DOCSLIB.ORG

Bibliography

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bibliography Bibliography Althaus, H. P.: Graphetik. Pp. 105-110 in Lexikon der Germanistischen Linguistik, Althaus, H. P., Henne, H., Wiegand, H. E. (eds). Tubingen 1973. - Graphemik. Pp. 118-132 in Lexikon der Germanistischen Linguistik, Althaus, H. P., Henne, H., Wiegand, H. E. (eds). Tubingen 1973. Bausch, K.-H.: Soziolekte. Pp. 254--262 in Lexikon der Germanistischen Linguistik, Althaus, H. P., Henne, H., Wiegand, H. E. (eds). Tubingen 1973. Borgstr0m, C. H.: InnfDring i sprogvidenskap. Oslo 1958. Brodda, B., Karlgren, H.: Synonymer och synonymers synonymer. KVAL PM 335. Stockholm 1967. Chomsky, N.: Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge (Mass.) 1965. - Current issues in linguistic theory. The Hague 1964. Also pp. 50-118 in The structure of language. Readings in the philosophy of language, Fodor, J. A., Katz, J. J. (eds). Englewood Cliffs (New Jersey) 1964. - Language and mind. New York-Chicago-San Francisco-Atlanta 1972. - Review of Skinner, B. F. Verbal behavior. Language 35:1, 26-58 (1959). Also pp. 547 -578 in The structure of language. Readings in the philosophy of language, Fodor, J. A., Katz, J. J. (eds). Englewood Cliffs (New Jersey) 1964. - Topics in the theory of generative grammar. The Hague 1966. - Syntactic structures. The Hague 1957. Chomsky, N., Halle, M.: The sound pattern of English. New York-Evanston-London 1968. Collinder, B.: Noam Chomsky und die generative Grammatik. Eine kritische Betrachtung. Acta Societatis Linguisticae Upsaliensis, Nova series 2:1. Uppsala 1970. Cooper, W. S.: Set theory and syntactic description. The Hague 1964. Coseriu, E.: Lecture Notes, abbreviation for Frobleme der romanischen Semantik. Vorle.rung gehalten im WS 1965/66 an der Universitat Tiibingen. Autorisierte Nachschrift besorgt von D. Kastovsky und W. Muller. - Les structures lexematiques. Zeitschrift fUr franzosische Sprache und Literatur, Beiheft, Neue Foige. Heft 1, 3-16 (1968). Elert, C.-C.: Ljud och ord i svenskan. Uppsala 1970. Fillmore, C. J.: The grammar of hitting and breaking. Pp. 120-133 in Readings in English transformational grammar, Jacobs, R. A., Rosenbaum, P. S. (eds). Waltham-Toronto­ London 1970. Fischer-J0rgensen, E.: Remarques sur les principes de l'analyse phonemique. Travaux du Cercle linguistique de Copenhague V, 214--234 (1949). Gleason, H. A.: An introduction to descriptive linguistics. New York, rev. ed., 1961. Hall, R. A., Jr.: Some recent developments in American linguistics. Neuphilologische Mit­ teilungen 70,192-227 (1969). - Underlying representation and observable fact in phonology. Journal of English Lin­ guistics 7,21-42 (1973). Hammarstrom, G.: Dialectal and sociolectal facts within the description of a language. Language Sciencies 34, 13-18 (1975). - Dialektologiska undersokningar. Nordisk tidsskrift for tale og stemme 24,27-51 (1964). - Etude de phonetique auditive sur le.r parler.r de I' Algarve. Uppsala 1953. - Generative phonology. A critical appraisal. Phonetica 27, 157-184 (1973). - Graphemes and nuncemes of English. Studia linguistica 26:1,14--25 (1972). 117 Hammarstrom. G.: Idiolekt. Pp. 312-314 in Lexikon der Germanistischen Linguistik, Althaus, H. P., Henne, H., Wiegand, H. E. (eds). Tlibingen 1973. - Inqueritos linguisticos II. Revista de Portugal, Serie A, Lingua Portuguesa 26, 9-32 (1961). - L'historique et Ie programme d'activite de l'Institut de phonetique d'Upsal. Pp. 152-156 in Communications et rapports du Premier Congres International de Dialectologie generale. Lou­ vain 1965. - Linguistische Einheiten im Rahmen der modernen Sprachwissenschaft. (Kommunikation und Kybernetik in Einzeldarstellungen 5.) Berlin-Heidelberg-New York 1966. (Spanish translation: Las unidades lingiilsticas en el marco de la linguistica moderna. Madrid 1974.) - Monophthongemes and diphthongemes. Linguistics 87, 50-53 (1972) = Talanya 1. - On linguistic terminology. Pp. 321-325 in Actes du Xc Congres International des Linguistes. Bucharest 1969. - On terminology in genetic, gennemic and energemic phonetics. Word 23:1-2-3, 254- 256 (1967). - Prosodeme und Kontureme. Phonetica 10, 194-202 (1963). - Pseudo-units in phonetics. Pp. 411-413 in Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 1967. Prague 1970. - Review of Hadding-Koch, K. Acoustico-phonetic studies in the intonation of Southern Swedish. Phonetica 7, 245-251 (1961). - Sur la duree des phonemes en suedois. Revista do Laborat6rio de Fonetica Experimental da Faculdade de Letras da Universidade de Coimbra 1, 9-27 (1952). - Sur l'inventaire des phonemes fran\tais. Pp. 343-346 in Omagiu lui Alexandru Rosetti. Bucharest 1965. - The problem of nonsense linguistics. Acta Societatis Linguisticae Upsaliensis, Nova series, 2:4. Uppsala 1971. - Towards more exhaustive descriptions of languages. Umea University, Department of Phonetics, Publication 6,1973, pp. 1-30. - Type et typeme, graphe et grapheme. Studia neophilologica 36:2, 332-340 (1964). - Dber Palatographie, anatomische Bedingungen der Lautunterschiede und schwedische Vokalphoneme. Zeitschrift flir Phonetik 17:5, 397-407 (1964). - Zur soziolektalen und dialektalen Funktion der Sprache. Zeitschrift flir Mundart­ forschung 34:3/4, 205-216 (1967). Hanson, G.: Dimensions in speech sound perception. Ericsson Technics No. 1. Stockholm 1967. Harris, Z. S.: Methods in structural linguistics. Chicago 1951. (Later title: Structural linguistics, Chicago 1963.) Hill, A. A.: Review of Quirk, R., Svartvik, ]., Investigating linguistic acceptability. Language 45:3,622-624 (1969). Hockett, c.: Problems of morphemic analysis. Language 23, 321-343 (1947). Also pp. 229-242 in Readings in linguistics I. ]oos, M. (ed.). Chicago and London 1957. Itkonen, E.: Concerning the methodological status of linguistic descriptions. Pp. 31-41 in Derivational Processes. KVAL PM 729, Kiefer, F. (ed.). Stockholm 1972. - Linguistics and metascience. Studia Philosophica Turkuensia Fasc. II. Kokemiiki 1974. ]akobson, R., Fant, G., Halle, M.: Preliminaries to speech analysis. Cambridge (Mass.) 1951. ]uilland, A. G., Lieb, H. H.: "Klasse" und Klassifikation in der Sprachwissenschaft. The Hague 1968. Lindblom, B.: Spectrographic study of vowel reduction. The ]ournal of the Acoustical Society of America 35:11, 1773-1781 (1963). Lyons, J.: Introduction to theoretical linguistics. Cambridge 1968. Martinet, A.: Un ou deux phonemes? Acta linguistica 1, 94-103 (1939). Also pp.116-123 in Readings in linguistics II, Hamp, E. P., Householder, F. W., Austerlitz, R. (eds). Chi­ cago 1966. Paul, H.: Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte. 5th ed. Halle 1920. Pike, K. L.: Language in relation to a unified theory of the structure of human behavior II. Glendale (Calif.) 1955. Pilch, H.: Modelle der englischen Wortbildung. Pp. 160-178 in Festschrift H. Marchand. The Hague 1967. 118 Pilch, H.: Neue Wege der englischen Phonetik. Anglia 77, 407-428 (1959). Quirk, R., Svartvik, ].: Investigating linguistic acceptabiliry. The Hague 1966. Saussure, F. de: Cours de linguistique generale. Paris 1964 (1st ed. 1916). Sigurd, B. : A note on the number of phonemes. Statistical Methods in Linguistics 2, 94-99 (1963). - Fragor och svar i lingvistiken. Pp. 83-98 in Vetenskapliga perspektiv. Stockholms universitet 1971. Trubetzkoy, N. S.: Grundzuge der Phonologie. Gottingen 1958. Ungeheuer, G.: Kommunikative und extrakommunikative Betrachtungsweisen in der Phonetik. Pp. 73-86 in Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Munchen-Prague-Philadelphia 1970. Weinreich, U.: Is a structural dialectology possible? Word 10:2-3, 388-400 (1954). 119 Author Index Althaus, H. P. 114 Householder, F. W. 21 Austerlitz, R. 21 Itkonen, E. 10, 11 Baudouin de Courtenay, J. V Jacobs, R. A. 106 Bausch, K.-H. 3 Jakobson, R. VI, 6, 20, 21, 95 Beebe, R. VII Joos, M. 50 Bell, T. VII Juilland, A. G. 5 Bloomfield, L. VI, 6 Karlgren, H. 91 Borgstrom, C. H. 57 Karre, K. 105 Brodda, B. 91 Katz, J. J. 78, 105 Busby, P. VII Lieb, H.-H. 5 Chadwick, N. VII Lindblom, B. 81 Chomsky, N. VI, 64, 65, 72, 73, 76, 78, Lindkvist, H. 105 88,93 Lyons, J. 91,100 Clyne, M. VII Martinet, A. VI,21 Collinder, B. VI, 71, 72 Nojd, R. 105 Cooper, W. S. 5 Paul, H. 70 Coseriu, E. VI, 85, 91, 96-98, 101-107 Pike, K. 19 Elert, c.-c. 20 Pilch, H. 8,30,51 Fant, G. 20,21,95 Platt, H. VII Fillmore, C. J. 106 Platt, J. VII Fischer-Jorgensen, E. 20,77 Pottier, B. 101 Fodor, J. A. 78, 105 Quirk, R. 85 Gleason, H. A. 9,57,62,64 Redin, M. 105 Hall, R. A., Jr. VI Roget, P. M. 91 Halle, M. VI, 20, 21, 95 Rosenbaum, P. S. 106 Hammarstrom, G. V, VI, 3, 4, 7-11, 15, Saussure, F. de V, VI, 2, 85 18,19,22-24,28-32,35,36,40,42,46, Shaw, E. VII 52,66, 71, 74, 76, 80, 81, 112-114 Sigurd, B. 29, 64 Hamp, E. 21 Skinner, B. F. 78 Hanson, G. 30 Svartvik, J. 85 Harris, Z. S. 6, 11 Tillmann, H. G. VI Heike, G. VI Trubetzkoy, N. S. V, VI, 6, 20, 96-98 Hill, A. A. 85 Uldall, H. J. 77 Hjelmslev, L. V, 77 Ungeheuer, G. VI, 30, 115 Hockett, C. 50 Weinreich, U. 110 120 Subject Index abstract IV, 4, 113 allopredicate 66 accentuation 31, 36 alloprosode 31, 34, 35, 37 acceptability 85 allopseudo-phone 19 acoustic 7, 8, 11, 14, 16, 30, 31, 44 alloquasi-phone 18 act 3 alloseme 73, 85, 86, 90--92, 95--97, actofcommunication 19,103,112 99--109, 111 active 74--77 -- component 85, 94, 111 actor 93, 106 allosememe 91 added 65,75,87--89,92,94,101 allosemi-phone 16 adjective 57, 58 allosubject 36, 66, 68 adjectiveme 57 allosubstantive 66 adverb 57, 58 allosyllab 33,41 adverbeme 57, 58 -- prosodeme 33 adverbial 58, 69, 73, 75 -- -- component 33 adverbialeme functeme 69, 73 allosyllabeme 33 affiliation 75--77, 92,111 --
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Grapheme-To-Lexeme Feedback in the Spelling System: Evidence from a Dysgraphic Patient
    COGNITIVE NEUROPSYCHOLOGY, 2006, 23 (2), 278–307 Grapheme-to-lexeme feedback in the spelling system: Evidence from a dysgraphic patient Michael McCloskey Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA Paul Macaruso Community College of Rhode Island, Warwick, and Haskins Laboratories, New Haven, USA Brenda Rapp Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA This article presents an argument for grapheme-to-lexeme feedback in the cognitive spelling system, based on the impaired spelling performance of dysgraphic patient CM. The argument relates two features of CM’s spelling. First, letters from prior spelling responses intrude into sub- sequent responses at rates far greater than expected by chance. This letter persistence effect arises at a level of abstract grapheme representations, and apparently results from abnormal persistence of activation. Second, CM makes many formal lexical errors (e.g., carpet ! compute). Analyses revealed that a large proportion of these errors are “true” lexical errors originating in lexical selec- tion, rather than “chance” lexical errors that happen by chance to take the form of words. Additional analyses demonstrated that CM’s true lexical errors exhibit the letter persistence effect. We argue that this finding can be understood only within a functional architecture in which activation from the grapheme level feeds back to the lexeme level, thereby influencing lexical selection. INTRODUCTION a brain-damaged patient with an acquired spelling deficit, arguing from his error pattern that Like other forms of language processing, written the cognitive system for written word produc- word production implicates multiple levels of tion includes feedback connections from gra- representation, including semantic, orthographic pheme representations to orthographic lexeme lexeme, grapheme, and allograph levels.
    [Show full text]
  • ON SOME CATEGORIES for DESCRIBING the SEMOLEXEMIC STRUCTURE by Yoshihiko Ikegami
    ON SOME CATEGORIES FOR DESCRIBING THE SEMOLEXEMIC STRUCTURE by Yoshihiko Ikegami 1. A lexeme is the minimum unit that carries meaning. Thus a lexeme can be a "word" as well as an affix (i.e., something smaller than a word) or an idiom (i.e,, something larger than a word). 2. A sememe is a unit of meaning that can be realized as a single lexeme. It is defined as a structure constituted by those features having distinctive functions (i.e., serving to distinguish the sememe in question from other semernes that contrast with it).' A question that arises at this point is whether or not one lexeme always corresponds to just one serneme and no more. Three theoretical positions are foreseeable: (I) one which holds that one lexeme always corresponds to just one sememe and no more, (2) one which holds that one lexeme corresponds to an indefinitely large number of sememes, and (3) one which holds that one lexeme corresponds to a certain limited number of sememes. These three positions wiIl be referred to as (1) the "Grundbedeutung" theory, (2) the "use" theory, and (3) the "polysemy" theory, respectively. The Grundbedeutung theory, however attractive in itself, is to be rejected as unrealistic. Suppose a preliminary analysis has revealed that a lexeme seems to be used sometimes in an "abstract" sense and sometimes in a "concrete" sense. In order to posit a Grundbedeutung under such circumstances, it is to be assumed that there is a still higher level at which "abstract" and "concrete" are neutralized-this is certainly a theoretical possibility, but it seems highly unlikely and unrealistic from a psychological point of view.
    [Show full text]
  • Part 1: Introduction to The
    PREVIEW OF THE IPA HANDBOOK Handbook of the International Phonetic Association: A guide to the use of the International Phonetic Alphabet PARTI Introduction to the IPA 1. What is the International Phonetic Alphabet? The aim of the International Phonetic Association is to promote the scientific study of phonetics and the various practical applications of that science. For both these it is necessary to have a consistent way of representing the sounds of language in written form. From its foundation in 1886 the Association has been concerned to develop a system of notation which would be convenient to use, but comprehensive enough to cope with the wide variety of sounds found in the languages of the world; and to encourage the use of thjs notation as widely as possible among those concerned with language. The system is generally known as the International Phonetic Alphabet. Both the Association and its Alphabet are widely referred to by the abbreviation IPA, but here 'IPA' will be used only for the Alphabet. The IPA is based on the Roman alphabet, which has the advantage of being widely familiar, but also includes letters and additional symbols from a variety of other sources. These additions are necessary because the variety of sounds in languages is much greater than the number of letters in the Roman alphabet. The use of sequences of phonetic symbols to represent speech is known as transcription. The IPA can be used for many different purposes. For instance, it can be used as a way to show pronunciation in a dictionary, to record a language in linguistic fieldwork, to form the basis of a writing system for a language, or to annotate acoustic and other displays in the analysis of speech.
    [Show full text]
  • Unit 2 Structures Handout.Pdf
    2. The definition of a language as a structure of structures 2.1. Phonetics and phonology Relevance for studying language in its natural or primary medium: oral sounds rather than written symbols. Phonic medium: the range of sounds produced by the speech organs insofar as the play a role in language Speech sounds: Individual sounds within that range Phonetics is the study of the phonic medium: The study of the production, transmission, and reception of human sound-making used in speech. e.g. classification of sounds as voiced vs voiceless: /b/ vs /p/ Phonology is the study of the phonic medium not in itself but in relation with language. e.g. application of voice to the explanation of differences within the system of language: housen vs housev usen vs usev 2.1.1. Phonetics It is usually divided into three branches which study the phonic medium from three points of view: Articulatory phonetics: speech sounds according to the way in which they are produced by the speech organs. Acoustic phonetics: speech sounds according to the physical properties of their sound-waves. Auditory phonetics: speech sounds according to their perception and identification. Articulatory phonetics has the longest tradition, and its progress in the 19th century contributed a standardize and internationally accepted system of phonetic transcription: the origins of the International Phonetic Alphabet used today and relying on sound symbols and diacritics. It studies production in relation with the vocal tract, i.e., organs such as: lungs trachea or windpipe, containing: larynx vocal folds glottis pharyngeal cavity nose mouth, containing fixed organs: teeth and teeth ridge hard palate pharyngeal wall mobile organs: lips tongue soft palate jaw According to their function and participation, sounds may take several features: Voice: voiced vs voiceless sounds, according to the participation of the vocal folds e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • From Phoneme to Morpheme Author(S): Zellig S
    Linguistic Society of America From Phoneme to Morpheme Author(s): Zellig S. Harris Source: Language, Vol. 31, No. 2 (Apr. - Jun., 1955), pp. 190-222 Published by: Linguistic Society of America Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/411036 Accessed: 09/02/2009 08:03 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=lsa. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Linguistic Society of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Language. http://www.jstor.org FROM PHONEME TO MORPHEME ZELLIG S. HARRIS University of Pennsylvania 0.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Phones and Phonemes
    NLPA-Phon1 (4/10/07) © P. Coxhead, 2006 Page 1 Natural Language Processing & Applications Phones and Phonemes 1 Phonemes If we are to understand how speech might be generated or recognized by a computer, we need to study some of the underlying linguistic theory. The aim here is to UNDERSTAND the theory rather than memorize it. I’ve tried to reduce and simplify as much as possible without serious inaccuracy. Speech consists of sequences of sounds. The use of an instrument (such as a speech spectro- graph) shows that most of normal speech consists of continuous sounds, both within words and across word boundaries. Speakers of a language can easily dissect its continuous sounds into words. With more difficulty, they can split words into component sounds, or ‘segments’. However, it is not always clear where to stop splitting. In the word strip, for example, should the sound represented by the letters str be treated as a unit, be split into the two sounds represented by st and r, or be split into the three sounds represented by s, t and r? One approach to isolating component sounds is to look for ‘distinctive unit sounds’ or phonemes.1 For example, three phonemes can be distinguished in the word cat, corresponding to the letters c, a and t (but of course English spelling is notoriously non- phonemic so correspondence of phonemes and letters should not be expected). How do we know that these three are ‘distinctive unit sounds’ or phonemes of the English language? NOT from the sounds themselves. A speech spectrograph will not show a neat division of the sound of the word cat into three parts.
    [Show full text]
  • Grapheme-To-Phoneme Models for (Almost) Any Language
    Grapheme-to-Phoneme Models for (Almost) Any Language Aliya Deri and Kevin Knight Information Sciences Institute Department of Computer Science University of Southern California {aderi, knight}@isi.edu Abstract lang word pronunciation eng anybody e̞ n iː b ɒ d iː Grapheme-to-phoneme (g2p) models are pol żołądka z̻owon̪t̪ka rarely available in low-resource languages, ben শ嗍 s̪ ɔ k t̪ ɔ as the creation of training and evaluation ʁ a l o m o t חלומות heb data is expensive and time-consuming. We use Wiktionary to obtain more than 650k Table 1: Examples of English, Polish, Bengali, word-pronunciation pairs in more than 500 and Hebrew pronunciation dictionary entries, with languages. We then develop phoneme and pronunciations represented with the International language distance metrics based on phono- Phonetic Alphabet (IPA). logical and linguistic knowledge; apply- ing those, we adapt g2p models for high- word eng deu nld resource languages to create models for gift ɡ ɪ f tʰ ɡ ɪ f t ɣ ɪ f t related low-resource languages. We pro- class kʰ l æ s k l aː s k l ɑ s vide results for models for 229 adapted lan- send s e̞ n d z ɛ n t s ɛ n t guages. Table 2: Example pronunciations of English words 1 Introduction using English, German, and Dutch g2p models. Grapheme-to-phoneme (g2p) models convert words into pronunciations, and are ubiquitous in For most of the world’s more than 7,100 lan- speech- and text-processing systems. Due to the guages (Lewis et al., 2009), no data exists and the diversity of scripts, phoneme inventories, phono- many technologies enabled by g2p models are in- tactic constraints, and spelling conventions among accessible.
    [Show full text]
  • The 44* Phonemes Following Is a List of the 44 Phonemes Along with The
    The 44* Phonemes Following is a list of the 44 phonemes along with the letters of groups of letters that represent those sounds. Phoneme Graphemes** Examples (speech sound) (letters or groups of letters representing the most common spellings for the individual phonemes) Consonant Sounds: 1. /b/ b, bb big, rubber 2. /d/ d, dd, ed dog, add, filled 3. /f/ f, ph fish, phone 4. /g/ g, gg go, egg 5. /h/ h hot 6. /j/ j, g, ge, dge jet, cage, barge, judge 7. /k/ c, k, ck, ch, cc, que cat, kitten, duck, school, occur, antique, cheque 8. /l/ l, ll leg, bell 9. /m/ m, mm, mb mad, hammer, lamb 10. /n/ n, nn, kn, gn no, dinner, knee, gnome 11. /p/ p, pp pie, apple 12. /r/ r, rr, wr run, marry, write 13. /s/ s, se, ss, c, ce, sc sun, mouse, dress, city, ice, science 14. /t/ t, tt, ed top, letter, stopped 15. /v/ v, ve vet, give 16. /w/ w wet, win, swim 17 /y/ y, i yes, onion 18. /z/ z, zz, ze, s, se, x zip, fizz, sneeze, laser, is, was, please, Xerox, xylophone Source: Orchestrating Success in Reading by Dawn Reithaug (2002) Phoneme Graphemes** Examples (speech sound) (letters or groups of letters representing the most common spellings for the individual phonemes) Consonant Digraphs: 19. /th/ th thumb, thin, thing (not voiced) 20. /th/ th this, feather, then (voiced) 21. /ng/ ng, n sing, monkey, sink 22. /sh/ sh, ss, ch, ti, ci ship, mission, chef, motion, special 23. /ch/ ch, tch chip, match 24.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Cruse
    English D Lexical Semantics Course Mitthögskolan HT 2002 Morgan Lundberg Notes on Meaning in Language by D. Alan Cruse Meaning in Language by D.A. Cruse Chapter 5 Introduction to lexical semantics The nature of word meaning [Recap: Phoneme: minimal meaning distinguishing element: /d/, /f/, /u:/. Morpheme: minimal meaning bearing element: dis-, zebra, -tion] The (prototypical) word – ‘a minimal permutable (‘utbytbart’) element’ · Can be moved about in a sentence (or rather, position altered): Am I mad?/I am mad. · Can’t be - broken up by other elements [exception: ‘infixes’ – unusual in Eng.] - have its parts reordered: needlessly – *lylessneed Internal structure: root morpheme [+ derivational and/or inflectional morphemes (affixes)]. Grammatical words are said to have no root morpheme: on, a, or, the Note on compounds : polar bear, bluebird, sea horse – look like two morphemes, but are (semantically) best considered one unit – one root morpheme. Ex: Polar bear – ?This bear is polar. Bluebird – ?a/*any bird which is blue Sea horse - *a horse (that lives/swims/grazes) in/by the sea Cf. ordinary nominal modification: red house – the house is red Prosody is indicative (except in very long words): ‘sea ,lion (compound) vs. ‘big ‘house (common noun phrase). What is a word in lexical semantics? · Word form – phonologically (and/or graphically) distinct “shape”: bank, mole · Lexeme – phonologically and semantically distinct, autonomous symbolic unit (i.e., it can stand alone because it contains a root morpheme): bank1, bank 2, mole1, swimming, etc. - Inflected forms based on the same root count as the same lexeme: swims, swimming, swam, swum. · In lexical semantics, a word is the same as a lexeme (=lexical unit).
    [Show full text]
  • Phonemes Visit the Dyslexia Reading Well
    For More Information on Phonemes Visit the Dyslexia Reading Well. www.dyslexia-reading-well.com The 44 Sounds (Phonemes) of English A phoneme is a speech sound. It’s the smallest unit of sound that distinguishes one word from another. Since sounds cannot be written, we use letters to represent or stand for the sounds. A grapheme is the written representation (a letter or cluster of letters) of one sound. It is generally agreed that there are approximately 44 sounds in English, with some variation dependent on accent and articulation. The 44 English phonemes are represented by the 26 letters of the alphabet individually and in combination. Phonics instruction involves teaching the relationship between sounds and the letters used to represent them. There are hundreds of spelling alternatives that can be used to represent the 44 English phonemes. Only the most common sound / letter relationships need to be taught explicitly. The 44 English sounds can be divided into two major categories – consonants and vowels. A consonant sound is one in which the air flow is cut off, either partially or completely, when the sound is produced. In contrast, a vowel sound is one in which the air flow is unobstructed when the sound is made. The vowel sounds are the music, or movement, of our language. The 44 phonemes represented below are in line with the International Phonetic Alphabet. Consonants Sound Common Spelling alternatives spelling /b/ b bb ball ribbon /d/ d dd ed dog add filled /f/ f ff ph gh lf ft fan cliff phone laugh calf often /g/ g gg gh gu
    [Show full text]
  • Phonemic Awareness: Phoneme Segmentation
    Phonemic Awareness: Phoneme Segmentation College- and Career-Ready Standard Addressed: Demonstrate understanding of spoken words, syllables, and sounds (phonemes). Blend and segment onsets and rimes of single-syllable spoken words Objective: Students will learn to segment words into individual phonemes (sounds). Materials OPTIONAL: Manipulatives, such as blocks, magnetic letters, Elkonin boxes (see page 4), practice word lists (see supplemental materials). Suggested Schedule and Group Size Schedule: Daily, no more than five to ten minutes per session Recommended group size: Individual or small group (up to five students) Note: The following script is intended as a model. Start with words with two or three phonemes. Adjust the difficulty of the words and increase independent practice opportunities as students become more proficient. Activity Intervention Principle Sample Script and Procedures Use explicit instruction, Today, we are going to practice saying the sounds we hear in including modeling and joint words. practice opportunities. Listen and watch. I’ll say the sounds in the word “pat.” (Put up one finger for each sound, or if using Elkonin boxes, point to each box or move an object into each box as you say the sounds. /p/ /aaaa/ /t/) How many fingers (boxes) did I put up (touch)? (Students should say “three.”) Right, that means “pat” has three sounds. Now let’s try it together. Say the sounds in “pat” with me. (Put up one finger for each sound, or, if using Elkonin boxes, point to each box or move an object into each box as you say the sounds. Watch to make sure the student(s) follow along with you: /p/ /aaaa/ /t/.) Adapted with permission from Phonemic awareness instructional routine: Segmenting, Kindergarten level.
    [Show full text]
  • 10. Semic Analysis Summary
    Louis Hébert, Tools for Text and Image Analysis: An Introduction to Applied Semiotics 10. SEMIC ANALYSIS SUMMARY Semic analysis was developed within the field of semantics (the study of meaning in linguistic units). This chapter presents Rastier's interpretive semantics, and semic analysis as formulated therein. Semic analysis is performed on a semiotic act – a text, for example – by identifying the semes, that is, the elements of meaning (parts of the signified), defining clusters of semes (isotopies and molecules) and determining the relations between the clusters (relations of presupposition, comparison, etc., between the isotopies). The repetition of a seme creates an isotopy. For example, in "There was a fine ship, carved from solid gold / With azure reaching masts, on seas unknown" (Émile Nelligan, "The Golden Ship"), the words "ship", "masts" and "seas" all contain the seme /navigation/ (as well as others). The repetition of this seme creates the isotopy /navigation/. A semic molecule is a cluster of at least two semes appearing together more than once in a single semantic unit (a single word, for instance). For instance, in the poem just quoted, there is a semic molecule formed by the semes /precious/ + /dispersion/. It appears in the "streaming hair" ("cheveux épars") of the beautiful Goddess of Love (Venus) who was "spread-eagled" ("s'étalait") at the ship's prow, and also in the sinking of the ship's treasure, which the sailors "disputed amongst themselves" ("entre eux ont disputés"). 1. THEORY Semic analysis is performed on a semiotic act – such as a text – by identifying the semes (the elements of meaning), finding clusters of semes (isotopies and molecules) and determining the relations between the clusters (relations of presupposition, comparison, etc., between the isotopies).
    [Show full text]