It suggest that usages which are not amenable to its rules are “ungrammatical”
3. It is based mainly on European language
4. While giving a reasonable account of Latin and Greek, its has distinction of morphology and syntax result in an inadequate notion of “modification” and of the criteria for “part of speech”.
5. It does not adequately distinguish.
C. The strength of structural grammar
1. It is empirical
2. It examines of language
3. The uniqueness of each language is recognized and done justice
4. It describes the minimum
D. The weakness
1. For many linguist only the descriptions language and not its explanation has been the goal of their discipline.
2. It prescinds from psychological factors that are important to all speakers
3. It has produced almost no complete grammars comparable to the exhaustive treatments by traditional method , concentrating on critical studies of how grammars should be written.
4. Some linguist has examined all forms of discourse on the same level.
5. It is difficult to attach importance to their statements that meaning has been avoided.
A320080135 Summary 1
Friday, March 04, 2011
TRADITIONAL GRAMMAR
In this section we will follow the development of some of these fundamental ideas and see that it was the medieval that developed a more sophisticated semantic theory.
A. Medieval Linguistic Theory
The world of thrax, discolus was a comparatively orderly one, which favored the flow of informational and the development of the scholarly idea of one’s predecessor. This continuity was broken with the fall of the Roman Empire, which resulted in a period of political and intellectual chaos. There was a brief revival of learning in Europe during the Carolingian renaissance of the ninth century, but it lost its impetus with the death of Charlemagne. Another intellectual revival gathered momentum in the elevens and the twelve centuries when works in Aris Totle.
Peter helias
The most respected grammar of the medieval period was that of Priscian. His based his grammatical descriptions on the writing and speech of the best models available to him. in the twelfth century a new method of explaining the regularities of Latin was introduced. Beginning with the Peter Helies, commentary on Priscian’s grammar. The time was favorable for change. Both Latin pronunciations and usage different from the classic models, since in the universities, which were open to students from many countries. Latin was a living language for international communication. The new pronunciation and grammar were preferred in spite the lack of correspondence with classical norms. Instead of basing their rules for correct usage on the ancients, the medieval under the influence of the logical approach to all problems, began to appeal to what they considered the inherent logic of their language. For this reason this period was called that of the “legalization of grammar”.
Petrus hispanus
As the work of helias’s indicates, little progress was made in the twelve century in the formal analysis of language with the exception of the breaking up and substantial and adjectival nouns into the more familiar classifications of nouns and adjectives. What the logicians added, however, was a more refined way of discussing the semantic aspect of language. Grammarians of his period, following aris totle and the stoics, gave positive class meaning to the part of speech in term of aris totle’s categories: the noun means “substance” or “quality”, the verbs meant “action” or “passivity”, and so on. With the development of further logical studies there came a subtle but important shift in emphasis, which can be accounted for in terms of linguistic form. Instead a discussing what a part means, the logician began to discuss how a part signifies something. This shift was a consequence of two developments: a more refined psychological theory and a more detail method of studying how expressions have meaning when they are constructions with the other expressions of the language.
MEANING
The general term that Hispanic used which corresponds to our vague expression “meaning is “signification”, define as “the representation of a thing through a conventional vocal sound”. Of course, this is a paraphrase of Aristotle definition of “voice”, but because of the more developed psychological theories of Hispanus’s day, the “representation” was not restricted to that of sensitive imagery. The “things” that could be represented were any of the products in the various stage of knowledge discussed earlier in this chapter.
TYPES OF SUPPOSITION
After distinguishing of two basic types of meaningful expression in the kind of language he examined (that is, categorematic and syncatagorematic). Hispanic review some facets of “meaning modification” for the categorematic terms. He distinguished: first: between formal and material supposition. This distinction is readily appreciated by comparing the use of John in the two sentences “John is my friend” and “John is a noun”. In the first example John represent formal, or personal, supposition, since in the expression is interpreted for the object it was intended to designate. In the second example, John is taken in material supposition, that is, as a name not for a noun linguistics object but for itself.
Hispanus studies were undertaken for a limited goal, which concerned the formalization of Latin for the purposes of logic, and especially for dialectic. As a result, he studied only a limited number of the total constructions of the language. But because of the nature of his work he came to show very clearly that the parts of speech could not be studied profitably in insulation but only in constructions in which they actually occurred. He also showed, in his examination of sophisms, that constructions with identical grammatical relations could be interpreted in more than one way, so that neither the pretended lexical definitions of the parts of speech (“a noun is the name of a person, place or thing”) nor the mere grammatical discussions of the functions each part typically assumed (the so-called modes of meaning) could solve problems of ambiguity.
Because they concerned themselves with these “modes” of being, understanding, and signifying, those who wrote the speculative grammars, which were entitled “on the modes of signification,” were called Modistae. They flourished in the late thirteenth and fourth teen centuries at the height of the scholastic period. What they had in common was not, as in often thought, a coherent and agreed on philosophy but a common logical and dialectic method. Just as there was no single philosophy that could be called “scholastic” as far as content was concerned, there was no common doctrine concerning how the various modes are related. The manner in which the modes are related were seen to depend on the particular kind of ontology (what there is to know), psychology (how we know what we know), and semantics (how we signify what we know) that was held. The modistae were in agreement about two things:
1. The basic kinds of modes there are and
2. How these modes are principally expressed.
The different sorts of modes were expressed in terms in Aristotles’ catagories, and there were only ten of them: the typical expressions of these modes were to be sought in the Latin language, as analyzed by Priscian.
ETYMOLOGY
One way in which the meaning of an expression was assigned by the medieval – a method skill often used today- was to consider its etymology. There was a little accurate information about the history and development of language at the time, although Latin and Greek texts from various periods were available for comparison. It was simply a known that language did change. In particular that the medieval form of Latin was not that of the classic period. The medieval were also well aware of the existence of many other languages, but few were interested in learning language other than those in which the Scriptures had been written or into which they had been translated. It should be clear then that the definition the medieval gave “etymology” was not what we would expect to find in a modern dictionary.
Further quotations from Isidore’s work will indicate the kind of information it’s contain. We can also see how little “folk etymology” has progress over the centuries:
- Different language
- Different nations
- Grammar
PRESCRIPTIVE GRAMMAR
When we discussing traditional grammar in America or England we are referring to two main sets of data: the general and speculative views about the nature of the language, which we have seen developed from the Greek period and the work of a number of English grammarians in the eighteenth century who subscribed to these views. It will be useful to inquire about the kind of information of they had about language and the work that had been done before the definitive character was given of English grammar in the eighteenth century.
TRADITIONAL GRAMMAR VERSUS LINGUISTIC
We can briefly compare the position of the traditional grammarians and the linguistics in the following outline. By traditional grammar is meant the basically Aristotelian orientations toward the nature of language as exemplified in the work of the ancient Greek and Roman, the speculative work of the medieval, and the prenscriptive approach of eighteenth century grammarians. By linguistic is meant the empirical, structural approach to language as represented principally by American linguistics during the period of the early 1930s to mid 1950s, since this is the work best known to those of the traditional approach. Since the comparison focuses on the extremes of both groups, it is probably fair to no single worker.
Differences between structural and traditional grammar
1. By defining classes and assigning rules for language based on meaning. Traditional grammars proceed, subjectively, explaining how important features of language can be related to me.
2. Traditional grammars appear to assign the reason why certain grammatical features of a language occur, and how they must behave.
3. Traditional grammar confuses levels of analysis that can be easily distinguished by using expressions such as “understood as” or “used in place of” to describe the overlap in the class membership of morphologically defined classes. In a sentence like “walking is healthful”. Walking is often said to be “considered as a noun”
4. The fact that traditional grammar is generally understood is due to its cultural history.
5. Because the Greek investigations of language started with logic. Traditional grammar has unthinkingly taken the declarative sentence as “basic.”
6. Traditional grammarians accuse the structuralism of giving no explanations of language.
It has the strength case each others:
A. The strength of traditional grammar
1. It is the most widespread, influential, and best understood method of discussing Indo-European language in the western world.
2. It is fairly well understood and consistently applied by most of those who teach it and have studied it. Many grammars of many languages are available.
3. It is humanistic in origin and therefore an answer, however, inadequate, to the kind of problems it raises.
4. It distinguishes rational, emotional, automatic and purely conventional types of discourse in theory, if not in grammatical practice.
5. It gives a fairly thorough and consistent analysis of the declarative sentence, the most frequently used type in written and spoken discourse.
6. It contains a theory of reference by which the meaning of declarative sentences can be explained and to which other uses may be reduced.
7. It is the vehicles by meant of which ordinary students and scholars have mastered many languages successfully for centuries.
B. The weakness:
1. It is normative
2. It suggest that usages which are not amenable to its rules are “ungrammatical”
3. It is based mainly on European language
4. While giving a reasonable account of Latin and Greek, its has distinction of morphology and syntax result in an inadequate notion of “modification” and of the criteria for “part of speech”.
5. It does not adequately distinguish.
C. The strength of structural grammar
1. It is empirical
2. It examines of language
3. The uniqueness of each language is recognized and done justice
4. It describes the minimum
D. The weakness
1. For many linguist only the descriptions language and not its explanation has been the goal of their discipline.
2. It prescinds from psychological factors that are important to all speakers
3. It has produced almost no complete grammars comparable to the exhaustive treatments by traditional method , concentrating on critical studies of how grammars should be written.
4. Some linguist has examined all forms of discourse on the same level.
5. It is difficult to attach importance to their statements that meaning has been avoided.
motion ived2011
FAMILY
Assuming technological feasibility, THW allow parents to alter the genes of their children to determine their sexual orientation
THW ban all forms of artificial reproduction technologies (IVF, surrogates, sperm banks, etc.) to force couples to adopt
THW pay the poor not to have children
INDONESIA
TH refuses to directly elect Yogyakarta’s governor
THBT building religious house of worships should not require authorization from the government
THW strip off all the wealth of high-profile corruptors, regardless of the actual amount of money they corrupt
SAME-SEX
THW subsidize child stories authors to create more homosexual heroes & heroines
THBT gay communities should 'out' gay public figures
TH opposes the repealing of Don't Ask Don't Tell
INTERNATIONAL SECURITY
THBT the US should launch a military intervention to Congo against the Lord’s Resistance Army
THBT the Mexican government should let international forces in to oppose drug cartels
THBT the UN should offer large bounties for the capture or the destruction of pirate ships in Somalia
ENVIRONMENT
THBT the Cancun results have brought us nowhere
THBT developed countries should offer asylum to refugees of small-island developing states that are displaced due to climate change
THW criminalize those who deny that climate-change is man-made
Assuming technological feasibility, THW allow parents to alter the genes of their children to determine their sexual orientation
THW ban all forms of artificial reproduction technologies (IVF, surrogates, sperm banks, etc.) to force couples to adopt
THW pay the poor not to have children
INDONESIA
TH refuses to directly elect Yogyakarta’s governor
THBT building religious house of worships should not require authorization from the government
THW strip off all the wealth of high-profile corruptors, regardless of the actual amount of money they corrupt
SAME-SEX
THW subsidize child stories authors to create more homosexual heroes & heroines
THBT gay communities should 'out' gay public figures
TH opposes the repealing of Don't Ask Don't Tell
INTERNATIONAL SECURITY
THBT the US should launch a military intervention to Congo against the Lord’s Resistance Army
THBT the Mexican government should let international forces in to oppose drug cartels
THBT the UN should offer large bounties for the capture or the destruction of pirate ships in Somalia
ENVIRONMENT
THBT the Cancun results have brought us nowhere
THBT developed countries should offer asylum to refugees of small-island developing states that are displaced due to climate change
THW criminalize those who deny that climate-change is man-made
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)