Sunday, December 16, 2012
Starsi Ludzie w Egipcie
Byle jakie chodniki, straszne nawyki. Rząd nie dla ludzi a dla samych siebie.
Friday, March 30, 2012
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Monday, April 18, 2011
Friday, October 8, 2010
Grammatical words vs. Phonological words.
* A Grammatical word (or empty word, or function word) has little or no identifiable meaning but has one or more grammatical functions. It can not be defined, and looking for an equivalent in another language if often pointless. English e.g. of, the, and, have who, if (some are borderline e.g. in, with, we, this, for)
Grammatical word (morphosyntactic word_ is a word that plays a distinct grammatical role within an utterance. Distinct grammatical words can belong to a single lexeme. Example The grammatical words dance and dances both belong to the same lexeme dance.
Grammatical words are different forms of a single word that occur depending on the syntactic context. This is why chair and chairs that are tokens of the same word must be treated as two different grammatical words as the first occurs in context appropriate for singular noun and the second in context appropriate for plural noun.
Words like e.g. and, into, lovely, with, for have one form only but despite this they are treated as grammatical words.
Grammatical word:
- is distinguished from larger units such as phrase and clause and also smaller units like e.g. morpheme.
- Is identified by criteria drawn from grammar.
[ From a category of Function words we can distinguish Grammatical words for they are borderline, they have grammatical function but also some identifiable meaning]
*A Phonological word is a piece of speech which behaves as a unit of pronunciation according to criteria which vary from language to language. In English the most useful criterion is that a phonological word contains only the main stress.
[The rest] [of the books'll] [have to] [go] [here]
The main stress is falling on the segments in brackets, therefore this sentence contains 5 phonological words.
Phonological word- a word, string of sounds that behaves as a unit of certain phonological processes, including stress assignment and accent.
In English every phonological word has a main stress and elements that are written as separate words but do not have their own stress are not phonological words in English.
E.g. the hot dogs ran for the lake. The sentence has 7 words but only 4 word stresses. There is no stress on the or for . Prepositions like for sometimes have stress, but as often as not are also included in the stress domain of the following word. Therefore it can be said that the string for the lake is a single phonological word.
Items like the, for that are phonologically dependent on adjacent words are called clitics. They can not usually stand alone phonologically.
Phonological word:
- is distinguished from the phoneme and the syllable as smaller units and also from larger units which might be set up as domains of international features.
- is a word established ultimately by phonological criteria.
Grammatical word (morphosyntactic word_ is a word that plays a distinct grammatical role within an utterance. Distinct grammatical words can belong to a single lexeme. Example The grammatical words dance and dances both belong to the same lexeme dance.
Grammatical words are different forms of a single word that occur depending on the syntactic context. This is why chair and chairs that are tokens of the same word must be treated as two different grammatical words as the first occurs in context appropriate for singular noun and the second in context appropriate for plural noun.
Words like e.g. and, into, lovely, with, for have one form only but despite this they are treated as grammatical words.
Grammatical word:
- is distinguished from larger units such as phrase and clause and also smaller units like e.g. morpheme.
- Is identified by criteria drawn from grammar.
[ From a category of Function words we can distinguish Grammatical words for they are borderline, they have grammatical function but also some identifiable meaning]
*A Phonological word is a piece of speech which behaves as a unit of pronunciation according to criteria which vary from language to language. In English the most useful criterion is that a phonological word contains only the main stress.
[The rest] [of the books'll] [have to] [go] [here]
The main stress is falling on the segments in brackets, therefore this sentence contains 5 phonological words.
Phonological word- a word, string of sounds that behaves as a unit of certain phonological processes, including stress assignment and accent.
In English every phonological word has a main stress and elements that are written as separate words but do not have their own stress are not phonological words in English.
E.g. the hot dogs ran for the lake. The sentence has 7 words but only 4 word stresses. There is no stress on the or for . Prepositions like for sometimes have stress, but as often as not are also included in the stress domain of the following word. Therefore it can be said that the string for the lake is a single phonological word.
Items like the, for that are phonologically dependent on adjacent words are called clitics. They can not usually stand alone phonologically.
Phonological word:
- is distinguished from the phoneme and the syllable as smaller units and also from larger units which might be set up as domains of international features.
- is a word established ultimately by phonological criteria.
Monday, December 21, 2009
Word versus Lexeme
Word- there is no exact definition of a word.
Some say that it is the smallest (unlike phrase) significant (unlike phoneme) unit of a given language that is internally stable (unlike sentence) and potentially mobile (unlike morpheme). A word is an arbitrary pairing of a sound and meaning.
Word- the basic term in morphology, it is one of the smallest completely satisfying bits of isolated meaning into which the sentence resolves itself. (Sapir)
Words may be classified as:
- simple- a word that consist of only one morpheme (hand)
- complex- a word built of at least two morphemes (unhand, handy, handful)
Lexeme:
- the smallest meaningful object having a lexical meaning
- an abstract unit that can be found in a dictionary in citation form (smallest lexically meaningful) –lemma(entries in a dictionary)
''shoot''' lexeme , shot, shoots, shooting- word forms
- it has no grammatical form, no inflection at all
Word Forms
- they are complete realizations of the lexeme
- they have phonological and orthographic shape
lexeme- RUN – abstract
word forms- run, runs, ran, running – concrete
Some say that it is the smallest (unlike phrase) significant (unlike phoneme) unit of a given language that is internally stable (unlike sentence) and potentially mobile (unlike morpheme). A word is an arbitrary pairing of a sound and meaning.
Word- the basic term in morphology, it is one of the smallest completely satisfying bits of isolated meaning into which the sentence resolves itself. (Sapir)
Words may be classified as:
- simple- a word that consist of only one morpheme (hand)
- complex- a word built of at least two morphemes (unhand, handy, handful)
Lexeme:
- the smallest meaningful object having a lexical meaning
- an abstract unit that can be found in a dictionary in citation form (smallest lexically meaningful) –lemma(entries in a dictionary)
''shoot''' lexeme , shot, shoots, shooting- word forms
- it has no grammatical form, no inflection at all
Word Forms
- they are complete realizations of the lexeme
- they have phonological and orthographic shape
lexeme- RUN – abstract
word forms- run, runs, ran, running – concrete
Monday, November 16, 2009
What is meant by prescriptive and descriptive approach to language.
Descriptive approach to language: tries to explain things as they actually are, not as we wish them to be, tries to find the unconscious rules that people follow when they are speaking and writing. Describes our basic linguistic knowledge.
Prescriptive approach to language: tries to tell us how one should speak and write and what rules of language usage people should know.
Prescription can only occur after the language has been described, good prescription depends on an adequate description.
Prescriptivists accuse descriptivists of being anarchists who want to do away with all the rules of language.
Descriptivists accuse prescriptivists of uniformed bigotry.
Descriptive linguistics is the work of analyzing and describing how language is (or was) spoken by a group of people in a speech community. All scholary research in linguistics is descriptive, it aims to observe the linguistics world as it is, without the bias of preconceived ideas about how it ought to be. [for teaching]
Prescription can refer to both codification and enforcement of rules governing how a language is to be used. These rules can cover such topics as standards for spelling, grammar or syntax , or rules of what is deemed socially and politically correct. It includes the mechanisms for establishing and maintaining an interregional language or standarised spelling systems.
*Prescriptive: A set of rules and examples dealing with the syntax and word structures of a language, usually intended as an aid to the learning of that language. Prescriptive grammar refers to the structure of a language as certain people think it should be used. A prescriptive grammar is an account of a language that sets out rules (prescriptions) for how it should be used and for what should not be used (proscriptions), based on norms derived from a particular model of grammar.
For English, such a grammar may prescribe ‘I’ as in ‘It is I’ and proscribe me as in ‘It's me’. It may proscribe ‘like’ used as a conjunction, as in ‘He behaved like he was in charge’, prescribing instead ‘He behaved as if he were in charge’. Prescriptive grammars have been criticised for not taking account of language change and stylistic variation, and for imposing the norms of some groups on all users of a language. They have been discussed by linguists as exemplifying specific attitudes to language and usage.
* Descriptive: The systematic study and description of a language. Seeks to describe how it is used objectively, accurately, systematically, and comprehensively. Descriptive grammar refers to the structure of a language as it is actually used by speakers and writers.
Prescription can only occur after the language has been described, good prescription depends on adequate description.
Both kinds of grammar are concerned with rules-but in different ways.
Specialists in descriptive grammar (called linguists) study the rules or patterns that underlie our use of words, phrases, clauses, and sentences. They aim to observe the linguistic world as it is without the bias of preconceived ideas of how it ought to be. On the other hand, prescriptive grammarians (such as most editors and teachers) lay out rules about what they believe to be the “correct” or “incorrect” use of language.
They codify and enforce the rules that should govern the language.
Robert Lowth (November 27, 1710 – November 3, 1787) was a Bishop of the Church of England, a professor of poetry at Oxford University and the author of one of the most influential textbooks of English grammar.
Lowth is also remembered for his publication in 1762 of A Short Introduction to English Grammar. Prompted by the absence of simple and pedagogical grammar textbooks in his day, Lowth set out to remedy the situation.
Lowth's grammar is the source of many of the prescriptive shibboleths (haslo rozpoznawcze) that are studied in schools, and established him as the first of a long line of usage commentators who judge the English language in addition to describing it.
An example of both is one of his footnotes: "Whose is by some authors made the Possessive Case of which, and applied to things as well as persons; I think, improperly."
His most famous contribution to the study of grammar may have been his tentative suggestion that sentences ending with a preposition—such as "what did you ask for?"—are inappropriate in formal writing. In what may have been intentional self-reference, Lowth used that very construction in discussing it. "This is an Idiom which our language is strongly inclined to; it prevails in common conversation, and suits very well with the familiar style in writing; but the placing of the Preposition before the Relative is more graceful, as well as more perspicuous; and agrees much better with the solemn and elevated Style."
Lowth's method included criticising "false syntax"; his examples of false syntax were culled from Shakespeare, the King James Bible, John Donne, John Milton, Jonathan Swift, Alexander Pope, and other famous writers, raising the question, by what authority did Lowth aspire to judge these writers' syntax? His understanding of grammar, like that of all linguists of his period, was based largely on the study of Latin, and a number of his judgments were arrived at by applying Latin grammar to English, a misapplication according to critics of a later generation (and his own stated principles; he condemned "forcing the English under the rules of a foreign Language").
Thus Lowth condemns Addison's sentence "Who should I meet the other night, but my old friend?" on the grounds that the thing acted upon should be in the "Objective Case" (corresponding, as he says earlier, to an oblique case in Latin), rather than taking this example and others as evidence from noted writers that "who" can refer to direct objects.
Lowth's ipse dixits appealed to those who wished for certainty and authority in their language. Lowth's grammar was not written for children; however, within a decade after it appeared, versions of it adapted for the use of schools had appeared, and Lowth's stylistic opinions acquired the force of law in the schoolroom. The textbook remained in standard usage throughout educational institutions until the early 20th century.
Robert Lowth, Short Introduction to English Grammar
“Lowth was a philologist ‘more inclined to melancholy than to mirth’, who believed that Hebrew was spoken in paradise. His Short Introduction to English Grammar (1762) became a standard text-book, and his name has become synonymous with prescriptive grammar. Lowth’s reputation as a prescriptivist is not entirely deserved. Though he liberally illustrated his grammar rules with errors to be found in the English Bible and in standard authors, his approach to correctness was not invariably rigid and, like most grammarians, he described English as well as prescribing its rules. . . . Lowth was convinced that English is rule-governed, and he defended the regularity and simplicity of the language against a tradition which viewed it as too primitive to possess any grammar at all. His model was Latin grammar, but he readily modified this to accommodate the idiosyncrasies of English.”
Joseph Priestley.
Joseph Priestley, A Course of Lectures on the Theory of Language and Universal Grammar
The Rudiments of English Grammar (1761) was a popular English grammar textbook written by the eighteenth-century British polymath Joseph Priestley(March 26, 1733 – February 8, 1804) was an eighteenth-century British natural philosopher, Dissenting clergyman, political theorist, theologian, and educator).
While a minister for a congregation in Nantwich, Cheshire, Priestley established a local school; it was his first successful educational venture. Believing that all students should have a good grasp of the English language and its grammar before learning any other language and dismayed at the quality of the instruction manuals available, Priestley wrote his own textbook: The Rudiments of English Grammar (1761).
The book was very successful—it was reprinted for over fifty years. Its humour may have contributed to its popularity; for example, Priestley illustrated the couplet with this rhyme:
Beneath this stone my wife doth lie:
She's now at rest, and so am I.
Priestley's innovations in the teaching and description of English grammar, particularly his efforts to disassociate it from Latin grammar, made his textbook revolutionary and have led twentieth-century scholars to describe him as "one of the great grammarians of his time."
Rudiments influenced all of the major British grammarians of the late eighteenth century: Robert Lowth, James Harris, John Horne Tooke and even the American Noah Webster.
Early Grammarians (18th Century)
A proposal for an Academy of the English Language was first brought forth by Jonathan Swift in 1712, but the Parliament voted against it. Nevertheless, several grammarians wrote dictionaries and grammar books in a prescriptive manner - telling people what to do or not to do with the language. Samuel Johnson's A Dictionary of the English Language was published in 1755 and Robert Lowth's Introduction to English Grammar appeared in 1762.
Early grammarians felt that language should be logical, therefore, the double negative was considered incorrect (two negatives equal one positive) and should not be used.
They also didn't like shortened or redundant words, borrowing words from other languages (except Latin and Greek), split infinitives, or prepositions at the end of the sentence.
A more scientifically minded attitude took hold by the 19th century when the Oxford English Dictionary was proposed in 1859. It was to be a factual account of every word in the English language since 1000 including its main form, pronunciation, spelling variations, part of speech, etymology, meanings in chronological order and illustrative quotations. The project was begun in 1879 under its first editor, James AH Murray. The1st edition was published in 1928, with supplements in 1933 and 1972-6. The second edition was published in 1989 and it recognised American and Australian English, as the International Phonetic Alphabet for pronunciation.
Abstract:
Joseph Priestley's (1733-1804) Rudiments of English Grammar (1761, second revised edition 1768) has often been interpreted as demonstrating that, unlike most 18th-century grammarians, Priestley took a descriptive approach towards the study of language. This article argues that such a characterisation both of Priestley's work and that of his contemporaries is misleading. The article offers a reappraisal of Priestley's Grammar, demonstrating that the idea of linguistic perfectibility is central to his linguistic ideas, but that it has often been overlooked by modern commentators. The two editions of Priestley's Grammar are assessed, and it is argued that the substantial alterations that he makes for the second edition reveal a grammarian struggling to bring order to the study of the English language.
Prescriptive approach to language: tries to tell us how one should speak and write and what rules of language usage people should know.
Prescription can only occur after the language has been described, good prescription depends on an adequate description.
Prescriptivists accuse descriptivists of being anarchists who want to do away with all the rules of language.
Descriptivists accuse prescriptivists of uniformed bigotry.
Descriptive linguistics is the work of analyzing and describing how language is (or was) spoken by a group of people in a speech community. All scholary research in linguistics is descriptive, it aims to observe the linguistics world as it is, without the bias of preconceived ideas about how it ought to be. [for teaching]
Prescription can refer to both codification and enforcement of rules governing how a language is to be used. These rules can cover such topics as standards for spelling, grammar or syntax , or rules of what is deemed socially and politically correct. It includes the mechanisms for establishing and maintaining an interregional language or standarised spelling systems.
*Prescriptive: A set of rules and examples dealing with the syntax and word structures of a language, usually intended as an aid to the learning of that language. Prescriptive grammar refers to the structure of a language as certain people think it should be used. A prescriptive grammar is an account of a language that sets out rules (prescriptions) for how it should be used and for what should not be used (proscriptions), based on norms derived from a particular model of grammar.
For English, such a grammar may prescribe ‘I’ as in ‘It is I’ and proscribe me as in ‘It's me’. It may proscribe ‘like’ used as a conjunction, as in ‘He behaved like he was in charge’, prescribing instead ‘He behaved as if he were in charge’. Prescriptive grammars have been criticised for not taking account of language change and stylistic variation, and for imposing the norms of some groups on all users of a language. They have been discussed by linguists as exemplifying specific attitudes to language and usage.
* Descriptive: The systematic study and description of a language. Seeks to describe how it is used objectively, accurately, systematically, and comprehensively. Descriptive grammar refers to the structure of a language as it is actually used by speakers and writers.
Prescription can only occur after the language has been described, good prescription depends on adequate description.
Both kinds of grammar are concerned with rules-but in different ways.
Specialists in descriptive grammar (called linguists) study the rules or patterns that underlie our use of words, phrases, clauses, and sentences. They aim to observe the linguistic world as it is without the bias of preconceived ideas of how it ought to be. On the other hand, prescriptive grammarians (such as most editors and teachers) lay out rules about what they believe to be the “correct” or “incorrect” use of language.
They codify and enforce the rules that should govern the language.
Robert Lowth (November 27, 1710 – November 3, 1787) was a Bishop of the Church of England, a professor of poetry at Oxford University and the author of one of the most influential textbooks of English grammar.
Lowth is also remembered for his publication in 1762 of A Short Introduction to English Grammar. Prompted by the absence of simple and pedagogical grammar textbooks in his day, Lowth set out to remedy the situation.
Lowth's grammar is the source of many of the prescriptive shibboleths (haslo rozpoznawcze) that are studied in schools, and established him as the first of a long line of usage commentators who judge the English language in addition to describing it.
An example of both is one of his footnotes: "Whose is by some authors made the Possessive Case of which, and applied to things as well as persons; I think, improperly."
His most famous contribution to the study of grammar may have been his tentative suggestion that sentences ending with a preposition—such as "what did you ask for?"—are inappropriate in formal writing. In what may have been intentional self-reference, Lowth used that very construction in discussing it. "This is an Idiom which our language is strongly inclined to; it prevails in common conversation, and suits very well with the familiar style in writing; but the placing of the Preposition before the Relative is more graceful, as well as more perspicuous; and agrees much better with the solemn and elevated Style."
Lowth's method included criticising "false syntax"; his examples of false syntax were culled from Shakespeare, the King James Bible, John Donne, John Milton, Jonathan Swift, Alexander Pope, and other famous writers, raising the question, by what authority did Lowth aspire to judge these writers' syntax? His understanding of grammar, like that of all linguists of his period, was based largely on the study of Latin, and a number of his judgments were arrived at by applying Latin grammar to English, a misapplication according to critics of a later generation (and his own stated principles; he condemned "forcing the English under the rules of a foreign Language").
Thus Lowth condemns Addison's sentence "Who should I meet the other night, but my old friend?" on the grounds that the thing acted upon should be in the "Objective Case" (corresponding, as he says earlier, to an oblique case in Latin), rather than taking this example and others as evidence from noted writers that "who" can refer to direct objects.
Lowth's ipse dixits appealed to those who wished for certainty and authority in their language. Lowth's grammar was not written for children; however, within a decade after it appeared, versions of it adapted for the use of schools had appeared, and Lowth's stylistic opinions acquired the force of law in the schoolroom. The textbook remained in standard usage throughout educational institutions until the early 20th century.
Robert Lowth, Short Introduction to English Grammar
“Lowth was a philologist ‘more inclined to melancholy than to mirth’, who believed that Hebrew was spoken in paradise. His Short Introduction to English Grammar (1762) became a standard text-book, and his name has become synonymous with prescriptive grammar. Lowth’s reputation as a prescriptivist is not entirely deserved. Though he liberally illustrated his grammar rules with errors to be found in the English Bible and in standard authors, his approach to correctness was not invariably rigid and, like most grammarians, he described English as well as prescribing its rules. . . . Lowth was convinced that English is rule-governed, and he defended the regularity and simplicity of the language against a tradition which viewed it as too primitive to possess any grammar at all. His model was Latin grammar, but he readily modified this to accommodate the idiosyncrasies of English.”
Joseph Priestley.
Joseph Priestley, A Course of Lectures on the Theory of Language and Universal Grammar
The Rudiments of English Grammar (1761) was a popular English grammar textbook written by the eighteenth-century British polymath Joseph Priestley(March 26, 1733 – February 8, 1804) was an eighteenth-century British natural philosopher, Dissenting clergyman, political theorist, theologian, and educator).
While a minister for a congregation in Nantwich, Cheshire, Priestley established a local school; it was his first successful educational venture. Believing that all students should have a good grasp of the English language and its grammar before learning any other language and dismayed at the quality of the instruction manuals available, Priestley wrote his own textbook: The Rudiments of English Grammar (1761).
The book was very successful—it was reprinted for over fifty years. Its humour may have contributed to its popularity; for example, Priestley illustrated the couplet with this rhyme:
Beneath this stone my wife doth lie:
She's now at rest, and so am I.
Priestley's innovations in the teaching and description of English grammar, particularly his efforts to disassociate it from Latin grammar, made his textbook revolutionary and have led twentieth-century scholars to describe him as "one of the great grammarians of his time."
Rudiments influenced all of the major British grammarians of the late eighteenth century: Robert Lowth, James Harris, John Horne Tooke and even the American Noah Webster.
Early Grammarians (18th Century)
A proposal for an Academy of the English Language was first brought forth by Jonathan Swift in 1712, but the Parliament voted against it. Nevertheless, several grammarians wrote dictionaries and grammar books in a prescriptive manner - telling people what to do or not to do with the language. Samuel Johnson's A Dictionary of the English Language was published in 1755 and Robert Lowth's Introduction to English Grammar appeared in 1762.
Early grammarians felt that language should be logical, therefore, the double negative was considered incorrect (two negatives equal one positive) and should not be used.
They also didn't like shortened or redundant words, borrowing words from other languages (except Latin and Greek), split infinitives, or prepositions at the end of the sentence.
A more scientifically minded attitude took hold by the 19th century when the Oxford English Dictionary was proposed in 1859. It was to be a factual account of every word in the English language since 1000 including its main form, pronunciation, spelling variations, part of speech, etymology, meanings in chronological order and illustrative quotations. The project was begun in 1879 under its first editor, James AH Murray. The1st edition was published in 1928, with supplements in 1933 and 1972-6. The second edition was published in 1989 and it recognised American and Australian English, as the International Phonetic Alphabet for pronunciation.
Abstract:
Joseph Priestley's (1733-1804) Rudiments of English Grammar (1761, second revised edition 1768) has often been interpreted as demonstrating that, unlike most 18th-century grammarians, Priestley took a descriptive approach towards the study of language. This article argues that such a characterisation both of Priestley's work and that of his contemporaries is misleading. The article offers a reappraisal of Priestley's Grammar, demonstrating that the idea of linguistic perfectibility is central to his linguistic ideas, but that it has often been overlooked by modern commentators. The two editions of Priestley's Grammar are assessed, and it is argued that the substantial alterations that he makes for the second edition reveal a grammarian struggling to bring order to the study of the English language.
Sunday, November 15, 2009
The Synchrony and Diachrony distinction in language description
Some insights into the nature of language can be gained by examining its history that means examining it diachronically, and some can be gained by assuming synchronic viewpoint.
The kind of information that we can expect from the two approaches can be represented by two kinds of section of the trunk of a tree.
- Horizontal section: Reveals kind of information that is similar to what syn
chronic study of language can reveal.
It shows particular stages of states of language that can be compared and are distinguishable from each other. For examining this data we do not need any knowledge about previous history. We can locate, define and describe items by relating them to items within this item.
You do not need to know etymology of a word to use it. You do not need to know what inflectional systems shaped the words to use them correctly.
- Vertical section: Can show only a thin slice of items corresponding to the historical development of a single set of units in the synchronic state.
The historical approach can be only used to study the development of any set of linguistic forms when we are informed about:
a) systematic relations of these forms in an earlier state of language
b) differences to be found in their systematic relations at a different state of language.
e.g., a cut of an ''English tree'' at one period would reveal presence of a certain number of nominal inflections but another cut of the same tree at present time would show fewer such inflections.
The kind of information that we can expect from the two approaches can be represented by two kinds of section of the trunk of a tree.
- Horizontal section: Reveals kind of information that is similar to what syn
chronic study of language can reveal.It shows particular stages of states of language that can be compared and are distinguishable from each other. For examining this data we do not need any knowledge about previous history. We can locate, define and describe items by relating them to items within this item.
You do not need to know etymology of a word to use it. You do not need to know what inflectional systems shaped the words to use them correctly.
- Vertical section: Can show only a thin slice of items corresponding to the historical development of a single set of units in the synchronic state.
The historical approach can be only used to study the development of any set of linguistic forms when we are informed about:
a) systematic relations of these forms in an earlier state of language
b) differences to be found in their systematic relations at a different state of language.
e.g., a cut of an ''English tree'' at one period would reveal presence of a certain number of nominal inflections but another cut of the same tree at present time would show fewer such inflections.
The properties which make human language a unique type of communication.
People use not only informative signals, which are unintentionally sent (e.g. sneezing: indicating cold), but also use language to intentionally communicate something.
There are six main features of human language which make it unique type of communication. What's more, these properties are unlikely to be found among communication systems of other creatures.
[To remember the six properties you may use DAPCUDD]
1. DISPLACEMENT - it enables users of language to describe events which not necessarily are happening at the present moment [like cat that meows], but may refer to past or future time. Thanks to this property, we can talk about things and places about which we are not sure and create fiction and possible future events. In contrast, it appears that animals use communication at this certain moment, here and now. If your cat is calling 'meow', you are likely to understand it as referring to that particular moment.
2. ARBITRARINESS – there is no 'normal' association between linguistic form and its meaning. The forms of human language do not fit the objects they describe and it is impossible to look at the word and from its shape determine its meaning.
However, there are some words like onomatopoeic ones which have sounds similar to real objects or activities (crash, cuckoo).
3. PRODUCTIVITY – human language in terms of potential utterance is infinite. It is still being enlarged with new expressions. In contrast to it, animals' systems of communicating are not flexible. Worker bees, who can communicate the place of nectar source taking advantage of set of signals relating to horizontal distance, fail to create new signals indicating vertical location.
4. CULTURE TRANSMISSION – it is a process of acquiring language in a cultural context. Humans do not have any predisposition to learn specific language [it is not given in genes] when they are born. They do not inherit language from parents, but from the surroundings and speakers with whom they have contact. However, a kitten irrespective of its surrounding will produce 'meow' rather instinctive and signals used in its communication will be also rather instinctive, not learnt.
5. DISCRETNESS – the sounds which are used in language are discrete. Even though there is no big difference between sound 'p' and 'b' in utterance these two sounds are meaningful. Each sound in the language is treated as distinct.
6. DUALITY – [most economical device of human language, because with finite number of sounds we are able to produce infinite number of utterances] ''double articulation'': there are two levels at which language is organised simultaneously. At physical level, we are able to produce individual sounds e.g. 'p', 'b' and none of these individual sounds has any essential meaning. At the second level, we produce these sounds in a particular combination('bin', 'pin') where one word's meaning is different from the meaning of another word. Therefore, human language can produce many combinations of sounds with a distinct meaning due to limited set of distinct sounds.
There are six main features of human language which make it unique type of communication. What's more, these properties are unlikely to be found among communication systems of other creatures.
[To remember the six properties you may use DAPCUDD]
1. DISPLACEMENT - it enables users of language to describe events which not necessarily are happening at the present moment [like cat that meows], but may refer to past or future time. Thanks to this property, we can talk about things and places about which we are not sure and create fiction and possible future events. In contrast, it appears that animals use communication at this certain moment, here and now. If your cat is calling 'meow', you are likely to understand it as referring to that particular moment.
2. ARBITRARINESS – there is no 'normal' association between linguistic form and its meaning. The forms of human language do not fit the objects they describe and it is impossible to look at the word and from its shape determine its meaning.
However, there are some words like onomatopoeic ones which have sounds similar to real objects or activities (crash, cuckoo).
3. PRODUCTIVITY – human language in terms of potential utterance is infinite. It is still being enlarged with new expressions. In contrast to it, animals' systems of communicating are not flexible. Worker bees, who can communicate the place of nectar source taking advantage of set of signals relating to horizontal distance, fail to create new signals indicating vertical location.
4. CULTURE TRANSMISSION – it is a process of acquiring language in a cultural context. Humans do not have any predisposition to learn specific language [it is not given in genes] when they are born. They do not inherit language from parents, but from the surroundings and speakers with whom they have contact. However, a kitten irrespective of its surrounding will produce 'meow' rather instinctive and signals used in its communication will be also rather instinctive, not learnt.
5. DISCRETNESS – the sounds which are used in language are discrete. Even though there is no big difference between sound 'p' and 'b' in utterance these two sounds are meaningful. Each sound in the language is treated as distinct.6. DUALITY – [most economical device of human language, because with finite number of sounds we are able to produce infinite number of utterances] ''double articulation'': there are two levels at which language is organised simultaneously. At physical level, we are able to produce individual sounds e.g. 'p', 'b' and none of these individual sounds has any essential meaning. At the second level, we produce these sounds in a particular combination('bin', 'pin') where one word's meaning is different from the meaning of another word. Therefore, human language can produce many combinations of sounds with a distinct meaning due to limited set of distinct sounds.
[Sounds do not have meaning, the morph it the smallest meaningful unit of meaning]
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Properties of Linguistic Sign
Ferdinand De Saussure distinguished 4 properties of linguistic sign. Two central are called arbitrariness and linearity.
- The arbitrariness – no motivation for the phonetic constitution of a sign is to be founding the thing for which it is a sign. There is no direct connection between the shape and the concept. For example there is no reason why the letters 'c', 'a', 't' or the sound of these phonemes produce exactly the image of the small, domesticated animal with fur, four legs and a tail in our minds. It is a result of conversion: speakers of the same language group have agreed and learnt that these letters or sounds evoke a certain image. This is true only in simple sign. In syntagmes (complex or compound words, syntactic construction) there is a relative motivation for example inflected forms are similarly constructed to signal the same meaning relations, syntactic constructions used in similar situations are similarly constructed.
- The linearity is seen in the significant which can be segmented into parts succeeding each other in time. The linearity is the entire basis of linguistic mechanism and the criterion by which language can be distinguished from other sign systems.
There are two more properties. Linguistic signs are both immutable (not able or likely to change [that we can still understand old movies or books, some things don't change) and mutable (able to change, even in our life time linguistic sign like komorka, mouse can change its concept)
- The basic reason for the immutability is the fact that each generation inherits its language and the signs that constitute it and both the community and individual are passive in receiving them. This indicates that the conventional nature of language is of a particular type and the notion that there is an explicit contract about meanings among speakers is quite misguided.
Four reasons for the immutability of linguistic sign:
1. Signs are arbitrary, any sign is as good as another
2. while people might prefer to change an arbitrary writing system, because the elements are limited in number and could become an object of criticism, the signs of language are infinite and this infinity seters linguistic change
3. language is an extremely complex system of which only a handful of experts are aware
4. language is the only social systems that all people use, and this fact helps to account for the conservatism of speakers concerning the alteration of their linguistic habits.
- The mutability of linguistic signs is an obvious fact of history. Language is mutable; view of a history which brings about shifts in relation of signifiant and signifie as a consequence of sound change and analogical shifts. From the view point of contemporary speaker [ mouse- used to refer to a little rodent, now the word has acquired new concept ' a computer mouse'] all the reasons for language not changing are visible. For the sake of science the fiction of stable language is necessary.
2 exceptions of arbitrariness;
* onomatopoeic expressions 'kuku'
* interjections 'ouch!'
[Linearity-words follow words, sentences follow sentences, no overlapping.
Mutability- merry/gay/cheerful: used to mean 'happy' now each word bears different meanings.]
- The arbitrariness – no motivation for the phonetic constitution of a sign is to be founding the thing for which it is a sign. There is no direct connection between the shape and the concept. For example there is no reason why the letters 'c', 'a', 't' or the sound of these phonemes produce exactly the image of the small, domesticated animal with fur, four legs and a tail in our minds. It is a result of conversion: speakers of the same language group have agreed and learnt that these letters or sounds evoke a certain image. This is true only in simple sign. In syntagmes (complex or compound words, syntactic construction) there is a relative motivation for example inflected forms are similarly constructed to signal the same meaning relations, syntactic constructions used in similar situations are similarly constructed.
- The linearity is seen in the significant which can be segmented into parts succeeding each other in time. The linearity is the entire basis of linguistic mechanism and the criterion by which language can be distinguished from other sign systems.
There are two more properties. Linguistic signs are both immutable (not able or likely to change [that we can still understand old movies or books, some things don't change) and mutable (able to change, even in our life time linguistic sign like komorka, mouse can change its concept)
- The basic reason for the immutability is the fact that each generation inherits its language and the signs that constitute it and both the community and individual are passive in receiving them. This indicates that the conventional nature of language is of a particular type and the notion that there is an explicit contract about meanings among speakers is quite misguided.
Four reasons for the immutability of linguistic sign:
1. Signs are arbitrary, any sign is as good as another
2. while people might prefer to change an arbitrary writing system, because the elements are limited in number and could become an object of criticism, the signs of language are infinite and this infinity seters linguistic change
3. language is an extremely complex system of which only a handful of experts are aware
4. language is the only social systems that all people use, and this fact helps to account for the conservatism of speakers concerning the alteration of their linguistic habits.
- The mutability of linguistic signs is an obvious fact of history. Language is mutable; view of a history which brings about shifts in relation of signifiant and signifie as a consequence of sound change and analogical shifts. From the view point of contemporary speaker [ mouse- used to refer to a little rodent, now the word has acquired new concept ' a computer mouse'] all the reasons for language not changing are visible. For the sake of science the fiction of stable language is necessary.
2 exceptions of arbitrariness;
* onomatopoeic expressions 'kuku'
* interjections 'ouch!'
[Linearity-words follow words, sentences follow sentences, no overlapping.
Mutability- merry/gay/cheerful: used to mean 'happy' now each word bears different meanings.]
Thursday, November 5, 2009
De Saussure's concept of Linguistic Sign
Dziecko ma concept ''zwierzęcia'', zna słowo ''pies'', widzi kurę i mówi, '' pać pieś!''
Linguistic Sign- polaczenie konceptu z nazwa, basis of communication, unity of a concept and sound image
According to Ferdinand De Saussure, language is made up of signs and every sign has two sides:
- Signified – concept
– the shape of a word, its phonic concept, i.e. the sequence of letters or
phonemes ( what you say and what you write)
– more abstract
– purely differential
– directly dependent upon the sound image with which it is associated
- Signifier – sound image
– memory of the sound trace that we can hear in our imagination
– it is not an actual spoken word, it is a sum of limited numbers of elements or phonemes which in turn can be called up only by a corresponding written symbols). There is a thing and it has a name.
– the sounds that compose the acoustic image, the phonemes, will be permissible ranges of sound differences imposed by the phonology of a particular language.
– The psychic impression of a sound, the representation of it which our senses give us.
The Linguistic Sign illustrated by:
It unites not a thing and a name, but a concept and an acoustic image, the physic entity with two sides. These two sides cannot be separated = the sign is indissoluble unity, permanent unit of two sides, which can not be separated.
The Sign is said to be:
- Concrete and integral (whole, entire) object of linguistic science, the point of view creates the object. That is, the point of view determines what is considered concrete (whole, entire), as opposed to an abstract (partial)
Signs are of two basic types, which will account for an important difference in the discussion of the properties of the sign. If a sign cannot be analyzed into constituent signs, it is a simple sign; if it consists of two or more meaningful parts, it is called a syntagme.
There are two types of signs: Simple and Syntagme. All signs have two central properties: Arbitrary and Linear
- Arbitrary: No motivation for the phonetic constitution of a sign is to be found in the thing for which it is a sign (mostly true in simple signs)
- Linear: Seen in significant (sound image) which can be segmented into parts succeeding each other in time (chain of speech)
The term Sign is a general expression. It can refer to sentence, clause, phrase, words or morphemes (only inflectional and derivational, not for roots or stems).
The word ''arbitrary'' does not imply that the choice of the signifier is left entirely to the speaker. A speaker has no power to change a sign in any way once it has become established in the linguistic community. I mean that it is unmotivated, i.e. arbitrary in that it actually has no natural connection with the signified.
Two objections against arbitrary nature of the sign:
- Onomatopoeia: the choice of signifier is not arbitrary (e.g., tick-tack); limited in number, not important
- Interjections: (e.g., ouch!)
[Additional objections:
- Immutable (changeless, inherited by generations) and mutable (from the History point of view)
- Simple (if it can not be analyzed into the consistent signs) and syntagme (if it consists of two or more meaningful parts i.e., complex and compound words, syntactic constructions).
La Langue, La Parole, Le Langage
De Saussure wanted to define language in such a way that it could be considered a thing, an object that could be studied scientifically (he required from this object to be invegistigable [one of the properties] without reference to its historical development).
La Parole = speaking [the way we speak] term used to refer to individual manifestations of Language.
Speaking includes the following properties: the sum of what people say, including individual constructions that are the consequence of a speaker's choice, acts of articulation that are equally matters of free choice, required to produce these constructions. [this interpretation makes 'speaking' conscious & fully individual product.
• La Parole includes anything that a speaker might say
Le Langage = La Parole + the rules of language
It has both the generality and the requirements of constraints found in grammatical rules. It includes both social and individual factors attributable to the individual speaker and that is why it is not pure and simple social fact.
• Le Langage encompasses anything a speaker might say as well as the constraints that prevent him or her from saying anything ungrammatical. [it has no principle of unity that would enable one to study it scientifically]
La Langue [it's a social fact] = Le Langage – La Parole [so these are just the rules, something we have in our minds, we can understand people talking thanks to rules]
It is the set of passively acquired habits we have been taught by our speech community, in terms of which we understand other speakers and produce combinations that other speakers of our community understand.
• When we hear La Parole of another community we receive the noises made, but not the social facts of the language
• When we hear La Parole within our own community we perceive the sounds as associated with social facts, according to a set of rules.
• La Langue contains the negative limits on what speaker must say if he or she is to speak a particular language grammatically.
These terms gave the beginning to Chomsky's division and dichotomy
To competence (La Langue) – knowledge of the linguistic rules and performance (La Parole) – generated from learner's underlying competence ability to use language.
La Langue it is a kind of code, algebra, according to De Saussure, ''a system of pure values that are determined by nothing except the momentary arrangement of terms.'' Viewed in this way la langue appears to be an abstraction. In order to make any study scientific we require ''a conventional simplification of the data'' to be examined. That is, we must abstract from some of the undenied concrete properties of the things a science studies in order to have a precisely definable object.
- Acts of speaking (la parole) are invariably individual, variable, whimsical, and inventive. There is no principle of unity within speech considered in this way, and, therefore, it is not amenable to scientific study. For a scientific study of anything we must have an object that ''holds still,'' since we want to count and measure it; la parole consists of an infinite number of individual choices, acts of articulation, and novel combinations. Its description, must, therefore, be infinite.
- La langue exists in the form of '' a sum of impressions deposited in the brain of each individual,'' which are ''almost like a dictionary of which identical copies have been distributed to each individual…it exists in each individually, yet it is common to all. Nor is it affected by the will of the depositaries.'' Since la langue is a ''deposit of signs which each individual has received'' from other speakers of the community, it is essentially a passive thing, as opposed to la parole , which is active. La language is a set of conventions that we all receive, ready-made, from previous speakers of the language.
La Parole = speaking [the way we speak] term used to refer to individual manifestations of Language.
Speaking includes the following properties: the sum of what people say, including individual constructions that are the consequence of a speaker's choice, acts of articulation that are equally matters of free choice, required to produce these constructions. [this interpretation makes 'speaking' conscious & fully individual product.
• La Parole includes anything that a speaker might say
Le Langage = La Parole + the rules of language
It has both the generality and the requirements of constraints found in grammatical rules. It includes both social and individual factors attributable to the individual speaker and that is why it is not pure and simple social fact.
• Le Langage encompasses anything a speaker might say as well as the constraints that prevent him or her from saying anything ungrammatical. [it has no principle of unity that would enable one to study it scientifically]
La Langue [it's a social fact] = Le Langage – La Parole [so these are just the rules, something we have in our minds, we can understand people talking thanks to rules]
It is the set of passively acquired habits we have been taught by our speech community, in terms of which we understand other speakers and produce combinations that other speakers of our community understand.
• When we hear La Parole of another community we receive the noises made, but not the social facts of the language
• When we hear La Parole within our own community we perceive the sounds as associated with social facts, according to a set of rules.
• La Langue contains the negative limits on what speaker must say if he or she is to speak a particular language grammatically.
These terms gave the beginning to Chomsky's division and dichotomy
To competence (La Langue) – knowledge of the linguistic rules and performance (La Parole) – generated from learner's underlying competence ability to use language.
La Langue it is a kind of code, algebra, according to De Saussure, ''a system of pure values that are determined by nothing except the momentary arrangement of terms.'' Viewed in this way la langue appears to be an abstraction. In order to make any study scientific we require ''a conventional simplification of the data'' to be examined. That is, we must abstract from some of the undenied concrete properties of the things a science studies in order to have a precisely definable object.
- Acts of speaking (la parole) are invariably individual, variable, whimsical, and inventive. There is no principle of unity within speech considered in this way, and, therefore, it is not amenable to scientific study. For a scientific study of anything we must have an object that ''holds still,'' since we want to count and measure it; la parole consists of an infinite number of individual choices, acts of articulation, and novel combinations. Its description, must, therefore, be infinite.
- La langue exists in the form of '' a sum of impressions deposited in the brain of each individual,'' which are ''almost like a dictionary of which identical copies have been distributed to each individual…it exists in each individually, yet it is common to all. Nor is it affected by the will of the depositaries.'' Since la langue is a ''deposit of signs which each individual has received'' from other speakers of the community, it is essentially a passive thing, as opposed to la parole , which is active. La language is a set of conventions that we all receive, ready-made, from previous speakers of the language.
Saturday, August 8, 2009
Singular or Plural?
REGURAL PLURALS
The plural of most nouns is made by just adding -s to the singular. But there are some special cases./Liczbe mnoga dla wiekszosci rzeczownikow tworzymy poprzez odane koncówki -s. Aczkolwiek, jest pare wyjatków.
1. Plural of nouns ending in consonant +y
/liczba mnoga rzeczownikow konczacych sie na spolgloske+y
If the singular ends in consonant +y (e.g. -by, -dy, -ry, -ty) the plural is normally made by changing -y to -i and adding -es. /Jezeli rzeczownik w liczbie pojedynczej konczy sie na spolgloske+y np: -by, -dy, -r, -ty liczba mnoga zazwyczaj tworzona jest poprzez zastapienie -y sammogloska -i oraz dodanie koncowki -es.
singular......................... plural
....consonant+y.......consonant+ies
baby.......................>babies
lady........................> ladies
ferry.......................>ferries
party......................>parties
If the singular ends with a vowel+y (e.g. day, boy, guy, donkey), the plural is made by adding -s (days, boys, guys, donkeys). / Kiedy liczba pojedyncza konczy sie na samogloske+y np: day, boy, guy, donkey, liczba mnoga tworzona jest poprzez dodanie -s.
Proper names ending in consonant+y usually have plurals in -ys. /Nazwy wlasne konczace sie spolgloska+y zazwyczaj posiadaja koncowke -ys w liczbii mnogiej.
Do you know the Kennedys?
I hate Februarys.
2. Plural of nouns ending in -sh, -ch, -s, -x, or -z
/liczba mnoga rzeczownikow konczacych sie na -sh, -ch, -s, -z, -x.
If the singular ends in -sh, -ch, -s, -x or -z, the plural is made by adding -es./ Jezeli liczba pojedyncza konczy sie na -sh, -ch, -s, -x, -z, liczbe mnoga tworzymy poprzez dodanie -es.
Singular..............................Plural
...-ch/-sh/-s/-x/-z.........>-ches/-shes/-ses/-xes/-zes.
church.................................>churches
cash.....................................>crashes
bus......................................>buses
box......................................>boxes
buzz....................................>buzzes
Nouns ending in a sngle -z have plurals in -zzes: quiz/quizes, fez/fezzes./ rzeczowniki konczace sie pojedynczym -z maja koncowke liczby mnogiej wpostaci -zzes np: quiz>quizzes, fez>fezzes
3. Plural of nouns ending in -o
/liczbamnoga rzeczownikow zakonczonych na -o
Some nouns ending in -o have purals in -es. The most common are:/Niektore rzeczowniki konczace sie na -o maja liczbenoga w postaci koncowki -es. Najpopularniejsze sa:
Singular...............Plural
echo....................>echoes
hero....................>heroes
negro..................>negroes
potato................>potatoes
tomato...............>tomatoes
Nouns ending in vowel+o have plurals in -s (e.g. radios, zoos). So do the following, and most new words ending in -o that come into the language.
Singular..............Plural
commando.........>commandos
concerto.............>concertos
Eskimo...............>Eskimos
kilo......................>kilos
logo.....................>logos
photo..................>photos
piano..................>pianos
solo.....................>solos
soprano..............>sopranos
The following words can have plurals in -s or -es; -es is more common.
Singular..............Plural
buffalo...............>buffaloes/buffalos
mosquito..........>mosquitoes/mosquitos
tornado............>tornadoes/tornados
volcano............>volcanoes/volcanos
IRREGULAR AND SPECIAL PLURALS
4. Irregular plurals in -ves
The following nouns ending in -f, -fe have plurals in -ves
Singular....................Plural
calf..........................>calves
elf ...........................>elves
half..........................>halves
knife........................>knives
leaf ..........................>leaves
life ...........................>lives
loaf..........................>loaves
self ..........................>selves
sheaf.......................>sheaves
shelf .......................>shelves
thies........................>thieves
wife.........................>wives
wolf .......................>wolves
Dwarf, hoof, scarf, wharf, can have plurals in either -fs or -ves
Hooves, scarves, wharves are more common than plurals in -fs.
Other words ending in -f, -fe are regular.
The plural of most nouns is made by just adding -s to the singular. But there are some special cases./Liczbe mnoga dla wiekszosci rzeczownikow tworzymy poprzez odane koncówki -s. Aczkolwiek, jest pare wyjatków.
1. Plural of nouns ending in consonant +y
/liczba mnoga rzeczownikow konczacych sie na spolgloske+y
If the singular ends in consonant +y (e.g. -by, -dy, -ry, -ty) the plural is normally made by changing -y to -i and adding -es. /Jezeli rzeczownik w liczbie pojedynczej konczy sie na spolgloske+y np: -by, -dy, -r, -ty liczba mnoga zazwyczaj tworzona jest poprzez zastapienie -y sammogloska -i oraz dodanie koncowki -es.
singular......................... plural
....consonant+y.......consonant+ies
baby.......................>babies
lady........................> ladies
ferry.......................>ferries
party......................>parties
If the singular ends with a vowel+y (e.g. day, boy, guy, donkey), the plural is made by adding -s (days, boys, guys, donkeys). / Kiedy liczba pojedyncza konczy sie na samogloske+y np: day, boy, guy, donkey, liczba mnoga tworzona jest poprzez dodanie -s.
Proper names ending in consonant+y usually have plurals in -ys. /Nazwy wlasne konczace sie spolgloska+y zazwyczaj posiadaja koncowke -ys w liczbii mnogiej.
Do you know the Kennedys?
I hate Februarys.
2. Plural of nouns ending in -sh, -ch, -s, -x, or -z
/liczba mnoga rzeczownikow konczacych sie na -sh, -ch, -s, -z, -x.
If the singular ends in -sh, -ch, -s, -x or -z, the plural is made by adding -es./ Jezeli liczba pojedyncza konczy sie na -sh, -ch, -s, -x, -z, liczbe mnoga tworzymy poprzez dodanie -es.
Singular..............................Plural
...-ch/-sh/-s/-x/-z.........>-ches/-shes/-ses/-xes/-zes.
church.................................>churches
cash.....................................>crashes
bus......................................>buses
box......................................>boxes
buzz....................................>buzzes
Nouns ending in a sngle -z have plurals in -zzes: quiz/quizes, fez/fezzes./ rzeczowniki konczace sie pojedynczym -z maja koncowke liczby mnogiej wpostaci -zzes np: quiz>quizzes, fez>fezzes
3. Plural of nouns ending in -o
/liczbamnoga rzeczownikow zakonczonych na -o
Some nouns ending in -o have purals in -es. The most common are:/Niektore rzeczowniki konczace sie na -o maja liczbenoga w postaci koncowki -es. Najpopularniejsze sa:
Singular...............Plural
echo....................>echoes
hero....................>heroes
negro..................>negroes
potato................>potatoes
tomato...............>tomatoes
Nouns ending in vowel+o have plurals in -s (e.g. radios, zoos). So do the following, and most new words ending in -o that come into the language.
Singular..............Plural
commando.........>commandos
concerto.............>concertos
Eskimo...............>Eskimos
kilo......................>kilos
logo.....................>logos
photo..................>photos
piano..................>pianos
solo.....................>solos
soprano..............>sopranos
The following words can have plurals in -s or -es; -es is more common.
Singular..............Plural
buffalo...............>buffaloes/buffalos
mosquito..........>mosquitoes/mosquitos
tornado............>tornadoes/tornados
volcano............>volcanoes/volcanos
IRREGULAR AND SPECIAL PLURALS
4. Irregular plurals in -ves
The following nouns ending in -f, -fe have plurals in -ves
Singular....................Plural
calf..........................>calves
elf ...........................>elves
half..........................>halves
knife........................>knives
leaf ..........................>leaves
life ...........................>lives
loaf..........................>loaves
self ..........................>selves
sheaf.......................>sheaves
shelf .......................>shelves
thies........................>thieves
wife.........................>wives
wolf .......................>wolves
Dwarf, hoof, scarf, wharf, can have plurals in either -fs or -ves
Hooves, scarves, wharves are more common than plurals in -fs.
Other words ending in -f, -fe are regular.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Present Simple
USE:
To talk about things that happen regularly, repeatedly or all the time/ o rzeczach ktore wydarzaja sie regularnie, powtarzaja sie, lub dzieja sie niustannie.
To talk abut permanent situations/ o sytuacjac nie ulegajacych zmianie
What do frogs eat?
It always rains here in November.
I play tennis every saturday.
Manti works for an insurance company. (she was working, is working, and will be working for them)
We do not normally use the Present Simple to talk about temporary situatins or actions that are only going on around the present..
Water boils at 100 Celsius. (permanent) but The kettle is boiling- shall I make tea? (now)
It usually snows in January. but Look!- it's snowing!
But with verbs that do not have progressive (-ing) form for 'around the present meaning' we use the Present Simple.
like- I like this wine very much.
believe- I beleve you.
We do not normally use the Present Simple to talk about the future, however the Prsent Simple is usedfor 'timetable' future events.
Her train arrives at 11:40.
I start my new job tomorow.
And the Simple Present is often used instead 'will' in subordinate clauses that refer to the future. I will kill anybody who touches my possessions.
I will phone you when i get home.
The Simple Present is also used in suggestions with 'Why don't you...?'
Why don't you take a day off tomorrow?
When we talk about series of completed actions and events. In demonstrations, commentaries, instructions and present tense stories.
First I take a bowl and break two eggs into it.
Lydiard passes to Taylor, Talor shoots- and it's a goal!
How do I get to the station?- You go straight on to the traffic lights, then you turn left...
So I go into the office, and I see this man, and he says to me...
Sometimes we do things by saying special words( e.g. pomising, agreeing).
I promise never to smoke again.
I swear that I will tell the truth.
I agree.
He denies the accusations.
The simple present is used with a perfect or past meaning in introductory expressions like:
I hear, I gather, I understand, I see...
I hear you are getting married. (= I have heard this)
I see there has been trouble down there in the factory.
I gther Manti is looking for a job.
Quotations are often introduced with says:
No doubt you all remember what Hamlet says about suicide.
It says in the paper that petrol's going up again.
Note also the structure here comes and there goes...
Here comes your husband.
There goes our bus- we'll have to wait for the next one.
Verbs that refer to physical feelings e.g. feel, hurt, ache, can often be used in simple or progessive tense withot much difference of meaning.
How do you feel? or How are you feeling?
My head aches. or My head is aching.
Some fixed phrases that are used in letter-writing can be expressed either in the simple present (more formal) or in the present progressive (less formal).
We write to advise you. (less formal: We are writing to let you know...)
I enclose my cheque for 200 zloty. (less formal: I am enclosing...)
I look forward to hearing from you. (less formal: I am looking forward to hearing...)
1. Statement/twierdzenie
I go to bed early.
You go to bed early.
He/
She/ goes to bed early.
It/
We sleep every night.
You work all days.
They go to bed early.
Often used with/Czesto uzywany ze slowami: always, never, ever, sometimes, rarely, often, usually, frequently.
Because they indicate how freqently you do sth, we place them between operator and verb/ bo oznaczaja jak czesto cos robimy, wstawiamy je pomiedzy osobe i czasownik:
I often ride a horse.
She rarely eats chocolate.
Only it this tense, in statements, to verbs for persons he, she, it- we add suffix -s, -es/ tylko w tym czasie, w zdaniach twierdzacych liczby pojedynczej, do czasownika odmienionego przez osoby: on, ona, ono dodajemy koncówke -s/-es.
she goes
it laughs
he sings
2. Negtion/zaprzeczenie
I do not go to bed early. ( I don't go...)
You do not go to bed early.
He/
She/ does not go to bead early
It/
In negations the suffix -s has to be added to auxiliary do/ w zaprzeczeniach koncowka -s dodawana jest do czasownika posilkowego do.
We don't do this too often.
You don't go there at all.
They don't meet at nights.
3. Question/pytanie
To ask a simple question we would start from Do...to ask more detailed question we would start with: where/gdzie, how/jak, when/kiedy, who/kto, what/co.
Do I know you?
How do I know you?/ the w/h question word we put infront of the auxiliary do.
Do you love me?
How much do you love me?
Does he go to bed every night?
What time does he go to bed?
Does Manti remember me?
Why doesn't she remember me?
Does it sleep at night?
In questions the suffix -s has to be added to auxiliary do/ w pytaniach koncowka -s dodawana jest do czasownika posilkowego do.
Who does it want to play with?
Do we want to stay?
Do you want to stay?
Do they want to stay?
Mozna tez zapodac poetycko ''czyz ja cie nie znam?, czyz ty mnie nie kochasz?''/Don't I know you?, Don't you love me?
For questions starting with Do... simple yes/no answer will do./ dla pytan zaczynajacych sie od Do zazwycaj odpowiedz tak/nie jest wystarczajaca.
-Do you miss me Manti?
-Yes, I do.
-Does she know?
-No, she doesn't.
To talk about things that happen regularly, repeatedly or all the time/ o rzeczach ktore wydarzaja sie regularnie, powtarzaja sie, lub dzieja sie niustannie.
To talk abut permanent situations/ o sytuacjac nie ulegajacych zmianie
What do frogs eat?
It always rains here in November.
I play tennis every saturday.
Manti works for an insurance company. (she was working, is working, and will be working for them)
We do not normally use the Present Simple to talk about temporary situatins or actions that are only going on around the present..
Water boils at 100 Celsius. (permanent) but The kettle is boiling- shall I make tea? (now)
It usually snows in January. but Look!- it's snowing!
But with verbs that do not have progressive (-ing) form for 'around the present meaning' we use the Present Simple.
like- I like this wine very much.
believe- I beleve you.
We do not normally use the Present Simple to talk about the future, however the Prsent Simple is usedfor 'timetable' future events.
Her train arrives at 11:40.
I start my new job tomorow.
And the Simple Present is often used instead 'will' in subordinate clauses that refer to the future. I will kill anybody who touches my possessions.
I will phone you when i get home.
The Simple Present is also used in suggestions with 'Why don't you...?'
Why don't you take a day off tomorrow?
When we talk about series of completed actions and events. In demonstrations, commentaries, instructions and present tense stories.
First I take a bowl and break two eggs into it.
Lydiard passes to Taylor, Talor shoots- and it's a goal!
How do I get to the station?- You go straight on to the traffic lights, then you turn left...
So I go into the office, and I see this man, and he says to me...
Sometimes we do things by saying special words( e.g. pomising, agreeing).
I promise never to smoke again.
I swear that I will tell the truth.
I agree.
He denies the accusations.
The simple present is used with a perfect or past meaning in introductory expressions like:
I hear, I gather, I understand, I see...
I hear you are getting married. (= I have heard this)
I see there has been trouble down there in the factory.
I gther Manti is looking for a job.
Quotations are often introduced with says:
No doubt you all remember what Hamlet says about suicide.
It says in the paper that petrol's going up again.
Note also the structure here comes and there goes...
Here comes your husband.
There goes our bus- we'll have to wait for the next one.
Verbs that refer to physical feelings e.g. feel, hurt, ache, can often be used in simple or progessive tense withot much difference of meaning.
How do you feel? or How are you feeling?
My head aches. or My head is aching.
Some fixed phrases that are used in letter-writing can be expressed either in the simple present (more formal) or in the present progressive (less formal).
We write to advise you. (less formal: We are writing to let you know...)
I enclose my cheque for 200 zloty. (less formal: I am enclosing...)
I look forward to hearing from you. (less formal: I am looking forward to hearing...)
1. Statement/twierdzenie
I go to bed early.
You go to bed early.
He/
She/ goes to bed early.
It/
We sleep every night.
You work all days.
They go to bed early.
Often used with/Czesto uzywany ze slowami: always, never, ever, sometimes, rarely, often, usually, frequently.
Because they indicate how freqently you do sth, we place them between operator and verb/ bo oznaczaja jak czesto cos robimy, wstawiamy je pomiedzy osobe i czasownik:
I often ride a horse.
She rarely eats chocolate.
Only it this tense, in statements, to verbs for persons he, she, it- we add suffix -s, -es/ tylko w tym czasie, w zdaniach twierdzacych liczby pojedynczej, do czasownika odmienionego przez osoby: on, ona, ono dodajemy koncówke -s/-es.
she goes
it laughs
he sings
2. Negtion/zaprzeczenie
I do not go to bed early. ( I don't go...)
You do not go to bed early.
He/
She/ does not go to bead early
It/
In negations the suffix -s has to be added to auxiliary do/ w zaprzeczeniach koncowka -s dodawana jest do czasownika posilkowego do.
We don't do this too often.
You don't go there at all.
They don't meet at nights.
3. Question/pytanie
To ask a simple question we would start from Do...to ask more detailed question we would start with: where/gdzie, how/jak, when/kiedy, who/kto, what/co.
Do I know you?
How do I know you?/ the w/h question word we put infront of the auxiliary do.
Do you love me?
How much do you love me?
Does he go to bed every night?
What time does he go to bed?
Does Manti remember me?
Why doesn't she remember me?
Does it sleep at night?
In questions the suffix -s has to be added to auxiliary do/ w pytaniach koncowka -s dodawana jest do czasownika posilkowego do.
Who does it want to play with?
Do we want to stay?
Do you want to stay?
Do they want to stay?
Mozna tez zapodac poetycko ''czyz ja cie nie znam?, czyz ty mnie nie kochasz?''/Don't I know you?, Don't you love me?
For questions starting with Do... simple yes/no answer will do./ dla pytan zaczynajacych sie od Do zazwycaj odpowiedz tak/nie jest wystarczajaca.
-Do you miss me Manti?
-Yes, I do.
-Does she know?
-No, she doesn't.
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Czasowiki Nieregularne Irregular Verbs
sth = something/cos/
sb = somebody/ktos/
Bezokolicznik/infinitve...Past Simple..Imieslow Bierny/Past Participle
Abide................................Abode................Abidden .....przebywac
Abide................................Abode................Abidden .....przebywac
Arise.................................Arose.................Arisen .....powstac
Awake..............................Awoke................Awoken ....obudzic
Be......................................Was/Were.........Been .....byc
Bear..................................Bore....................Borne ....niesc
Beat..................................Beat.....................Beaten .....bic
Become............................Became...............Become .....stac sie
Begin.................................Began..................Begun .....zaczac
Behold..............................Beheld................Beheld .....spstrzec
Bend.................................Bent....................Bent .....zgiac
Bereave...........................Bereft..................Bereft .....pozbawc
Bereave...........................Bereaved............Bereaved .....osierocic
Bet...................................Bet.......................Bet .....zalozyc sie
Bid...................................Bid.......................Bid .....licytowac
Bind..................................Bound.................Bound .....wiazac
Bite...................................Bit.......................Bitten .....gryzc
Bleed................................Bled.....................Bled .....krwawic
Blow.................................Blew....................Blown .....dmuchac
Break...............................Broke..................Broken .....lamac
Breed...............................Bred....................Bred .....hodowac
Bring................................Brought..............Brought .....przynosic
Broadcast........................Broadcast...........Broadcast ....nadawac
Build.................................Built.....................Built .....budowac
Burn.................................Burnt...................Burnt .....palic
Burst................................Burst...................Burst .....pekac
Buy...................................Bought................Bought .....kupowac
Cast..................................Cast.....................Cast .....rzucac*
Catch................................Caught................Caught .....lapac
Choose.............................Chose..................Chosen .....wybierac
Clap..................................Clapt...................Clapt .....oklaskiwac
Cling.................................Clung..................Clung .....lgnac
Come................................Came..................Come .....przychodzic
Cost..................................Cost....................Cost .....kosztowac
Cost..................................Costed................Costed .....ustalac koszt
Creep...............................Crept..................Crept .....skradac sie
Cut...................................Cut.....................Cut .....ciac
Deal..................................Dealt..................Dealt .....zajmowac sie
Dig....................................Dug.....................Dug .....kopac
Dive.................................Dove...................Dived .....zanurkowac
Do.....................................Did.......................Done .....robic
Draw................................Drew...................Drawn .....rysowac
Dream..............................Dreamt..............Deamt .....snic
Drink................................Drank.................Drunk .....pic
Drive................................Drove..................Driven .....prowadzic
Dwell...............................Dwelt...................Dwelt .....mieszac
Eat....................................Ate......................Eaten .....jesc
Fall...................................Fell......................Fallen .....spadac
Feed.................................Fed......................Fed .....karmic
Feel..................................Felt.......................Felt .....czuc
Fight................................Fought.................Fought .....walczyc
Find.................................Found..................Fund .....znajdowac
Fit....................................Fit........................Fit .....pasowac na sb
Flee.................................Fled.....................Fled .....uciekac
Fling................................Flung...................Flung .....rzucac*
Fly...................................Flew.....................Flown .....latac
Forbear..........................Forbore................Forborne .....powstrzymywac sie
Forbid............................Forbade...............Forbidden .....zabraniac
Forecast.........................Forecast..............Forecast .....zapowiadac
Foresee..........................Foresaw...............Foreseen .....przewidywac
Foretell...........................Foretold...............Foretold .....przepowiadac
Forget.............................Forgot..................Forgotten .....zapominac
Forgive...........................Forgave................Forgiven .....wybaczac
Forsake..........................Forsook................Forsaken .....opuszczac
Freeze.............................Froze....................Frozen .....zamarzac
Frostbite.........................Frostbt................Frostbitten .....doznac odmroenia
Get...................................Got.......................Got .....dostawac
Give.................................Gave.....................Given .....dawac
Go....................................Went.....................Gone .....isc
Grind...............................Ground.................Ground .....mlec
Grow...............................Grew.....................Grown .....rosnac
Hang................................Hung.....................Hung .....wieszac rzecz
Hang................................Hanged..................Hanged .....wieszac sb
Have................................Had........................Had .....miec
Hear.................................Heard....................Heard .....slyszec
Hew.................................Hewed...................Hewn .....ciosac*
Hide.................................Hid.........................Hidden ....ukrywac
Hit....................................Hit.........................Hit .....uderzac
Hold.................................Held......................Held .....trzymac
Hurt................................Hurt.......................Hurt .....ranic
Inlay................................Inlaid...................Inlaid .....inkrustowac
Input...............................Input....................Input .....wprowadzac dane into sth
Keep................................Kept......................Kept .....trzymac
Kneel...............................Knelt.....................Knelt .....kleczec
Knit.................................Knit.......................Knit .....robic na drutach
Know...............................Knew.....................Kown .....wiedziec
Lay..................................Laid.......................Laid .....klasc*
Lead................................Led........................Led .....prowadzic
Lean................................Leant....................Leand .....opieac sie
Leap................................Leapt....................Leapt .....skakac
Learn..............................Learnt...................Learnt .....uczyc sie
Leave..............................Left.......................Left .....opusczac
Lend................................Lent......................Lent .....pozyczac*
Let...................................Let........................Let .....powalac
Lie...................................Lay........................Lain .....lezec
Lie...................................Lied......................Lied .....klamac
Light...............................Lit.........................Lit .....oswietlac
Lose................................Lost......................Lost .....gubic*
Make..............................Made....................Made .....robic
Meet...............................Met........................Met .....spotykac
Mislead.........................Misled....................Misled .....wprowadzac w blad
Misspell........................Misspelt................Mispelt .....zrobicblad ortograficzny
Mistake........................Mistook.................Mistaken .....pomylic
Misunderstand...........Misunderstood.....Misunderstood .....zle zrozumiec
Mow.............................Mowed...................Mown .....kosic
Outdo...........................Outdid...................Outdone .....przewyszac
Outgrow......................Outgrew................Outgrown .....wyrastac
Overcome....................Overcame.............Overcome .....pokonac
Overdo.........................Overdid................Overdone .....przesadzac w czyms
Overdraw....................Overdrew.............Overdrown .....przekrazac kredyt
Overfeed.....................Overfed.................Overfed .....przekarmic
Overhear....................Overheard.............Overhard .....przypadkowo syszec
Oversleep....................Overslept..............Overslept .....zaspac
Overtake......................Overtook..............Overtaen .....przegonic
Pay...............................Paid.........................Paid .....placic
Put...............................Put..........................Put .....klasc
Quit..............................Quit........................Quit .....przestac
Read............................Read........................Read .....czytac
Rebuild.........................Rebuilt...................Rebuilt .....odbudowac
Rewind.........................Rewound...............Rewound .....przewijac
Rewrite.......................Rewrote..................Rewritten .....przepisac
Rid.................................Rid..........................Rid .....uwalniac od czegos
Ride...............................Rode.......................Ridden .....jechac
Ring................................Rang......................Rung .....dzwonic
Ring................................Ringed...................Ringed .....obraczkowac
Rise.................................Rose......................Risen .....ponosic sie
Run................................Ran..........................Run .....biegac
Saw................................Sawed.....................Sawn .....pilowac
Say.................................Said.........................Said .....powiedziec
See.................................Saw..........................Seen .....widziec
Seek................................Sought....................Sought .....szukac
Sell..................................Sold........................Sold .....sprzedawac
Send...............................Sent........................Sent .....wyslac
Set..................................Set..........................Set .....nastawiac
Sew................................Sewed....................Sewn .....szyc
Shake.............................Shook......................Shaken .....potrzasac
Shear.............................Sheared..................Shorn .....strzyc
Shed..............................Shed........................Shed .....lac
Shed..............................Shed........................Shed .....lac
Shave.............................Shaved...................Shaven .....golic
Shine.............................Shone......................Shone .....swiecic
Shine.............................Shined.....................Shined ....polerowac
Shoe...............................Shod.......................Shod .....podkuc
Shoot..............................Shot.......................Shot .....strzelac
Show..............................Showed..................Shown ....pokazywac
Shrink............................Shrank..................Shrunk .....kurczyc sie
Shut...............................Shut.......................Shut .....zamykac
Sing................................Sang.......................Sung .....spiewac
Sink................................Sank......................Sunk .....tonac
Sit...................................Sat.........................Sat .....siedziec
Slay................................Slew.......................Slain .....zabijac
Sleep..............................Slept......................Slept .....spac
Slide...............................Slid........................Slid .....slizgac
Sling...............................Slung....................Slung .....ciskac
Slink...............................Slunk....................Slunk .....podkradac sie
Slit..................................Slit........................Slit .....rozcinac
Smell.............................Smelt.....................Smelt .....wachac
Sneak.............................Snuck/-ed.............Snuck/-ed .....podejrzec
Soothsay........................Soothsaid..............Soothsaid .....przepowiadac
Sow................................Sowed....................Sown .....siac
Speak.............................Spoke.....................Spoken .....mowic
Speed.............................Sped.......................Sped .....mknac
Speed up.......................Speeded up...........Speeded up .....przyspeszac
Spell...............................Spelt......................Spelt .....literowac
Spend............................Spent.....................Spent .....wydawac
Spill................................Spilt.......................Spilt .....rozlewac
Spin................................Spun.....................Spun .....przasc
Spit................................Spat.......................Spat .....pluc
Split...............................Split.......................Split .....rozlupac
Spoil................................Spoilt.....................Spolt .....psuc
Spread............................Spread..................Spread ....rozciagac
Spring.............................Sprang..................Sprung .....skoczyc
Stand..............................Stood....................Stood .....stac
Steal................................Stole.....................Stolen .....krasc
Stick................................Stuck....................Stuck .....przykleic
Sting................................Stung...................Stung .....kluc*
Stink................................Stank...................Stunk ....smierdiec
Strew...............................Strewed...............Srewn .....rozrzucic*
Stride..............................Strode...................Strodden .....kroczyc
Strike..............................Struck...................Struck .....uderzac
String..............................Strung...................Strung .....nizac/nawlec*
Strip................................Stript.....................Stript .....zdejmowac
Strive..............................Strove...................Striven .....usiowac
Sublet..............................Sublet...................Sublet .....pdnajmowac
Swear.............................Swore....................Sworn .....klac
Sweat.............................Sweat.....................Sweat .....pocic sie
Sweep.............................Swept....................Swept .....zamiatac
Swell...............................Swelled..................Swollen .....puchnac*
Swim..............................Swam.....................Swum .....plywac
Swing..............................Swung...................Swung .....hustac
Take..............................Took.......................Taken .....brac
Teach.............................Taught...................Taught .....nauczac
Tear................................Tore......................Torn .....rwac
Tell..................................Told......................Told .....powiedzic
Think.............................Thought.................Thought .....myslec
Thrive............................Throve...................Thriven .....kwitnac
Throw............................Threw....................Thrown .....rzucac
Thrust...........................Thrust....................Thrust .....wpychac
Tread............................Trod........................Trodden .....stapac
Unbend.........................Unbent...................Ubent .....wyprostowac
Ubind............................Unbound................Unbound .....rozwiazywac cos zwiazanego
Undergo......................Underwent.............Undergone .....poddawac sie czemus
Underlie......................Underlay.................Underlain .....lezec pod sth
Understand................Understood.............Understood .....rozumiec
Undertake..................Undertook...............Undertaken .....przedsiebrac
Undo...........................Undid........................Undone .....odwiazywac
Unwind.......................Unwound.................Unwound .....odwijac
Uphold........................Upheld.....................Upheld .....podtrzymywac
Upset..........................Upset........................Upset .....wzburzac
Vex..............................Vext..........................Vext .....draznic
Wake...........................Woke........................Woken .....budzic
Wear...........................Wore.........................Worn .....nosic ubranie
Weave........................Wove.........................Woven .....tkac
Wed............................Wed...........................Wed .....zaslubic
Weep..........................Wept..........................Wept .....plakac
Wet.............................Wet...........................Wet .....zwizac
Win.............................Won...........................Won .....wygrywac
Wind..........................Wound......................Wound .....nawijac
Withdraw..................Withdrew................Withdrawn .....wycofywac
Withhold...................Withheld.................Withheld .....wstrzymywac
Withstand.................Withstood...............Withstood .....wytrzymywac
Wring........................Wrung......................Wrung .....wykrecac
Write.........................Wrote.......................Written .....pisac
*Cast light onto sth
Cast a spell on/over -oczarowac
I don't mean to cast down on his version of the story-poddawac w watpliwosc
Cast an eye over sth- rzucac na cos okiem
Cast a vote- oddac glos
Cast aside- pozbyc sie
*Manti pulled off her coat and flung it on the chair.
He flung his arms around my neck.
*
hew--hewed-hewn/ciosac
mow-mowed-mown/kosic
saw--sawed--sawn/pilowac
sew--sewed--sewn/szyc
sow--sowed--sown/siac
*klasc sie....lay-laid--laid
*klasc sie....lay-laid--laid
lezec............lie--lay--lain
klamac........lie--lied-lied
*Lending is giving for a time. You lend sth to sb, or lend sb sth. /to dawanie czegos komus na jakis czas. Pozyczasz cos komus, lub pozyczasz komus cos.
I lent my car to Manti, and I never saw it again.[:)]
Lend me your comb for a minute, will you?
Borrowing is taking for a time. You borrow sth from sb. /to branie czegos na jakis czas. Pozyczasz cos od kgos.
Can I borrow your bicycle?
I borrowed 10 zloty from Manti.
* lose- gubic, but loose- luzny
to tie up the loose ends-dopracowac szczegoly
loosely-luzno
*to be stung by a bee
*the Ocean looks like thousands diamonds strewn across a blue blanket.
*To string beads on the golden thread.
*Swollen tonsils.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)