GCS A grammatical coding system for natural language. Unpublished monograph, UCLA. Availabl

合集下载

Systemic Functional Grammar

(2)语言是社会人的有意义的活动，是做事的手段，是动作，因此它的功能之一必然是反映人与人之间的关系，如或对对话轮的选择做出规定，或是对事物的可能性和出现频率表示自己的判断和估测，或是反映说话人和听话人之间的社会地位和亲属关系。这个元功能就是“人际” （interpersonal）元功能。
(3) 实际使用中的语言基本单位不是词或句这样的语法单位，而是表达相对来说是完整思想的“语篇”（text）。上述两种功能部分最后要由说话人把它们组织成语篇才能实现。这就是“语篇”（textual）元功能。语篇功能是语言与语境发生联系，使说话人只能生成与情景相一致和相称的语篇。
的语义时，必然要在语言的各个语义功能部分进行相应的选择。这种选择取决于使用语言时的语境的方方面面。这种选择在语言的不同层次都可进行。总之，内容决定形式，形式要由实体体现。
功能语法则说明语言是社会交往的工具。语言系统的形式正是人们在长期交往中为了实现各种不同的语义功能所决定的。同样，当人们在语言系统中进行选择时，也是根据所要实现的功能而进行的有动因的活动。由于语言构建现实，功能语法必须建立在日常形式的语言上，它是经验的理论。
Systemic Functional Grammar 系统功能语法
系统功能语言学的背景
M.A.K. Halliday（韩礼德）（1925－）在伦敦学派中继承和发展了弗斯的理论。他的系统功能语法是一种具有社会学倾向的功能语言学处理方法，是二十世纪最有影响的语言学理论之一，同时也影响到和语言相关的不同领域，如语言教学、社会语言学、话语分析、文体学和机器翻译等。 1947年，韩礼德在伦敦大学获得了中国语言文学学士。随后于1947-1949年之间，在罗常培的指导下在北京大学学习； 1949-1950年在岭南大学，师从王力。后来他在弗斯的指导下攻读博士学位。1955年，韩礼德完成了他的博士论文《" 元朝秘史"的语言》，主要研究了14世纪中国北方的方言。 1955年以来，他在英国和美国的多所大学里任教，教授语言学课程。1975年，韩礼德移居澳大利亚，创建了悉尼大学的语言学系，并且一直任教至1988年退休。

The Third International Chinese Language

The Third International Chinese Language Processing Bakeoff: Word Segmentation and Named Entity RecognitionGina-Anne LevowUniversity of Chicago1100E.58th St.Chicago,IL60637USAlevow@AbstractThe Third International Chinese LanguageProcessing Bakeoff was held in Spring2006to assess the state of the art in twoimportant tasks:word segmentation andnamed entity recognition.Twenty-ninegroups submitted result sets in the twotasks across two tracks and a total ofﬁvecorpora.We found strong results in bothtasks as well as continuing challenges.1IntroductionMany important natural language processing tasks ranging from part of speech tagging to parsing to reference resolution and machine translation assume the ready availability of a tokenization into words.While such tokenization is relatively straight-forward in languages which use whites-pace to delimit words,Chinese presents a signif-icant challenge since it is typically written with-out such separation.Word segmentation has thus long been the focus of signiﬁcant research because of its role as a necessary pre-processing phase for the tasks above.However,word segmentation re-mains a signiﬁcant challenge both for the difﬁculty of the task itself and because standards for seg-mentation vary and human segmenters may often disagree.SIGHAN,the Special Interest Group for Chi-nese Language Processing of the Association for Computational Linguistics,conducted two prior word segmentation bakeoffs,in2003and 2005(Emerson,2005),which established bench-marks for word segmentation against which other systems are judged.The bakeoff presentations at SIGHAN workshops highlighted new approaches in theﬁeld as well as the crucial importance of handling out-of-vocabulary(OOV)words.A signiﬁcant class of OOV words is Named En-tities,such as person,location,and organization names.These terms are frequently poorly covered in lexical resources and change over time as new individuals,institutions,or products appear.These terms also play a particularly crucial role in infor-mation retrieval,reference resolution,and ques-tion answering.As a result of this importance,and interest in expanding the scope of the bakeoff ex-pressed at the Fourth SIGHAN Workshop,in the Winter of2005it was decided to hold a new bake-off to evaluate both continued progress in Word Segmentation(WS)and the state of the art in Chi-nese Named Entity Recognition(NER).2Details of the Evaluation2.1CorporaFive corpora were provided for the evaluation: three in Simpliﬁed characters and two in tradi-tional characters.The Simpliﬁed character cor-pora were provided by Microsoft Research Asia (MSRA)for WS and NER,by University of Penn-sylvania/University of Colorado(UPUC)for WS, and by the Linguistic Data Consortium(LDC)for NER.The Traditional character corpora were pro-vided by City University of Hong Kong(CITYU) for WS and NER and by the Chinese Knowl-edge Information Processing Laboratory(CKIP) of the Academia Sinica,Taiwan for WS.Each data provider offered separate training and test corpora. General information for each corpus appears in Table1.All data providers were requested to supply the training and test corpora in both the stan-dard local encoding and in Unicode(UTF-8)in a standard XML format with sentence and word tags,and named entity tags if appropriate.ForSource Training(Wds/Types)BIG5HKSCS/Unicode220K/23KBIG5/Unicode91K/15KUnicode61K(est.wds)GB18030/Unicode100K/13KGB/Unicode155K/17KTable1:Overall corpus statisticsall providers except the LDC,missing encodingswere transcoded by the organizers using the ap-propriate Python CJK codecs.Primary training and truth data for word seg-mentation were generated by the organizers via aPython script by replacing sentence end tags withnewlines and word end tags with a single whites-pace character,deleting all other tags and associ-ated newlines.For test data,end of sentence tagswere replaced with newlines and all other tags re-moved.Since the UPUC truth corpus was onlyprovided in white-space separated form,test datawas created by automatically deleting line-internalwhitespace.Primary training and truth data for namedentity recognition were converted from theprovided XML format to a two-column formatsimilar to that used in the CoNLL2002NERtask(Sang,2002)adapted for Chinese,wheretheﬁrst column is the current character andthe second column the corresponding tag.For-mat details may be found at the bakeoff website(/bakeoff2006/).For consistency,we tagged only”<NAMEX>”mentions,of either(PER)SON,(LOC)ATION,(ORG)ANIZATION,or(G)EO-(P)OLITICAL(E)NTITY as annotated in the corpora.1Test wasgenerated as above.The LDC required sites to download trainingdata from their website directly in the ACE2eval-uation format,restricted to”NAM”mentions.Theorganizers provided the sites with a Python scriptto convert the LDC data to the CoNLL formatabove,and the same script was used to create thetruth data.Test data was created by splitting onnewlines or Chinese period characters.Comparable XML format data was also pro-vided for all corpora and both tasks.The segmentation and NER annotation stan-dard,as appropriate,for each corpus was madewhere naming errors or minor divergences from requiredﬁle formats arose,a mix of manual inter-vention and automatic conversion was employed to enable scoring.The primary scoring scripts were made available to participants for followup experiments.3Participating SitesA total of36sites registered,and29submitted re-sults for scoring.The greatest number of partici-pants came from the People’s Republic of China (11),followed by Taiwan(7),the United States (5),Japan(2),with one team each from Singapore, Korea,Hong Kong,and Canada.A summary of participating groups with task and track informa-tion appears in Table2.A total of144ofﬁcial runs were scored:101for word segmentation and43 for named entity recognition.4Results&DiscussionWe report results belowﬁrst for word segmenta-tion and second for named entity recognition. 4.1Word Segmentation ResultsTo provide a basis for comparison,we computed baseline and possible topline scores for each of the corpora.The baseline was constructed by left-to-right maximal match implemented by Python script,using the training corpus vocabulary.The topline employed the same procedure,but instead used the test vocabulary.These results are shown in Tables3and4.For the WS task,we computed the following measures using the score(Sproat and Emerson, 2003)program developed for the previous bake-offs:recall(R),precision(P),equally weighted F-measure(F=2P R(p(1−p)Site Name Country CKIP UPUC LDCID WS WS NER NER Northeastern University of China ZH C CLanguage Technologies Institute,2O Oand Communications Technology,Japan JP CBasis Technology C CPattern Recognition and Intelligentof Posts and Telecommunications ZH CHKUST,Human Language6O O7O O Chinese Academy of Sciences ZH C C CAlias-i, C CBeijing University of Posts10O O11C OC O Technology(Beijing)Co.,Ltd.ZH OAI Lab.,Dept of InformationTaiwan.TW OCNanjing University,China ZHIntelligent Agent Systems Lab(IASL),15C C16C C18CTaiwan TWMicrosoft Research Asia ZH OC OCYahoo!USCKIP,Academia Sinica,Taiwan TWKookmin University KO C CShenyang Institute of24OCSingapore SG C CNational Taiwan University TWITNLP,Harbin Institute of30OC O at Taiwan TW CNational Laboratory on Machine32OC OC O34O OTable2:Participating Sites by Corpus,Task,and TrackSource Precision OOV Rate R ivCITYU0.8820.0400.9690.9150.8920.030MSRA0.9000.0340.9810.8690.8280.011Source Precision OOV Rate R iv CITYU0.9850.0400.9810.9800.9830.997 MSRA0.9930.0340.9910.9610.9680.989RunID C r C p R oov150.9730.9720.9720.981 b±0.000691±0.0007030.787200.9720.9710.9710.979±0.000739±0.0007270.77310.9710.9650.9680.981c±0.000783±0.0007610.792150.9660.9670.9660.973±0.000750±0.0008250.633110.9620.9620.9620.972±0.000805±0.0008550.68990.9660.9570.9610.983b±0.000855±0.0008050.71480.9520.9540.9530.960±0.000929±0.0009380.63840.8450.8440.8440.854a±0.001559±0.0015470.506130.5890.5890.5890.613 Table5:CITYU:Word Segmentation:Closed TrackSite R P F R iv±0.000625±0.0006390.840320.9790.9760.9770.985±0.000715±0.0007610.795220.9700.9650.9670.979±0.000794±0.0007940.787130.5440.5490.5470.559 3±0.002129±0.0021310.195130.4970.4670.4810.516 Table6:CITYU:Word Segmentation:Open TrackSite R P F R iv±0.001280±0.0013710.702150.9610.9530.9570.974 b±0.001280±0.0014140.656320.9580.9480.9530.972±0.001327±0.0015580.55410.9470.9430.9450.962a±0.001455±0.0015710.69490.9510.9350.9430.976±0.001607±0.0016540.54780.9390.9290.9340.954a±0.002449±0.0024610.52140.8360.8280.8320.8471±0.002875±0.0030930.036Site R P F R iv±0.001232±0.0013710.704340.9590.9490.9540.972±0.001327±0.0014680.64720.9530.9460.9490.965b±0.001428±0.0015210.676130.7240.6680.6950.749 3±0.002915±0.0031480.160130.6540.5730.6110.680 Table8:CKIP:Word Segmentation:Open TrackSite R P F R iv±0.001176±0.0012220.612260.9610.9530.9570.977±0.001252±0.0013090.49410.9550.9560.9560.966d±0.001336±0.0012950.574110.9550.9530.9540.969 b±0.001350±0.0012950.575150.9490.9570.9530.959 a±0.001389±0.0012660.672160.9520.9540.9530.964 b±0.001376±0.0013230.60250.9560.9470.9510.972b±0.001427±0.0013500.568180.9500.9300.9400.974 a±0.001192±0.0017320.175180.9540.9210.9370.981±0.001578±0.0014760.640230.9330.9390.9360.948±0.001683±0.0016210.554180.9490.8970.9220.982 a±0.002371±0.0023600.47340.8170.8210.8190.829Table9:MSRA:Word Segmentation:Closed TrackSite R P F R iv a±0.000884±0.0009260.839110.9770.9760.9770.982±0.000986±0.0009660.811320.9770.9710.9740.988±0.001077±0.0010770.804300.9770.9600.9680.989±0.001252±0.0012220.71120.9490.9540.9520.958±0.001336±0.0014990.503240.9380.9460.9420.946 Table10:MSRA:Word Segmentation:Open TrackSite R P F R iv±0.001207±0.0013300.707320.9360.9230.9300.961 a±0.001207±0.0014250.634260.9360.9170.9260.966 b±0.001279±0.0014540.577160.9290.9090.9190.958±0.001279±0.0014970.54610.9220.9140.9180.949±0.001363±0.0014400.680310.9170.9040.9100.940±0.001387±0.0015580.459230.9150.8960.9050.949±0.001511±0.0016090.56840.8310.8190.8250.864b±0.001998±0.0019220.637 RunID C r C p R oov340.9490.9390.9440.966±0.001188±0.0013140.711200.9400.9270.9330.959±0.001169±0.0013630.680120.9330.9160.9240.959±0.001207±0.0014760.561240.9280.9060.9170.954±0.001339±0.0015450.5933If the span was a single character and appeared UN-tagged in the corpus,we exclude it.Longer spans are re-tained for tagging even if they might appear both tagged and untagged in the training corpus.two runs performing below baseline.The best F-score overall on the MSRA Open Track reached 0.912,with ten other scores for MSRA and CITYU Open Track above0.85.Only two sites submitted runs in both Open and Closed Track conditions,and few Open Track runs were sub-mitted at all,again limiting comparability.For the only corpus with substantial numbers of both Open and Closed Track runs,MSRA,the top three runs outperformed all Closed Track runs. System scores and baselines were much higher for the CITYU and MSRA corpora than for the LDC corpus.This disparity can,in part,also be at-tributed to a substantially smaller training corpus for the LDC than the other two collections.The presence of an additional category,Geo-political entity,which is potentially confused for either location or organization also enhances the difﬁ-culty of this corpus.Training requirements,vari-ation across corpora,and most extensive tag sets will continue to raise challenges for named entity recognition.Named entity recognition results for all runs grouped by corpus and track appear in Tables14-19;all tables are sorted by F-score.Source R PER-F LOC-F0.6110.5290.516N/A0.4930.4280.290.5390.590.5340.469N/A Table13:Baselines:NER:Maximal match with unique tag in training corpus Site P F LOC-F30.91430.89030.9211190.92010.88610.9251210.92660.88530.9232210.92420.88500.9236190.90790.88470.923380.92760.86940.9114210.91880.86830.9105210.91640.86810.911490.86900.85510.8861190.87420.85190.9015260.84660.82590.8863310.90350.78710.8905290.77030.70190.7613RunID R ORG-F PER-F0.74980.68010.8098Table15:CITYU:Named Entity Recognition:Open Track Site P F LOC-F GPE-F0.72650.65850.788480.81430.68780.17050.7727Table16:LDC:Named Entity Recognition:Closed TrackSite P F LOC-F GPE-F0.66210.52090.742260.67200.66360.70780.29820.45530.7420RunID R ORG-F PER-F0.84200.83100.9009a0.81710.81960.8257b0.82880.76980.84950.82340.81500.7938f0.79310.80710.7568g0.80320.77420.7753avdic0.77670.81380.8126dcrf0.77400.81410.80930.80970.72950.8196cnoword0.75540.81000.7764bvoting0.76060.81450.78990.78820.74910.7699r0.71680.72880.71070.31240.45910.3521Table18:MSRA:Named Entity Recognition:Closed TrackSite P F LOC-F 100.92200.91180.9034 140.90760.89990.9099 110.87670.87600.8976 110.86450.85200.8745 320.83970.82890.8804 70.84680.81320.8552 60.81950.75070.8291 300.86970.74760.7029 80.83200.74240.8000 120.70830.61690.6154 120.73950.60960.6154GPE tags in the truth data mapped to LOC,since no GPE tags were present in the results.5Personal communication,Mu Li,Microsoft Research Asia.ate WS and NER and focus attention on improve-ments to the fundamental techniques which en-hance performance on higher level tasks. AcknowledgementsWe gratefully acknowledge the generous assis-tance of the organizations and individuals listed below who provided the data for this bakeoff; without their support,it could not have taken place:•Chinese Knowledge Information ProcessingGroup,Academia Sinica,Taiwan:Keh-JiannChen,Henning Chiu•City University of Hong Kong:Benjamin K.Tsou,Olivia Oi Yee Kwong •Linguistic Data Consortium:StephanieStrassel•Microsoft Research Asia:Mu Li •University of Pennsylvania/University ofColorado,USA:Martha Palmer,NianwenXueWe also thank Hwee Tou Ng and Olivia Oi Yee Kwong,the co-organizers of theﬁfth SIGHAN workshop,in conjunction with which this bakeoff takes place.Olivia Kwong merits special thanks both for her help in co-organizing this bakeoff and in coordinating publications.Finally,we thank all the participating sites who enabled the success of this bakeoff.ReferencesThomas Emerson.2005.The Second International Chinese Word Segmentation Bakeoff.In Proceed-ings of the Fourth SIGHAN Workshop on Chinese Language Processing,Jeju Island,Republic of Ko-rea.Charles M.Grinstead and urie Snell.1997.In-troduction to Probability.American Mathematical Society,Providence,RI.Erik F.Tjong Kim Sang.2002.Introduction to the CoNLL-2002Shared Task:Language-Independent Named Entity Recognition.In Proceedings of the 6th Conference on Natural Language Learning2002 (CoNLL-2002).Richard Sproat and Thomas Emerson.2003.The First International Chinese Word Segmentation Bakeoff.In Proceedings of the Second SIGHAN Workshop on Chinese Language Processing,Sapporo,Japan.。

语言学超精简1

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTIONSession ALanguage is a system of arbitrary vocal symbols used for human communication.Language is a means of verbal communication. It is instrumental in that communicating by speaking or writing is a purposeful act.It is social and conventional in that language is a social semiotic and communication can only take place effectively if all the users share a broad understanding of human interaction including such associated factors as nonverbal cues, motivation, and socio-cultural roles. Language learning and use are determined by the intervention of biological, cognitive, psychosocial, and environmental factors.Other definitions：Language is a symbolic form of communication that involves, on the one hand, the comprehension of words and sentences and, on the other, the expression of feelings, thoughts, and ideas. The basic units of language are phonemes, morphemes, and words.from Encyclopedia BritannicaLanguage is the systematic communication by vocal symbols. It is a universal characteristic of the human species.Nothing is known of its origin, although scientists have identified a gene that clearly contributes to the human ability to use language. Scientists generally hold that it has been so long in use that the length of time writing is known to have existed (7,900 years at most) is short by comparison. Just as languages spoken now by peoples of the simplest cultures are as subtle and as intricate as those of the peoples of more complex civilizations, similarly the forms of languages known (or hypothetically reconstructed) from the earliest records show no trace of being more ―primitive‖ than their modern forms.from The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia人类特有的一种符号系统。

Syntax,Morpholog...

Syntax, Morphology, and Semantics of EzafeParviz Parsafar, Ph.D.Yuba Community CollegeAbstractEzafe, whi ch literally means …annexation‟ or …addition‟ and is traditionally known as a “Genitive” marker1, is an indispensable element inside any noun phrase comprising a head modified by at least one non-clausal modifier and/or complement. That is, any study of Persian involving NPs in subject position or predicate position, whether followed by light verbs or thematic verbs, is bound to encounter ezafe in numerous example sentences. Therefore, the present paper, which is a slightly revised version of chapter one in Parsafar(1996), attempts to present a clear understanding of the syntax, morphology, and semantics of ezafe.Although ezafe has been stud ied by many scholars such as Mo‟in(1962)2, Homayunfarrokh (1960), Phillot (1919), Palmer (1971), Sami‟ian (1983), and Karimi and Brame(1986), its grammatical status is not yet quite transparent. Grammarians have regarded ezafe as a polysemous “word” carrying over ten different “meanings/functions”. The purpose of this paper is to unravel the myth and to show that ezafe is a dummy clitic-like morpheme which is semantically void while syntactically it functions as an “associative marker” which subordinates its [+N] host, on the left, to its following complements.If sound, such a conclusion will be reminiscent of Zwicky sand Pullum‟s (1983, 502) observation: “An important point about doing grammatical research on a well-known [or even a relatively well-understood] language is that there can still be surprises. Evidence, sometimes of a subtle and indirect kind, can be uncovered for analyses of a quite unexpected character.”It needs to be mentioned at the outset that the principal focus of this work is on the colloquial language, but there are also numerous references to and examples from the formal registers. In those cases where there is a syntactic or semantic difference between the colloquial and the formal versions of a given example, it will be discussed. Otherwise, the registers of the examples will not be brought up except for emphasis.Pivotal to my adoption of the colloquial language were two significant facts. First, there has been a predominant tendency in the works on Persian to examine basically the formal (or in some cases the literary) language. The disregard for the colloquial language appears to have a primarily stylistic bias which could be overcome through detailed studies of this register.Second, although the colloquial and the formal versions of Farsi are to a large extent identical both syntactically and semantically, there are certain lexical, functional, pragmatic, and even syntactic differences between them. For instance, there are lexical items such as /tu/ …in, inside, into‟, /bæqæl/ …beside‟, and /pæhlu/ …next to‟ which are exclusively employed in the colloquial language or have a greater range of applications here than in the formal versions. Thus, the colloquial focus of the present study will help demonstrate many such discrepa ncies3. ReferencesAdams, Valerie. 1973. An Introduction to Modern English Word-formation. London: Longman Group Limited.Aronoff, Mark. 1976. Word Formation in Generative Grammar. Linguistic Inquiry Monograph No.1. MIT.Bauer, Laurie. 1983. English Word Formation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bing, Janet Mueller. 1980. Linguistic Rhythm and Grammatical Structure in Afghan Persian. Linguistic Inquiry 11(3): 437-463.Bloomfield, Leonard. 1933. Language. Chicago: University of Chicago edition 1984. Chodzko, A. 1883. Grammaire De La Langue Persane. paris: Maisonneuve & CIE LibrairesÉditeurs.Chomsky,N. 1970. “Remarks on Nominalization” in Jacobs and Rosenbaum 1970. 184-221. Chomsky, N. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht, Holland: Foris Publications.Homayunfarrokh, A. R. 1339 (1960). Dastur-e Jame‟-e Zæban-e Farsi. [ A Comprehensive Grammar of the Persian Language]. 2nd. ed. Tehran: Elmi.Horn, Laurence. (p.c.)Insler, Stanley. (p.c.)Jackendoff, R. 1977. X-bar Syntax: A Study of Phrase Structure. Linguistic Inquiry Monograph No. 2. MIT.Karimi, Simin. 1989. Aspects of Persian Syntax, Specificity, and the Theory of Grammar. Seattle: University of Washington Dissertation.Karimi, Simin, and Michael Brame. 1986. A Generalization Concerning the ezafe Construction in Persian. paper presented at the annual meeting of the Western Conference of Linguistics, Canada.Klavans, Judith L. 1985. The Independence of Syntax and Phonology in Cliticization. language 61(1): 95-120.Lazard, Gilbert. 1957. Grammaire du Persian Contemporain. paris: Librairie C. Klincksiek. Lyons, Christopher. 1986. The Syntax of English Genetive C onstructions. Journal of Linguistics 22:123-143. Printed in Great Britain.Lyons, John. 1971. Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Maling, Joan. 1983. Transitive Adjectives: A Case of Categorical Reanalysis. In Henry and Richards 1983, 253-289.Marantz,Alec. 1989. “Clitics and Phrase Structure” in Baltin and Kroch 1989, 99-116. Marchand, H. 1969. The Categories and Types of Present-Day English Word-Formation, 2nd ed. Munchen: Beck.Mo’in, M. 1340(1961). Mofrad-o Jam‟ [Singular and Plural]. Tehran: Ebn-e Sina Publications. Mo’in, M. 1341 (1962a). Esm-e Mæsdær, Hasel-e Mæsdær [verbal Nouns and Abstract Nouns[. Tehran: Ebn-e Sina.Mo’in, M. 1341(1962b). Ezafe [The Genitive Case]. Tehran: Ebn-e Sina Publications. Moyne, John Abel. 1970. The Structure of Verbal Constructions in Persian. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Dissertation.Moyne, John Abel, and Guy Carden. 1974. Subject Reduplication in Persian. Linguistic Inquiry 5(2): 205-249.Nye, Gertrude E. 1955. The Phonemes and Morphemes of Modern Persian: A Descriptive Study. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan dissertation.Palmer, A. 1971. The Ezafe Construction in Modern Standard Persian. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan dissertation.Parsafar, Parviz. 1990a. The Persian /ra/. Unpublished qualifying paper presented to the faculty, Department of Linguistics, Yale University, New Have, CT.Parsafar, Parviz. 1990b. The Morphology of Modern Persian Suffixes. Unpublished qualifying paper presented to the faculty, Department of Linguistics, Yale University, New Haven, CT. Parsafar, Parviz. 1996. Spatial Prepositions in Modern Persian. New Haven, CT: Yale University dissertation.Perlmutter, David M. 1980. Relational Grammar. in Moravcsik and Wirth, eds.,Syntax and Semantics 13: 195-227. Current Approaches to Syntax, Academic Press.Phillot, D.C. 1919. Higher Persian Grammar. Calcutta: Baptist Mission Press.Quirk, R., Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Radford, Andrew. 1981. Transformational Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Radford, Andrew. 1988. Transformational Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Riemsdijk, H. C. Van. 1978. A Case Study in Syntactic Markedness: Thw Binding Nature of Prepositional Phrases. Dordecht, Holland: Foris Publications.Rubinchik, Yu. A. 1971. The Modern Persian Language. Moscow: Nauka Publishing House. Sami’ian, Vida. 1983. Structure of Phrasal Categories in Persian: an X-Bar Analysis. Los Angeles: UCLA dissertation.Scalise, S. 1984. generative Morphology. Dordrecht: Foris.Stowell, Timothy Angus. 1981. Origins of Phrase Structure. Massachusetts: MIT dissertation. Windfuhr, Gernot L. 1979. Persian Grammar. The Hague: Mouton P.Zwicky, Arnold M. 1976. On Clitics. Phonologica 1976. ed. by Wolfgang U. Dresser and Oskar E. Pfeiffer. Innsbruck: Innsbrucker Beitrage Zur Sprachwissenschaft.Zwicky, Arnold M. 1977. On Clitics. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club. Zwicky, Arnold M. 1980. Stranded to. Ohio State University Working Papers in Linguistics 24:166-173.Zwicky, Arnold M. 1982. Stranded to and Phonological Phrasing in English. Linguistics 20:3-57. Zwicky, Arnold M. 1985. Clitics and Particles. Language 61(2): 283-305.Zwicky, Arnold M. and Geoffrey Pullum. 1983. Cliticization vs. Inflectio n: English n‟t. Language 59(3): 502-513.。

LINGUISTICS——胡壮麟版

LINGUISTICSChapter one INTRODUCTION1. What is linguistics?⏹the scientific study of language2. What is language?⏹a system whose parts can and must be considered in their synchronic solidarity)--Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913): Course in General Linguistics (1916)⏹a set (finite or infinite) of sentences, each finite in length and constructed out of a finite set of elements(Chomsky,1957)—一种有限或无限的句子系列，每一句子的长度有限，并由一种有限的成分系统构成。

⏹--Noam Chomsky (1928- ): Syntactic Structures (1957)⏹a purely human and non-instinctive method of communicating ,ideas, emotions and desires by means of voluntarily produced symbols(Sapir,1921)—--Edward Sapir (1884-1939):Language: An Introduction to the Study of Speech (1921)⏹一种纯人类的和非本能的、⏹借助自发产生的符号以交流思想、⏹情感和意愿的方法。

⏹a system of arbitrary vocal symbols used for human communication.--Ronald Wardhaugh: Introduction to Linguistics (1977)3. (Design)Features of Human Language⏹Arbitrariness⏹Duality⏹Creativity⏹Displacement⏹duality二重性:language as a system with 2 subsystems/structures/levels---meaninglesssounds and units of meaning grouped and regrouped with sounds⏹creativity (productivity)创造性: provides opportunities for sendingmessages that have never been sent before and for understanding novel messages. displacement:移位性can be used to refer to things real or imagined, past, present or future [no matter how eloquently a dog may bark, he cannot tell you that his parents were poor but honest.]⏹4.The functions of Language⏹ 6 functions(by Jacobson):referential,poitic,emotive,conative,phatic,metalingual function(所指、诗学、感情、意动、元语言功能)⏹ 4 functions(by Halliday):⏹the ideational function表意功能: language as a medium that links a person with the world⏹the interpersonal function人际功能: as a medium to get along in a community⏹the textual function篇章功能: create relevance to context⏹5.Some Important Distinctions⏹5.1 prescriptive vs. descriptive规定与描述: aims to lay down rules to tell people what they should say and what they not say.aims to describe and analyze the language people actually use;⏹5.2 synchronic vs. diachronic共时与历时: the description of a language at some point of time in history is a synchronic study ; the description of a language as it changes through time is a diachronic study.⏹5.3 Langue vs. parole语言与言语: by F. de. Saussure索绪尔. French words. Langue refers to the abstract linguistic system shared by all the members of a speech community, and parole refers to the realization of a langue in actual use. Langue is the set of conventions and rules which language users all have to abide by, and parole is the concrete use of the conventions and the application of the rules. Langue is abstract; it is not the language people actually use. Parole is concrete; it refers to the naturally occurring language events. Langue is relatively stable, it does not change frequently; parole varies from person to person, and from situation to situation.⏹6.Branches of linguistics:⏹microlinguistics introduced in the charter behind.⏹macrolinguistics:Sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, cognitive linguistics,etc.Chapter 2 PHONETICS1.What is phonetics语音学? The study of speech sounds2. Organs of speech: the pharyngeal cavity---the throatthe oral cavity—the mouth,the nasal cavity—the nose3 Broad and narrow transcriptionsInternational Phonetic Alphabet (IPA), a widely used standardized and internationally accepted system of phonetic transcription. The basic principle of the IPA is using one letter selected from major European languages to represent a sound.IPA provides it users with another set of symbols called diacritics. (变音符, 如façade上所加的变音符号或résumé上表示发高音的记号)●Broad transcription:letter-symbols only, used in dictionaries and textbooks for general purposes.●Narrow transcription:letter-symbols with diacritics, representing more fine details, used by phoneticians4.Classification of English speech sounds: vowels and consonants---the obstruction of air-stream4.1 classification of vowels: they are differentiated by a number of factors:the position of the tongue in the mouth: the front---[]the central---the back---the openness of the mouth: the close ---the semi-close ---the semi-open---the open---the shape of the lips:the rounded---all the back vowels with the exception of [a]the un-rounded—all the front vowels and central vowels4.2 classification of consonants;Chapter3 PHONOLOGY⏹1. What is phonology音位学?The study of sound systems and patterns. focuses on three fundamental questions: What sounds make up the list of sounds that can distinguish meaning in a particular language? What sounds vary in what ways in what context? What sounds can appear together in a sequence in a particular language?⏹2. Phonology vs. phonetics: concerned with the same aspect of language---the speech sounds, but differ in their approach and focus. Phonetics is of a general nature . It is interested in all the speech sounds in all human languages.⏹Phonology aims to discover how speech sounds in a language form patterns and how these sounds are used to convey meaning in linguisticcommunication. The conclusion we reach about the phonology of one language is very often language specific and should not be applied to another language without discretion.⏹3. Phone音素, phoneme音位, and allophone音位变体:⏹3.1 A phone is a phonetic unit or segment. The speech sounds we hear and produce during linguistic communication are all phones. But a phone does not necessarily distinguish meaning.⏹3.2 A phoneme is an abstract unit. It is not any particular sound, but rather it is represented or realized by a certain phone in a certain phonetic context.⏹3.3 An allophone: The different phones which can represent a phoneme in different phonetic context are called the allophones of that phoneme.⏹In words” feel” and” leaf”, there are four phones [f, i:, l, ł], but three phonemes/f, i:, l/, and phonemes, the dark [ł ]and clear[ l ]are the allophones of the phoneme/ l / .●4 Phonemic contrast: as two distinctive phonemes, /p/ and /b/ in [pit] and [bit]●5 Complementary distribution: allophones of the same phoneme occurring in different phonetic environments, e.g. clear [l] and dark [ł]●6 Minimal pair: Two different forms are identical in every way except for one sound segment which occurs in the same place in the strings, pill and bill,till and kill, kill and dill7.Some rules in phonologySequential rules: rules that govern the combination of sounds in a particular language, blik but not lbki; there are rules governing the combination of three consonants clustering together (see p. 26); phonological patterning is language specific, e.g. [☠] not as initial inEnglish and standard Chinese, but can occur in Vietnamese, Shanghai dialect and Cantonese●Assimilation rules:when a sound is pronounced, the feature of the consonant which follows it is copied, vowels may be nasalized in bean, green, and team;and in incorrect [n] becomes [☠]; assimilation reflected in spelling: impossible for inpossible●Deletion rules: the sound is deleted when it occurs before a final nasalconsonant, e.g. sign, design, and paradigm8.Suprasegmental features : stress, tone, intonationAttention: such features also convey meanings.●Chapter4 MORPHOLOGY1.What is morphology形态学?The study of the internal structure of words and the rules by which the words are formed .2.Open class: nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs to which new words can be added. For example: beatnik (a person who rejects or avoids conventional behavior)3.Closed class: conjunctions, prepositions, articles and pronouns to which new word are not usually added4.morpheme: the minimal meaningful unit of language.5.Classification of morphemes语素:5.1 free morphemes: roots, morphemes as words5.2 bound morphemes: affixes, morphemes attached to free morphemes to form new words5.3 inflectional morphemes: morphemes indicating case and number of n.s, tense and aspect of v.s, and degree of adj.s and adv.s5.4 derivational morphemes: bound morphemesadded to existing forms to construct new words6.Formation of English words6.1 derivation:forms a word by adding an affix to a free morpheme.Since derivation can apply more than once,it is possible to creae a derived word with a number of affixes.6.2 compounding:the combination of free morphemes.6.3 others: conversion, clipping, blending, backformation, acronyms and abbreviations, etc⏹Conversion:a process that puts an existing word of one class into another class.This happens more frequently between n.s and v.s.e.g.LOOK in take a look is a noun converted from a verb.⏹Clipping :A process that shortens a word ,e.g.bus-omnibus,gym-gymnasium⏹Blending:To create a new word by combining one part of a word with one part of another word.e.g.motor+hotel=motel,breastfast+lunch=brunch⏹Backformation:To create a new word by dropping a real or supposed suffix.e.g.edit--editor⏹Acronym&abbreviation:Putting together the initial letters of some words.The difference between the two is the former can be read as a word .The latter,letter by letter.NATO,USA…….Chapter5 SYNTAX⏹1.What is syntax句法学?How words are combined to form sentences and the rules that govern the formation of sentences.⏹2.Different approaches to syntax: Knowledge of sentence structure is the object of study of all schools of grammar. One school of grammar is comparatively more successful in dealing with certain aspects of syntax. Among all grammars, four appear to be well recognized, namely, traditional grammar, structural grammar, T.G grammar and systemic-functional grammar.⏹2.1 traditional G.:initially based on European languages, particularly on Latin and Greek. termed pedagogic grammar. In analyzing sentences, the method adopted is called parsing切分法.⏹1) identifying elements of the sentence,⏹2) identifying part of speech of each word⏹3) pointing out the inflection of the words,⏹4) describing the relationship between the words,⏹5) generalizing the order of the words.(3 weaknesses)⏹2.2 structural grammar:the early 20 century. American anthropologists and linguists. dying American Indian language. 2 concepts: form class形式类, immediate constituent 直接成分.⏹ A sentence can be cut into sections. Each section is its immediate constituent. Then each section can be further cut into constituent. This on-going cutting is termed immediate constituent analysis. This way of syntactic analysis adds a new dimension to the analysis of sentence structure. IC analysis can accounting for the linearity and the hierarchy of sentence structure, and, therefore, structural ambiguity .(but no pedagogic grammar of a language has been written following this approach )⏹2.3 T.G grammar转换生成语法: TO Chomsky, a grammar as the tacit shared knowledge of all speakers is a system of finite rules by which an infinite number of sentences can be generated. The task of the linguist is to describe adequately this system of rules and explain how they wok.⏹ 2.3.1 The model of the standard theory 标准理论based on Chomsky1965 :⏹According to the model, we select words from the lexicon (our mental dictionary) and string them together, following P.S rules. The sentence structure at this stage is the deep structure, which will be further manipulated according to transformational rules. The actual form of the sentence is the surface structure, which is represented phonetically in speech or orthographically in writing. If this model is right, then writing a TG grammar of a language means working out 2 sets of rules which are followed by speakers of the language.⏹2.3.2 P.S rules短语规则: rules that specify the constituents of syntactic categories. They are part of speaker's syntactic knowledge. Such knowledge exists in the mind of speakers.4 tentative ps rules:⏹A)S →NP VP⏹B)NP →[(Det) (Adj) N⏹[Pron⏹C)VP →(Aux) V (NP)(PP)⏹D)PP →P NP⏹2.3.3转换及转换规则transformational rules⏹我们在谈及转换时需要引入两个概念：深层结构（Deep Structure简称DS）和表层结构（Surface Structure简称SS）。

会话含义——精选推荐

会话含义会话含义彭飞语⽤学定义：Pragmatics is the systematic study of meaning by virtue of, or dependent on, the use of language. The central topics of inquiry of pragmatics include implicature, presupposition, speech acts, and deixis.1 格赖斯的会话含义理论格赖斯⾮⾃然意义理论（a theory of meaning nn）(nn-non natural)S meaning nn p by “uttering” U to A if and only S intends：当且仅当(ⅰ)说话⼈S意图听话⼈A想到p，(ⅱ)说话⼈S意图听话⼈A识别其意图(ⅰ)，(ⅲ)说话⼈S意图听话⼈A对其意图(ⅰ)的识别是听话⼈A想到p的⾸要原因，此时就认为“说话⼈S通过对听话⼈A发出话语U来表达⼀种⾮⾃然意义p”。

“⾮⾃然意义”也可叫做“说话⼈意义”（speaker meaning），实际上就是表达和意识意图（交际效果），也就是我们说的语⽤意义。

1.1 合作原则和会话准则(1)合作原则（cooperative principle）：在参与交谈时，要根据场合和需求，使你说的话符合你所参与的交谈的公认⽬的或⽅向。

(2)会话准则（the maxins of conversation）：①质的准则：话语真实。

(ⅰ)不说错误的话(ⅱ)不说缺乏证据的话②量的准则：(ⅰ)不要⽐交谈需要说的少(ⅱ)不要⽐交谈需要说的多③相关准则：所说的话要具有相关性。

④⽅式准则：清晰明⽩地表达。

(ⅰ)避免晦涩(ⅱ)避免歧义(ⅲ)简洁(ⅳ)有条理1.2 说话者和会话准则的关系(1)说话者遵守会话准则(2)说话者违背会话准则：如说谎(3)说话者选择不遵守某⼀准则（opt out of a maxim）：“冲突”状况，遵循⼀条违背另⼀条(4)说话者故意违反或利⽤⼀条准则（flout or exploit a maxim）1.3 Conversational implicature O和Conversational implicature F(1)Conversational implicature O ：直接遵守会话准则产⽣的会话含义。

语言学精华术语概念(英文版)

Linguistics - TermsMetafuncion: The general roles language plays are termed metafunctions. Language plays three metafunctions: 1. the ideational function, to identify things, to think, or to record info; 2. the interpersonal function, to use it as a medium to communicate in a community; 3. the textual function, to organize message in a logical way; to bring units of language into unity.Contractive distribution: sounds appearing in the same environment. a. minimal pairs: two words differing by only one sound in the same position (e.g. sip, zip); b. minimal sets: words distinguished by one segment in the same position (e.g. beat, bit, bet, bat). Complementary distribution: allophones that are not found in the same position, but share phonetic featuresFree variation: if segments appear in the same position but the mutual substitution does not result in change of meaning, they are said to be in free variation. Segments in free variation are generally dialectal variation (e.g. economics).Morpheme: the smallest meaningful unit of language is called a morpheme. The morpheme can be classified into free morphemes, bound morpheme (inflectional morpheme and derivational morphemes).Allomorphs: a morpheme may be represented by different forms, called allomorphs.(E.g. the prefix：in has four allomorphs as found in the words impossible, immoral, irregular, irresistible.)Inflectional morphemes: indicating grammatical categories (e.g. indicates case and number of nouns, tense and aspect of verbs, and degree of adjectives and adverbs.) Derivational affixes: Derivational affixes are bound morphemes added to existing forms to construct new words. The process of putting affixes to existing forms to create new words is called deviation.Syntagmatic relations: chain relations, supported by TG grammar, regarding language as an abstract system, analyzing its form; It is a method of analyzing sentences by looking into their constituents and generalizing the pattern.Paradigmatic relations: choice relations, supported by SF grammar, emphasizing the vertical relations in order to explain the realization of the function of language; It focuses on the language in use.Transitivity: Transitivity is the syntactic structure as representation of experience. The ideational function is realized by the transitivity system of language. It is a type of linguistic process which represents what exists and what is going on around us andinside us. The three main linguistic processes are termed material processes, relational processes and mental processes.Mood: The unique contribution by systematic-functional grammar is the observation that only a particular element of syntactic structure, called mood, realizes the interaction between the speaker and hearer.All purposes in conversations fall into two fundamental categories: giving or demanding. Giving goods-and services is offer; giving information is statement. Demanding g&s is command; demanding information is question.Mood is a syntactic constituent made up of the subject and the finite. The subject is the first noun phrase in a statement. The finite is a verbal operator that expresses tense or modal meaning as well as positive or negative form.Modality: Modality expresses the semantic space between yes and no. It can be categorized into modalization and modulation. Modalization relates to how valid the information is (probability, usuality); Modulation relates to how confident the speaker can be in the eventual success of the speech act (obligation, inclination). Reference: reference is one aspect of meaning and the relation by which a word picks out or identifies an entity in the world. E.g. London refers to the capital of Great Britain. The word dog denotes a kind of domestic animal.Sense: It is mental representation and the association with something in the speaker/ hear’s mind. E.g. when you hear the expression dog, you will naturally reflect on its features in addition to the kind of animal as the referent of the expression. Homonymy: Homonyms are words which have the same form but different meanings. Homograph: same spelling, different meaningsHomophone: same pronunciation, different meaningsFull Homonym: same spelling and pronunciation, different meaningsHyponymy: Hyponymy is a relation of inclusion. Tiger, lion, elephant and dog are hyponyms of the word animal. Words like animal are called superordinates. Componential analysis: The approach that analyzes word meaning by decomposing it into its atomic features is CA. Advantages: 1. It is a breakthrough in the formal representation of meaning. 2. It reveals the impreciseness of the terminology in the traditional approach to meaning analysis. 3. It examines the components of senses. The more semantic features a word has, the narrower its reference is. Limitations: It cannot be applied to the analysis of all lexicons, merely to words within the same semantic field.Prototype: The theory of prototype introduces a notion of degree of membership. 1. Some members of a category are typical and central while others are peripheral. 2. There is no clear dividing line between the judgments of two entities. Rather, the one category is gradually merged into the other. 3. Categories are gradable. This approach allows for marginal members. 4. This theory eliminates the dilemma of the traditional conception of category as it postulates that typical members may possess more features than non-typical members.Deixis: Deixis means “pointing”via language. An expression used by speaker to identify something is called deictic expression. (E.g. “what’s this”. The deictic expression “this” is to indicate something in the immediate context.) Deixis can be put into person deixis (comprising personal pronouns), place deixis (specifying the locations relative to the speech event), time deixis (indicating the time of speaking and hearing) and discourse deixis (an expression that has its reference within the discourse or text).Anaphoric reference: the reference of a deixis to a preceding expression is technically termed anaphoric reference. E.g. “a boy and a girl are planting a tree, she is holding it and he is shoveling earth”“he,she” is used as anaphoric reference to refer to “a boy and a girl.”Cataphoric reference: the reversal of the antecedent-anaphora pattern is known as cataphoric reference. E.g. it’s a good idea to have a picnic. It is used as cataphoric reference to refer to “to have a picnic”.Speech act: actions performed via speaking are called speech acts. A speech act consists of three dimensions. The act of producing a meaningful linguistic expression is called locutionary act. The act of communication intention through utterance is termed illocutionary act. The act of bringing an effect is known as perlocutionary act. As functions may not correspond to forms, speech acts can be direct and indirect. 1. Direct speech act: corresponding to the structure of an utterance (straightforward)2. Indirect speech act: those in which there is no correspondence between a structure and a function (polite). It takes longer to process on the part of the hearer.Code model: Communication is achieved by encoding and decoding messages. Inferential model: Illocutions and implicatures are not directly represented by linguistic codes; they must be inferred.Back-channel signals: People always use indications to indicate that he/she is listening. There are two types of indication: paralinguistic signals such as nodding, gestures, smiles, and other facial expressions; vocal signals, uh-uh, yeah, mmm and so on. These vocal and paralinguistic signals are called back-channel signals.Variety: the form of a language used by any group pf speakers or used in a particular fieldFour types: 1. The standard variety(the form of a language used by the governments and communication media, taught in schools and universities and is mainly or only written form) 2. Regional dialect(a variety of language spoken by people living in an area) 3. Sociolects (forms of languages that characterize the speech of different social classes) 4. Registers (a term referring to “varieties according to use”, vs. the former “according to user”) Three dimensions: field (the purpose and subject-matter of communication); mode (the means by which communication takes place); tenor (the relations between the communicators)Sapir-Whorf hypothesis: Language, culture and thought are interdependent. That different people speak differently – that they think differently – that their language offers them different ways of expressing Relativism: Culture affects the way we think through language, especially in our classification of the physical world, the social world, and the ideological world. E.g. kinships in different languages. Communicative competence: the tacit knowledge of language and the ability to use it Four parameters underlining a speakers CC: (1) Whether/to what degree sth is formally possible (good in grammar); (2) Whether/to what degree sth is feasible (acceptability); (3) Whether/to what degree sth is appropriate; (4) Whether/to what degree sth is in fact done (effectiveness).。

英语系语言学考研讲解

注意事项语言学是考研比较头疼的课程，以下几个复习中需要注意的问题，供你参考：第一，要注意基本概念和基本理论。

基本概念要烂熟于心，做到能见到概念就知道它属于哪个章节，基本内容是什么，对这个概念不同的语言学流派有什么不同的理解，你个人的见解又是什么。

基本理论要清楚，要知道在对待同一个问题时不同的理论是如何处理的，它们的哲学基础是什么？它们的理论前提是什么？它们的优势和弊端都是什么？你对这些理论有什么评价？第二，要注意对于基本理论的应用。

比如在音位学章节里，用区别性特征理论的研究结果来描写音位；在形态学里，用派生形态学的理论来解释构词法；在句法学里，用直接成分分析法和树形图来解释歧义句等等。

这些经典理论的运用在考试中是经常出现的。

第三，要注意语言学和其他学科的联系。

虽然在考试中主要考察语言学的核心学科，可是语言学和其它学科的交叉有时也占有一定的比例。

所以建议大家多看看相关的章节，掌握一下那个章节的概貌：比如说，社会语言学、二语习得、计算语言学、历史比较语言学等等。

第四，要注意创造性地理解和解释新现象。

在考试题目中，总会有些平时复习没有见过的语言材料让你来分析。

这时不要紧张，要仔细思考那其中所包含的信息，并检索自己知识系统中的相关理论去解释它。

要有创造性的见解。

第五，要多做练习。

英语语言学概论重点难点提示第一章概论语言的定义：语言的基本特征（任意性、二重性、多产性、移位、文化传递和互换性）；语言的功能（寒暄、指令、提供信息、询问、表达主观感情、唤起对方的感情和言语行为）；语言的起源（神授说，人造说，进化说）等。

语言学定义；研究语言的四大原则（穷尽、一致、简洁、客观）；语言学的基本概念（口语与书面语、共时与历时、语言与言学、语言能力与言行运用、语言潜势与语言行为）；普通语言学的分支（语音、音位、语法、句法、语义）；；语言学的应用（语言学与语言教学、语言与社会、语言与文字、语言与心理学、人类语言学、神经语言学、数理语言学、计算语言学）等。

南京师范大学03-07语言学真题

2003年南师大英语语言学考试题目---初试一、单选题。

1.The scholars who put forward interaction hypothesis hold ________.A) language acquisition is a process of “stimulus-response”.B) humans are predisposed to acquire a language.C) human’s linguistic potentiality must be comb ined with the environment.D) human’s linguistic environment can be ignored as long as humans have language acquisition device.2.American Black English is _______.A) a social variety B) a regional varietyC) a combination of social and regional dialect. D) a temporal dialect3.According to Basil Bernstein, elaborated code is extensively used by _________.A) middle class people and their children.B) working-class people and their children.C) both middle class and working class peopleD) parents of children without any distinction of social background.4. Read the following two sentences and decide what kind of error the learner commits in the second sentence:He practiced English a lot last month. (1)*She comed back home early yesterday. (2)The error in the second sentence belongs to the category of ___________.A) mother tongue interference B) overgeneralizationC) cross-association D) performance error5.In the Semantic Triangle advanced by Ogden and Richards, “thought or reference” is ______.A) word, sentence B) the object C) concept D) symbol6.The word “laze” is an example of _______ in word formation.A) acronym B) blending C) functional shift D) back formation7. Pragmatics is a study of ________.A) language learning B) language acquisitionC) language planning D) language in use8. A linguist is interested in _________.A) what is said B) what is right both in syntax and in semanticsC) what is grammatical D) what ought to be said9. In English elements in construction are generally _______.A) linear B) continuous C) discontinuous D) endocentric10. __________ is a sound produced by bringing the tip of the tongue into contact with the upper teeth to create the obstruction.A) An alveolar B) A bilabial C) A palatal D) A dental二、名词解释1.linguistic universalsnguage acquisition device:3.cultural diffusion4.suggestopedia:5.polysemy6.utterance meaning:7.coinage 8.articulatory phonetics:9.endocentric construction 10.structural change:三、判断1.According to Chomsky, the word “competence” is not limited to the ability of an ideal native speaker to construct and recognize grammatical sentences in his language.2.Eskimos have countless words for snow because snow is so common in their culture that they regard it far less important.3.Plato and Aristotle argued that the categories of thought determined the categories of language.4.Audiolingualism, contrary to American structuralism and behaviorist psychology, emphasizes the importance of regular patterns.5.People in the west tend to verbalize their gratitude and compliments less than Chinese speakers.6.It is unlikely that there is a prelinguistic stage when babies just babble.7.When varieties are classified in terms of use, they are called registers.8.From sociological view we can derive meaning from context.9.The relationship between “alligator” and “reptile” is homonymy.10.Denotation id the additional meaning than an expression carries whil e often shows people’s attitudes or emotions towards the subjects being talked about.11.Speech act theory was proposed by Austin and has been developed by Grice.12.A language is weakened when it borrows large numbers of words from other languages.13.Searle suggests 5 basic categories of illocutionary acts as follows: assertives, commissives, expressives, informatives and declarations.14.There is a single cause of language change.15.Morphology refers to the study of the internal structure of words, and the rules by which words are formed.16.Spoken utterances share some common linguistic features with written utterances.17.A small set of rules can generate an infinite number of sentences, all of which are idiomatic.18.IC analysis shows linear relationship, so it helps to account for the ambiguity of certain constructions.19.Linguists are interested in the sounds that convey meaning in human linguistic communication.20.Simply speaking, a morpheme can be defined as a minimal unit of meaning.四、问答1.Of all the theories you have learned on language acquisition, which one seems to you most reasonable? Why?2.Point out the marked differences between sociolinguistic study and traditional linguistic studies.3.How does the following exchange of conversation illustrate the Politeness Principle?A: We’ll miss Bill and Agatha, won’t you?B: Well, we’ll miss BILL.4.What is the distinction between sense and reference?5.How do you tell compounds from the noncompounded word sequence?6.What are the two criteria suggested by Chomsky for judging grammar?2003年南师大英语语言学考试题目---复试一、判断Passage one:The study of how we do things with sentence is the study of speech acts. In studying speech acts, we are acutely aware of the importance of the context of utterance. In some circumstances There is a sheepdog in the closet is a warning, but the same sentence may be a promise or even a mere statement of fact, depending on circumstances. We call this purpose----a warning, a promise, a threat, or whatever----the illocutionary force of a speech act.Speech act theory aims to tell us when we appear to ask questions but are really giving orders, or when we say one thing with special (sarcastic) intonation and mean the opposite. Thus, at a dinner table, the question Can you pass the salt? means the order Pass the salt! It is not a request for information, and yes is an inappropriate response.1.Illocutionary acts are special case of speech acts, referring to the speaker’s intention in uttering something.2.Because the illocutionary force of a speech act depends on the context of the utterance, speech act theory is a part of pragmatics.3.In most cases, the illocutionary force of “Look out!” is a suggestion.4.The speech act theory originated with the British philosophy John Austin in the late 70’s.5.Billy and Joe were long-time pals. One time Billy was in desperate need of money. His car had broken down and he needed $300 to fix it. So, he asked Joe for a load. Joe said he could lend Billy the money. This made Billy happy and he said to Joe; (a) “You are a terrible friend.”It is non-sarcastic answer.(b) “You are a fine friend.”It is a sarcastic one.Passage twoInflectional is a term used in Morphology to refer to one of the two main categories or processes of sword formation, the other being derivational. These terms also apply to the two types of affix involved in word formation. Inflectional affixes signal grammatical relationships, such as plural, past tense and possession, and do not change the grammatical class of the stems t which they are attached; that is, the words constitute a single paradigm, e.g. walk, walks, walked. A word is said to “inflect for” past tense, plural, etc. In traditional (pre-linguistic) grammatical studies, the term “accidence” was used in this se nse.In the phrase inflecting language (“inflectional” or “inflected” language), the term refers to a type of language established by comparative linguistics using structural (as opposed to diachronic) criteria, and focusing on the characteristics of the word. In this kind of language, words display grammatical relationships morphologically: they typically contain more than one morpheme but, unlike agglutinative languages, there is no one-to-one correspondence between these morphemes and the linear sequence of morphs. In languages such as Latin, Greek, Arabic etc. the inflectional forms of words may represent several morphological oppositions, e.g. in Latin amo(I love), the form simultaneously represents present tense, active, first person singular, indi cative. This “fusing” of properties has led to such languages being called fusional and had motivated the word-and-a model of analysis. As always in such classifications, the categories are not clear-cut: different languages will display the characteristic of inflection to a greater or lesser degree.1.A language in which nouns have inflectional properties is an inflectional language.2.The affix “un-” or “dis-” is an inflectional affix.3.The agglutinative language is a language that typically expresses concepts in complex words consisting of many elements,rather than by inflection or by using isolated elements.4.Many English adjectives have inflectional properties.5.The Chinese language is an agglutinative language.Passage threeEach tongue draws a circle about the people whom it belongs, and it is possible to leave this circle only by simultaneously entering that of another people. Learning a foreign language ought hence to be the conquest of a new standpoint in the previously prevailing cosmic attitude of the individual. In fact, it is so to a certain extent, inasmuch as every language contains the entire fabric of concepts and the conceptual approach of a portion of humanity. But this achievement is not complete, because one always carries over in to a foreign tongue to a greater or lesser degree one’s own cosmic viewpoint—indeed one’s personal linguistic pattern.(von Humboldt [1836]1971:39-40)1.This passage mainly discusses the relationship between one’s p ersonal linguistic pattern and a foreign language.2.According to the author of this passage, language is a powerful instrument that allows us to make sense of the world.3.This passage reveals the fact that one’s own cosmic viewpoint determines linguistic orientation.4.The author of this passage seems to believe that language and the world outlook are two sides of the coin.5.The author of this passage seems to advocate that one’s language presupposes one’s way of thinking.二、问答1.Give examples to illustrate several different approaches to meaning.2.Why do we need two principles of conversation, i.e. the cooperative principle and the politeness principle?3.What does it mean that a linguist is interested in what is said, not what he thinks ought to be said?4.What is the advantage of IC analysis? Take “Drive the car near the station” as an example.5.Describe briefly the social differences in the use of language among speakers of the Chinese language.三、评论State clearly the interrelationship between language and cognition, giving theoretical analysis as well as empirical illustration.2004年南师大英语语言学考试题目---复试一、单选题。

刘润清《新编语言学教程》章节题库(认知语言学)【圣才出品】

第10章认知语言学I. Fill in the blanks.1. ______ is the mental process of classification, while ______ is the products of the preceding process.【答案】Categorization; category【解析】范畴化是人类对经验进行分类的过程。

范畴是范畴化的产物。

2. ______ is an approach to the analysis of natural language that focuses on language as an instrument for organizing, processing, and conveying information.【答案】Cognitive linguistics【解析】认知语言学是一种研究自然语言的方法，集中研究语言组织，处理与传达信息的作用。

3. There are three aspects in basic-level categories: ______, ______ and ______.【答案】perception; communication; knowledge organization【解析】基本层次范畴的三方面：感知，交流和知识系统。

Ⅱ. Multiple Choices.1. In the following sentences, which is not a metonymy?A. The sax has the flu today.B. Watergate changed American politics.C. Wall Street is in a panic.D. She is the apple in her parents’eyes.【答案】D【解析】其他三句为转喻，D为暗语。

1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。

GCS: A Grammatical Coding System for Natural Language Data Susan Curtiss UCLA

Jeff MacSwan Arizona State University

Jeannette Schaeffer Ben Gurion University of the Negev

Mural Kural University of California, Irvine

Tetsuya Sano Meiji Gakuin University

Running head: GCS: A Grammatical Coding System Corresponding author: Susan Curtiss, Ph.D. Department of Linguistics, UCLA, 405 Hilgard Ave. Los Angeles, CA 90095-1543. email: scurtiss@ucla.edu. GCS: A Grammatical Coding System GCS: A Grammatical Coding System for Natural Language Data* In this article, we describe GCS, an acronym for Grammatical Coding System; GCS is designed as a general-use grammatical coding system appropriate for research on the language of normal and language-impaired children or adults. GCS is intended for use in any study concerned with grammatical development, and is especially useful for studies in which a relatively large number of participants is involved. It takes advantage of recent theoretical developments in the linguistic sciences to characterize development and/or language disorder in children and adults. In addition to our coding system, we present a computerized method for reading coded transcripts and calculating relevant descriptive statistics. This article is organized as follows. Section 1 describe the scientific context in which GCS was developed. Section 2 outlines the theoretical framework which guided us in developing the particular coding conventions used in GCS, and discusses specific ways in which MacWhinney's (2000) CHAT system needed to be extended in order to meet our needs. Section 3 presents GCS, our coding system, which includes examples of coded utterances throughout. Section 4 outlines our computerized analysis system. A full coded transcription is included in the Appendix. 1. GCS’s Development Context The research project for which GCS was developed investigated the neurology of language acquisition, both the lateralization and localization of language during development, in the normal case, as well as in children who have severe brain-damage. This research program has specifically examined language development in children with

* This research was supported by NIH grant DHHS NS28383. We gratefully acknowledge assistance from

Jelena Krivapovic in refining the GCS system.

2 medically intractable epilepsy in treatment of which they have undergone surgical resection of the diseased tissue. The surgeries range from unilobar resections (e.g., temporal lobectomy), to multilobar resections (e.g., temporal-parietal-occipital lobectomy or, in more extreme cases, hemidecortication (removal or disconnection of the entire cortex, often referred to as hemispherectomy). The effects on language acquisition of disease and removal of different parts of the left or right hemisphere at different ages have then been examined and compared -- left vs. right, one region vs. another, one etiology vs. another, one age vs. another, and, importantly, brain-damaged child vs. normally developing child. The research has focused on several topics, including: (1) the capacity of each hemisphere alone to subserve lexical and grammatical development (a comparison of left-hemispherectomized and right-hemispherectomized children with each other and with normally developing children), (2) the development of lateralization and localization of grammar (specifically, syntax and morphology) as opposed to lexicon, (3) the effects of brain damage on specific functional subsystems of the grammar; namely, the D(eterminer)-system, the I(nflectional)-system, and the C(omplementizer)-system, and other core aspects of syntax, (4) the effects of localized brain damage on lexicon -- the establishment of a mental dictionary of content words and their interrelations -- as opposed to syntax and morphology, and (5) maturational constraints on the acquisition of grammar, again syntax and morphology. The research has been part of a multi-disciplinary investigation regarding whether there is a systematic association between specific patterns of linguistic delay or anomaly and specific neuropathology.