DOCSLIB.ORG

Anmmoduction , to the STUDY of LANGUAGE

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

>a^:i:>c ANmmODUCTION , TO THE STUDY OF LANGUAGE BY LEONARD BLOOMFIELD Ph. B., Assistant Professor of Compal'ative Philology and German in the University of Illinois ii^m^ NEW YORK HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2010 with funding from • University of Toronto http://www.archive.org/details/introductiontostOObloo TO a. &. ^. PEEFACE. Tliis little book is intended, as tlie title implies, for the general reader and for the student who is entering upon linguistic work. Jts purpose is the same, according- ly, as that of Whitney's Language and the Study of Lan- guage and TJie Life and Grouih of Language, books which fifty years ago represented the attainments of linguistic science and, owing to their author's clearness of view and conscientious discrimination between ascertained fact and mere surmise, contain little to which we cannot to- day subscribe. The great progress of our science in the last half-century is, I believe, nevertheless sufficient ex- cuse for my attempt to give a summary of what is now known about language. That the general reader needs such information as is here given was recognized by Whitney, who wrote, in the preface of his first-named book: 'It can hardly admit of question that at least so much knowledge of the na- ture, history, and classifications of language as is here presented ought to be included in every scheme of higher education.' While questions of a linguistic nature are everywhere a frequent subject of discussion, it is surpris- ing how little even educated people are in touch with the scientific study of language. I hope that my book will furnish a simple aid for those who choose to make up this deficiency in our scheme of general education Students whose vocation demands linguistic knowledge are subjected in our universities to a detached course or VI PREFACE two on details of the phonologic and morphologic history of such languages as Old English, Gothic, or Old French, — details which are meaningless and soon forgotten, if no instruction as to their concrete significance has pre- ceded. To this method of presentation is due, I think, the dislike which so many workers in related fields bear toward linguistic study. I hope that this essay may help to introduce students of philosophy, psychology, ethnol- ogy, philology, and other related subjects to a juster acquaintance with matters of language. In accordance with this twofold aim, I have limited myself to a presentation of the accepted doctrine, not even avoiding well-used standard examples. In a few places I have spoken of views that cannot claim more than probability, of hypotheses, and of problems yet to be solved, but I have done this explicitly and only be- cause I think it fitting to indicate the diiection in which our study is at present tending. Consequently the matter here presented is by no means my own, but rather the property of all students of language. It will be found in fuller form and with bibliographic support in the books mentioned in Chapter Ten, and these books I may there- fore name as my more immediate sources.^) It will be apparent, especially, that I depend for my psychology, general and linguistic, entirely on Wundt; I can only hope that I have not misrepresented his doctrine. The day is past when students of mental sciences could draw on their own fancy or on 'popular psychology' for their views of mental occurrence. L. B. 1) Of Sweet's Primer of Phonetics the first, and of Meillet's Introduction the second edition was used in compilation, but the later editions do not, I believe, differ materially as to any- thing here discussed. — CONTENTS. Psga CHAPTER I THE NATURE AND ORIGIN OF LANGUAGE. 1. Expressive movements 1 2. Gesture-language 4 3. Writing 7 4. Audible expressive movements 8 5. Development of language in the child 10 1'^ 6. The origin of language 7. Language constantly changing 16 8. Social character of language 17 CHAPTER n. THE PHYSICAL BASIS OF LANGUAGE. 1. Unconsciousness of speech-movements 18 2. Writing an imperfect analysis li> 3. The vocal chords 21 4. The velum 26 5. Oral articulation 27 6. Oral noise-articulations 28 7. Musical oral articulations 33 8. Infinite variety of possible sounds 38 9. Glides and mixtures of articulation 40 10. Syllables 4t 11. Stress 43 12. Pitch 61 ^"^ 13. Duration » 14. Limitation of articulations in each dialect 53 15. Automatic variations 54 Vni CONTENTS Page CHAPTER m. THE MENTIL BASIS OF LANGUAGE. 1. The place of language in our mental life 56 2. Total experiences 56 3. The analysis of total experiences 59 4. The naming of objects 63 5. The development of abstract words 65 6. Psychologic composition of the word 66 7. Grammatical categories 67 8. Psychologic character of the linguistic forms ... ,69 9. Psychologic motives of utterance . 70 10. Interpretation of the linguistic phenomena 71 CHAPTER IV. THE FORMS OF LANGUAGE. 1. The inarticulate outcry 73 2. Primary interjections 73 3. Secondary interjections 75 4. The arbitrary value of non-interjectional utterances . 77 5. The classifying nature of linguistic expression .... 82 6. Expression of the three types of utterance 90 7. The parts of utterances 92 8. The word: phonetic character 97 9. The word: semantic character 103 10. Word-classes 108 11. The sentence .. 110 CHAPTER V MORPHOLOGY. 1 The significance of morphologic phenomena .... 120 2. Morphologic classification by syntactic use (Parts of speech) 120 5. Classification by congruence 127 4. Phonetic-semantic classes IHl 6. Classes on a partially phonetic basis 136 6. Difference between morphologic classification and non- linguistic association 139 7. Classes by composition 140 CONTENTS IX Page 8. Derivation and inflection 140 9. The semantic nature of inflection: the commonest cate- gories 141 10. The semantic nature of derivation 150 11. The phonetic character of the morphologic processes . 151 12. Word-composition: semantic value 159 13. Word-composition not a phonetic process 16'2 14. Simple word: compound: phrase 165 CHAPTER YI. SliNTAX. 1. The field of syntax 167- 2. The discursive relations 168 3. The emotional relations 170 4. Material relations 171 5. Syntactic categories 174 6. The expression of syntactic relations: moduhition in the sentence 176 7. Cross-referring constructions 178 8. Congruence 180 9. Government 182 10. Word-order 186 11. Set phrases: the transition from syntax to style. 188- 12. The complex sentence 190 CHAPTER Vn. INTERNAL CHANGE IN LANGUAGE. 1. Language constantly changing 195 2. Causes of the instability of language 195 3. Change in articulation . 202 4. Analogic change . 221 6. Semantic change . , .... 237 6. The ultimate conditions of change in language . • ,251 CHAPTER Vni. EXTERNAL CHANGE OF LANGUAGES. 1. Language never uniform . 259 2. Increase of uniformity . 262 . X CONTENTS ' Page 3. Decrease of uniformity does not offset the increase. 263 4, Inferences from historic conditions 265 6. The process of differentiation 273 6. Deduction of internal history from related forms . 274 7. Interaction of dialects and languages . , . , . 280 8. Standard languages 288 CHAPTER IX. THE TEACHING OF LANGUAGES. 1. The purpose of foreign language instruction . , , • , 292 2. Character of the instruction . 293 3. Age of the pupil 295 4. Equipment of the teacher 297 5. Drill in pronunciation . 299 6. Method of presenting semantic material . 300 7. Grammatical information 30-2 8. Texts 304 9. References 305 CHAPTER X. THE STUDY OF LANGUAGE. 1. The origin of linguistic science . 307 2. How to study linguistics . 313 3. Relation of linguistics to other scie^ices 319 INDICES. 1 Authors, etc 326 2. Languages 327 3. Subject* 331 CHAPTER I. THE NATURE AND ORIGIN OF LANGUAGE. 1, Expressive moyements. In the animal world every mental process is accompanied by a corresponding phys- ical process. Some of these physical processes are express- ive movements. Investigation has shown that the express- ive movements are most directly co-ordinated with the emotional element that is present in every mental process. In man as well as in the lower animals it is primarily the intensity of the emotional element which appears in the expressive movements. Everyday observation recog- nizes the intensity of emotion of monkeys, dogs, or birds and even of such distant forms as the ant or the fly. In man and in the animals nearer to man a mild emotion is accompanied on the physical side by a hurrying of pulse-beat and respiration. If the emotion is more violent, the expressive movements extend, successively, to the facial muscles, then to the hands and arms, and finally to the legs and feet, embracing a set of actions well known to common observation. As the violence of the emotion increases, these movements also grow more ener- getic. When a certain extreme, however, is reached, the mental turmoil suddenly ceases and, in exact correspond- ence with this, there is a stopping of all the physical manifestations: the muscles grow slack, the leo;s often refusing support, and heart-beat and respiration may tem- porarily or even permanently stop. Bloomfield, Study of Language 1 2 THE NATURE AND ORIGIN OF LANGUAGE While the expressive movements are thus chiefly de- pendent on the intensity of emotion, some of them, espe- cially in the monkey and in man, have come secondarily to indicate also the qiiality of the emotion. The quality of the emotion shows itself in the play of the facial muscles. The various facial expressions are probably mechanized forms of what were once instinctive efforts at dealing with experiences of taste. The familiar 'sweet' or pleasurable expression brings any substance that may be in the mouth as much as possible into contact with the tip of the tongue, which is most sensitive to sweet tastes.
Recommended publications
  • An Introduction to the Study of Language LEONARD BLOOMFIELD

    An Introduction to the Study of Language LEONARD BLOOMFIELD

    INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF LANGUAGE AMSTERDAM STUDIES IN THE THEORY AND HISTORY OF LINGUISTIC SCIENCE General Editor E.F. KONRAD KOERNER (University of Ottawa) Series II - CLASSICS IN PSYCHOLINGUISTICS Advisory Editorial Board Ursula Bellugi (San Diego);John B. Carroll Chapel Hill, N.C.) Robert Grieve (Perth, W.Australia);Hans Hormann (Bochum) John C. Marshall (Oxford);Tatiana Slama-Cazacu (Bucharest) Dan I. Slobin (Berkeley) Volume 3 Leonard Bloomfield An Introduction to the Study of Language LEONARD BLOOMFIELD AN INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF LANGUAGE New edition with an introduction by JOSEPH F. KESS University of Victoria Victoria, British Columbia JOHN BENJAMINS PUBLISHING COMPANY AMSTERDAM/PHILADELPHIA 1983 FOR CHARLES F. HOCKETT © Copyright 1983 - John Benjamins B.V. ISSN 0165 716X ISBN 90 272 1892 7 (Pp.) / ISBN 90 272 1891 9(Hb.) No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm or any other means, without written permission from the publisher. ACKNOWLEDGMENT For permission to reprint Leonard Bloomfield's book, An Introduction to the Study of Language (New York, 1914) I would like to thank the publisher Holt, Rinehart & Winston, and Ms Mary McGowan, Manager, Rights and Permissions Department.* Thanks are also due to my colleague and friend Joseph F. Kess for having con• tributed an introductory article to the present reprinting of Bloomfield's first book, and to Charles F. Hockett of Cornell University, for commenting on an earlier draft of my Foreword, suggesting substantial revisions of content and form. It is in recognition of his important contribution to a re-evaluation of Bloomfield's oeuvre that the present volume is dedicated to him.
  • Journal of Language Relationship

    Journal of Language Relationship

    Российский государственный гуманитарный университет Russian State University for the Humanities Russian State University for the Humanities Institute of Linguistics of the Russian Academy of Sciences Journal of Language Relationship International Scientific Periodical Nº 3 (16) Moscow 2018 Российский государственный гуманитарный университет Институт языкознания Российской Академии наук Вопросы языкового родства Международный научный журнал № 3 (16) Москва 2018 Advisory Board: H. EICHNER (Vienna) / Chairman W. BAXTER (Ann Arbor, Michigan) V. BLAŽEK (Brno) M. GELL-MANN (Santa Fe, New Mexico) L. HYMAN (Berkeley) F. KORTLANDT (Leiden) A. LUBOTSKY (Leiden) J. P. MALLORY (Belfast) A. YU. MILITAREV (Moscow) V. F. VYDRIN (Paris) Editorial Staff: V. A. DYBO (Editor-in-Chief) G. S. STAROSTIN (Managing Editor) T. A. MIKHAILOVA (Editorial Secretary) A. V. DYBO S. V. KULLANDA M. A. MOLINA M. N. SAENKO I. S. YAKUBOVICH Founded by Kirill BABAEV © Russian State University for the Humanities, 2018 Редакционный совет: Х. АЙХНЕР (Вена) / председатель В. БЛАЖЕК (Брно) У. БЭКСТЕР (Анн Арбор) В. Ф. ВЫДРИН (Париж) М. ГЕЛЛ-МАНН (Санта-Фе) Ф. КОРТЛАНДТ (Лейден) А. ЛУБОЦКИЙ (Лейден) Дж. МЭЛЛОРИ (Белфаст) А. Ю. МИЛИТАРЕВ (Москва) Л. ХАЙМАН (Беркли) Редакционная коллегия: В. А. ДЫБО (главный редактор) Г. С. СТАРОСТИН (заместитель главного редактора) Т. А. МИХАЙЛОВА (ответственный секретарь) А. В. ДЫБО С. В. КУЛЛАНДА М. А. МОЛИНА М. Н. САЕНКО И. С. ЯКУБОВИЧ Журнал основан К. В. БАБАЕВЫМ © Российский государственный гуманитарный университет, 2018 Вопросы языкового родства: Международный научный журнал / Рос. гос. гуманитар. ун-т; Рос. акад. наук. Ин-т языкознания; под ред. В. А. Дыбо. ― М., 2018. ― № 3 (16). ― x + 78 с. Journal of Language Relationship: International Scientific Periodical / Russian State Uni- versity for the Humanities; Russian Academy of Sciences.
  • Grammar: a Historical Survey

    Grammar: a Historical Survey

    IOSR Journal Of Humanities And Social Science (IOSR-JHSS) Volume 10, Issue 6 (May. - Jun. 2013), PP 60-62 e-ISSN: 2279-0837, p-ISSN: 2279-0845. www.Iosrjournals.Org Grammar: A Historical Survey Dr Pandey Om Prakash Associate Professor, Dept of English, Gaya College, Gaya (Under Magadha University, Bodh Gaya India) The term grammar has been derived from the Greek word ‘grammatica or grammatika techne’ which means ‘the art of writing’. The Greeks considered grammar to be a branch of philosophy concerned with the art of writing. In the middle ages grammar came to be regarded as a set of rules, usually in the form of text book, dictating correct usage. So in the widest and the traditional sense, grammar came to mean a set of normative and prescriptive rules in order to set up a standard of ‘correct usage’. The earliest reference of any grammar is to be found in 600 B.C.. Panini, in 600 B.C., was a Sanskrit grammarian from Pushkalvati, Gandhara, in modern day Charsadda District of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Panini is known for his formulation of 3959 rules of Sanskrit morphology, syntax, semantics in the grammar known as Ashtadhyayi meaning eight chapters. After Panin observations on Language are found in the records we have of pre-Socratic philosophers, the fifth century rhetoricians, Plato and Aristotle. The sources of knowledge of the pre-Socratic and the early theoraticians are fragmentary. It would be wise therefore to begin with Plato. The earliest extinct document in Greek on the subject of language is Cratylus, one of Plato’s dialogues.
  • Linguistics in the Preparation of Modern Foreign Language Teachers

    Linguistics in the Preparation of Modern Foreign Language Teachers

    71 - 74-39 EDDY, Peter Armes, 1941- LINGUISTICS IN THE PREPARATION OF MODERN FOREIGN LANGUAGE TEACHERS. The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1970 Language and Literature, linguistics University Microfilms, A XEROX Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan © 1971 Peter Armes Eddy ALL RIGHTS RESERVED LINGUISTICS i n t h e preparation OP ITODBRN FOREIGN LANGUAGE TEACHERS DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University , By Peter aC Eddy, B.A, M.A. ****** + *** The Ohio State University 1970 Approved by Adviser College of Education ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer's interest was first attracted to linguistics by work in phonetics done with Andre Mal^cot at Middlebury College. At Ohio State, an introductory course with Charles J. Fillmore served to rekindle this interest and to persuade the writer to pursue further linguistic studies. During the writing of this dissertation, the en­ couragement and aid of friends and colleagues were a constant source of stimulation. Although their many contributions could not be measured in so short a space, two individuals, Terrence J. QuinJi and George M.Landon, were particularly generous with their time and personal resources. The writer is greatly indebted to A. Bruce Gaarder, of the United States Office of Education, who permitted him access to the records of NDEA institutes. Chapter II of the dissertation could not have been written without this information. Finally, this brief mention cannot sufficiently acknowledge the support, both financial and moral, given by Edward D. Allen, the writer's major adviser, and by Paul Pimsleur, Director of the Listening Center.
  • A Logical Reconstruction of Leonard Bloomfield's Linguistic Theory

    A Logical Reconstruction of Leonard Bloomfield's Linguistic Theory

    A logical Reconstruction of Leonard Bloomfield’s Linguistic Theory Thomas Meier Draft, October 2012 Abstract In this work we present a logical reconstruction of Leonard Bloom- field’s theory of structural linguistics. First, the central notions of this theory are analyzed and discussed. In the following section, a recon- struction with the so-called structuralist approach in the philosophy of science is presented. After defining the general framework of Bloom- field’s theory, questions of lawlikeness and theoretical terms will be discussed. In a further step, this work aims to contribute to the dis- cussion of theory change and scientific realism, applied to linguistic theory. After the reconstruction of further theories of linguistics, it can be studied whether certain inter theoretical relations hold. It aims to be a contribution to the discussion on the foundations of linguistics. structural linguistics - structuralist approach - lawlikeness - theoretical terms - theory change 1 1 Introduction The aim of this work is to provide a logical reconstruction of Leonard Bloom- field’s linguistic theory. Only few work has been done so far in the philosophy of linguistics, concerning logical reconstructions of linguistic theories. By the application of the methodological framework of the so-called structural- ist approach (see Balzer, et.al. 1987), we reconstruct Bloomfield’s theory. The reconstruction will provide new insights as it shows how the notions of Bloomfield’s theory are interrelated. Furthermore, the issues of lawlikeness and theoretical terms in Bloomfield’s theory will be addressed. A logical reconstruction of Bloomfield’s theory also opens a way for future work on intertheoretical relations between linguistic theories and, in a broader philo- sophical sense, can be seen as an important fundamental contribution that can be used in the discussion on theory change and scientific realism, applied to linguistics.
  • 1 the Armenian Dialects of Jerusalem Bert Vaux, Harvard University in Armenians in the Holy Land, Michael Stone, Ed. Louvain

    1 the Armenian Dialects of Jerusalem Bert Vaux, Harvard University in Armenians in the Holy Land, Michael Stone, Ed. Louvain

    The Armenian Dialects of Jerusalem Bert Vaux, Harvard University In Armenians in the Holy Land, Michael Stone, ed. Louvain: Peeters, 2002. 1. Introduction The Armenian community in Jerusalem was first established somewhere between the third and fifth centuries, and since that time has remained relatively isolated from the rest of the Armenian-speaking world. It has furthermore been subjected to a degree of Arabic influence that is quite uncommon among Armenian linguistic communities. For these reasons, it is not surprising that a distinctive dialect of Armenian has emerged in the Armenian Quarter of Jerusalem. Strangely, though, this dialect has never been studied by Armenologists or linguists, and is not generally known outside of the Armenian community in Israel. (Mention of the Armenian dialect of Jerusalem is notably absent in the standard works on Armenian dialectology and in the Soviet Armenian Encyclopedia, for example.) Those who do know about the distinctive speech of the Jerusalem Armenians generally consider it to be “bad Armenian” supplemented by words A thousand thanks to Vartan Abdo, Arpine, †Antranig Bakirjian, Chris Davis, Yeghia Dikranian, Hagop Hachikian, Garo Hagopian, Vartuhi Hokeyan, Tavit Kaplanian, Arshag Merguerian, Madeleine Habosian Derderian, Shushan Teager, Abraham Terian, Rose Varzhabedian, Aram Khachadurian, and Apkar Zakarian for all of the hours they devoted to assisting me with this project. The transcription employed here is that of REArm; linguists should note the following oddities of this system: <¬> represents a voiced uvular fricative, IPA [“]. <x> represents a voiceless uvular fricative, IPA [X]. <j> represents a voiced alveopalatal affricate, IPA [dz]. <c> represents a voiceless alveopalatal affricate, IPA [ts].
  • Introduction

    Introduction

    CHAPTER 1 Introduction 1.1 Some Historical and Methodological Backgrounds Semantic Syntax is a formal theory of grammar, introducing an entirely new method of syntactic description. It takes a grammar to be a formal system map- ping well-motivated semantic analyses (SA’s) onto well-formed surface struc- tures of sentences. My claim is that no other formal grammatical theory has achieved the level of success reached by Semantic Syntax, which is unique in the way it accounts for, often so far unobserved, syntactic complications in the languages analysed in the terms of a unified theory. Grammars are, naturally, language-specific but it is a central tenet of Semantic Syntax that all grammars of individual languages or language varieties are subject to strong universal constraints. Consequently, it is a central concern of Semantic Syntax to search for those constraints, so that a maximally unified account can be provided of natural languages and their grammars. Semantic Syntax is characterised by the one overarching hypothesis that every sentence in every natural language is to be seen as a composition of prop- ositional structures (under a speech act operator), each consisting of a predi- cate and its argument terms. In its present form, this hypothesis goes back to James D. McCawley (1938–1999) but it is, in fact, the continuation of medi- eval and renaissance thinking about language, reaching a first apogee in the great work by the Salamanca professor Franciscus Sanctius, Minerva seu de Causis Linguae Latinae, published in 1587, and in Antoine Arnauld and Claude Lancelot’s famous Grammaire générale et raisonnée, known as the Port Royal Grammar, published in Paris in 1660.
  • Epenthesis and Prosodic Structure in Armenian

    Epenthesis and Prosodic Structure in Armenian

    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Los Angeles Epenthesis and prosodic structure in Armenian: A diachronic account A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Indo-European Studies by Jessica L. DeLisi 2015 © Copyright by Jessica L. DeLisi 2015 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION Epenthesis and prosodic structure in Armenian: A diachronic account by Jessica L. DeLisi Doctor of Philosophy in Indo-European Studies University of California, Los Angeles, 2015 Professor H. Craig Melchert, Chair In this dissertation I will attempt to answer the following question: why does Classical Armenian have three dierent reexes for the Proto-Armenian epenthetic vowel word- initially before old Proto-Indo-European consonant clusters? Two of the vowels, e and a, occur in the same phonological environment, and even in doublets (e.g., Classical ełbayr beside dialectal ałbär ‘brother’). The main constraint driving this asymmetry is the promotion of the Sonority Sequenc- ing Principle in the grammar. Because sibilants are more sonorous than stops, the promo- tion of the Sonority Sequencing Principle above the Strict Layer Hypothesis causes speak- ers to create a semisyllable to house the sibilant extraprosodically. This extraprosodic structure is not required for old consonant-resonant clusters since they already conform to the Sonority Sequencing Principle. Because Armenian has sonority-sensitive stress, the secondary stress placed on word-initial epenthetic vowels triggers a vowel change in all words without extraprosodic structure, i.e. with the old consonant-resonant clusters. Therefore Proto-Armenian */@łbayR/ becomes Classical Armenian [èł.báyR] ‘brother,’ but Proto-Armenian */<@s>tipem/ with extraprosodic <@s> becomes [<@s>.tì.pém] ‘I rush’ because the schwa is outside the domain of stress assignment.
  • 1. Introduction1 Geoffrey Haig and Geoffrey Khan

    1. Introduction1 Geoffrey Haig and Geoffrey Khan

    1. Introduction1 Geoffrey Haig and Geoffrey Khan 1. Aims and scope of the volume This volume contains a series of descriptions of around 20 languages (or language groups), spoken across a region that includes most of eastern Turkey, western Iran and northern Iraq (see Fig. 1 for the locations), together with overview articles of sub-regions, and an appendix with selected lexical items from these languages. The region that we refer to here loosely as “Western Asia” is not clearly demar- cated, either politically or topographically, and requires a few words of explana- tion. Essentially it is linked to an ancient cultural core, namely the northern part of Mesopotamia, the upper catchment regions of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. The book’s coverage goes beyond Mesopotamia in the narrower sense to include the surrounding mountainous regions of the Zagros in the southeast, and the elevated regions northwards and eastwards across the Anatolian plateau into the outliers of the Caucasus. These areas were all involved, at least economically and stra- tegically, in the succession of empires that arose in and around ancient Mesopo- tamia, beginning with the Sumerians in the third millennium BCE and continuing down to the Ottoman Empire into the dawn of the twentieth century. The sense of a common Kulturraum, while difficult to delineate precisely, is reflected by the growing recognition of linguistic parallels shared among the region’s languages, some of which we take up below. We have further divided the region into five sub-areas, each of which is treated in a section of the volume, with its own overview chapter.
  • 66. the Evolution of Armenian

    66. the Evolution of Armenian

    1146 X. Armenian Weitenberg, Jos J. S. 1997c The prepositional group iy-and the orthography of Gospel manuscript M (Matenadaran 6200). Annual of Armenian Linguistics 18: 39−50. Weitenberg, Jos J. S. 1999−2000 On the early development of Armenian dialects. II. The monophthongization of ay. Annual of Armenian Linguistics 20: 1−26. Weitenberg, Jos J. S. 2001 Thoughts on Armenian accentuation. Annual of Armenian Linguistics 21: 65−73. Weitenberg, Jos J. S. 2002 Aspects of Armenian dialectology. In: Jan Berns and Jaap Van Marle (eds.), Present- day Dialectology. Problems and Findings. (Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Mono- graphs 137). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 141−157. Weitenberg, Jos J. S. 2004 Armenian barwokʿ ‘good, well’. In: Adam Hyllested, Anders Richardt Jørgensen, Jenny Helena Larsson, and Thomas Olander (eds.), Per Aspera ad Asteriscos. Studia Indoger- manica in Honorem Jens Elmegaard Rasmussen. Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachwissen- schaft der Universität, 627−632. Weitenberg, Jos J. S. 2006 Aspects of Classical Armenian orthography: Armenian e, and the Greek names in the Gospels. In: Anna Krasnuolska, Kinga Maciuszak, and Barbara Mękarska (eds.), In the Orient where the Gracious Light … Satura Orientalis in Honorem Andrzej Pisowicz. Cracow: Księgarnia Akademicka, 215−228. Weitenberg, Jos J. S. 2008 Diphthongization of initial E- and the development of initial Y- in Armenian. In: Alexan- der Lubotsky, Jos Schaeken, and Jeroen Wiedenhof (eds.), Evidence and Counter-Evi- dence. Essays in Honour of Frederik Kortlandt. Volume I. Balto-Slavic and Indo-Euro- pean Studies. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 609−616. † Jos J. S. Weitenberg 66. The evolution of Armenian 1. Varieties of Armenian 5.
  • 3.3 Classical Armenian Syllable Structure

    3.3 Classical Armenian Syllable Structure

    UCLA UCLA Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title Epenthesis and prosodic structure in Armenian: A diachronic account Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3mk6z9mq Author DeLisi, Jessica L. Publication Date 2015 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Los Angeles Epenthesis and prosodic structure in Armenian: A diachronic account A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Indo-European Studies by Jessica L. DeLisi 2015 © Copyright by Jessica L. DeLisi 2015 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION Epenthesis and prosodic structure in Armenian: A diachronic account by Jessica L. DeLisi Doctor of Philosophy in Indo-European Studies University of California, Los Angeles, 2015 Professor H. Craig Melchert, Chair In this dissertation I will attempt to answer the following question: why does Classical Armenian have three dierent reexes for the Proto-Armenian epenthetic vowel word- initially before old Proto-Indo-European consonant clusters? Two of the vowels, e and a, occur in the same phonological environment, and even in doublets (e.g., Classical ełbayr beside dialectal ałbär ‘brother’). The main constraint driving this asymmetry is the promotion of the Sonority Sequenc- ing Principle in the grammar. Because sibilants are more sonorous than stops, the promo- tion of the Sonority Sequencing Principle above the Strict Layer Hypothesis causes speak- ers to create a semisyllable to house the sibilant extraprosodically. This extraprosodic structure is not required for old consonant-resonant clusters since they already conform to the Sonority Sequencing Principle. Because Armenian has sonority-sensitive stress, the secondary stress placed on word-initial epenthetic vowels triggers a vowel change in all words without extraprosodic structure, i.e.
  • Kurdish and Armenian

    Kurdish and Armenian

    GARNIK ASATRIAN State University of Yerevan, Armenia Kurdish and Armenian The earliest, irregular and sporadic contacts between Armenians and Kurds date back approximately to the 11th -12th centuries AD. However, it was not until the movement of Kurds to various parts of Mesopotamia and Armenia had grown into mass migration in the first half of the 16th century that the Armenian-Kurdish relationships became active. Since that period and up until the late 1920s - prior to the Armenian genocide in the Ottoman Empire - these two peoples had been in close and constant contact. As a result, in some Western Armenian provinces a certain Armeno- Kurdish ethno-linguistic situation emerged, characterised by widespread Armenian-Kurdish bilingualism, which could not but leave obvious traces – local dialects of both languages, to some extent, influenced one another. Judging from the existent linguistic materials, the influence of Armenian on Kurdish appears to have been much greater as it manifests itself not only in vocabulary, but also in phonetics, and partially, word formation. Meanwhile, the influence of Kurdish on Armenian, or, more precisely, on the Western Armenian dialects, was limited to vocabulary, and to a lesser degree as well. This can be explained by the fact that Armenian had somewhat become a sort of substrate language for the Kurmanji dialects spoken in the historical Western Armenian areas. The Armenian-Kurdish linguistic relationships were in the form of direct contacts; they did not affect other linguistic aspects of public life, and were exemplified only on the dialect level. The paper presents the analysis of the Armeno-Kurdish linguistic connections, particularly the interrelations between the Western Armenian dialects and the Kurdish dialects of the same area.