Lesson 1: Linguistics and Language

Properties of Language
When talking about language we may say that it is a system of conventionalized symbols by which we communicate. The main properties are: arbitrariness symbolism creativity. Arbitrariness can be explained by taking some words as examples: cane (Italian) chat (French) dog (English) The relationship between speech sounds and meaning is regarded as arbitrary and for this reason different languages have different speech sounds to represent the same things: English: the rice is burning! Korean: Pap thanda Italian: Il riso sta bruciando Different languages convey the same message. However there are words where the pronunciation suggests the meaning. These are called onomatopoeic words. English: cuckoo! Spanish: cuco! Italian: cucu! German: kuckuck English: buzz English: hiss All languages: tic tac Italian: chichiricch English: cock-a-doodle-do Russian: kukuriku In the vocabulary of any language there is a small group of onomatopoeic words as the majority words of languages are to be seen as arbitrary. The relationship between the words and things is symbolic. Dog symbolizes a certain class of quadruped Chair symbolizes a certain type of furniture

Creativity is another important feature of all languages which allow new utterances to be created thanks to new thoughts, experiences, situations. The little girl ate the apple The man ate the apple Both ate the apple The rabbit ate the cabbage All these examples have structural similarity. But, for instance, the following sentence The rull stud the thrull does not make any sense since the words have no meaning even though the structure conforms to the rules of English. On the contrary dog the ate bone the does not conform to the rules of English. In other examples such as She wintered in Mexico He holidayed in Greece the verbs are created from time expressions. However these two instances: It midnighted in the festival He nooned at Shirleys house are to be considered incorrect because noon and midnight are points of time rather than periods of time. Thus it is clear from what I have said up to now that languages are rule-governed structures. These rules reflect the systematic structure of language; they are not imposed from the outside but are observed regularity of language behaviour. In each language we have the following characteristics of grammar: Grammar with its rules and elements Linguistic competence which correspond to knowledge of language Linguistic performance which deals with how people use their knowledge of language, that is, grammar in comprehension and production All languages have a grammar that can be more or less equal in complexity. The components of grammar are: Phonetics: the articulation and perception of speech sound Phonology: the pattering of speech sound Morphology: word-formation Syntax: sentence formation Semantics: the interpretation of words and sentences Pragmatics: how to use things with words

More clarifications on the features of language Talking about human languages we can say that their main feature consists in the fact that unities of meaning (signs) are arbitrary and conventional. Nothing in the sound of the words in a language allow us to discover the meaning of the words. The sound, for example, of the words chaise, chair, sedia, do not have any physical relation with the objects described by these words. Onomatopoeic words (Italian cocod/chicchiricch used to imitate the song of the chicken or the cock) or rather the sounds that compound them are bound to the object they describe. This is difficult to understand when we become aware that for the same group of objects different onomatopoeic words will be used in different languages (cocka-doodle-doo in English, kukuriku in Russian etc). All this implies that signs (unities of meaning which form a message) are conventional and arbitrary form. The words of a language have been chosen by human beings to represent a given set of objects, ideas, or phenomena. Speaking the same language as someone else, then, means sharing a certain number of conventions. Languages are regarded as creative because during our lifetime we would rarely repeat the same sentence twice. This happens thanks to the composition of languages themselves which in their turn are made up of combinable and divisible particles that can be expressed by the slightest change in a statement. And an almost infinite number of sentences can be created by starting from a limited number of words and sounds. On the other hand, the meaning of a sentence is not necessarily the addition of the meaning of each word that forms it. Moreover the same word can have more than one meaning, that is, it can be polysemic. For example the word cane in Italian means either dog or cock (referring to rifle gun-rifle at half cock-). The word leaf in English means either the leaf of a tree/plant or the page in a book. The context in which the sentence has been produced is necessary to any ambiguity which would arise in avoiding such cases. Language seen as a mental faculty allowing oral communication is innate while the code allowing its realization is learned.

Lesson 1: Linguistics and Language

Other important Features of Language

These two words are distinct as they have nothing in common from the point of view of meaning : an intermediate pronunciation leads to one or other of the words. Restraint does not allow language to intensify the signifier and then to intensify the meaning correspondingly in the same way this is done by the use of shouts or interjections:

A but uttered softly implies doubt A but uttered loudly can, instead, imply a greater conviction of doubt Speaking of semantic omnipotence (with language we can talk about whatever we like) we intend to refer to the capacity of language to talk about everything . It allows us to carry out a list of different functions, of which the most well known are those taken into consideration by the linguist, Jakobson. Explanations of Jakobsons communicative functions He stated that a common code is not sufficient for a good communicative process and for this reason it is necessary a context from which the object of communication is drawn. He allocates a communicative function to each of the components; The Emotive Function: it focuses on the addressers own attitudes towards the content of the message is emphasized (examples can be seen in Emphatic Speech, Interjections, etc) The Conative Function: it is directed to the addressee (a typical example is found in the vocative) The Referential Function: it refers to the context. The function, here, that emphasizes the communication is dealing with something contextual (it is also called representative by Bulher) The Phatic Function: it is necessary to establish contact and refers to the channel of communication. There are some of these utterances that are employed to maintain contact between two speakers. The Metalinguistic Function: it concerns the code itself and is seen as the function of language about language. An example of Metalanguage is this whole reader and we use it in order to examine the code. This function, however, is predominant in questions like Could you please repeat your answer? where the code is misunderstood and needs correction or clarification. The Poetic Function: it is given to the messages that usually convey more than just the content and they are always to be seen as a creative touch of our own (Examples: rhetorical figures, pitch or loudness etc) Another essential property of language concerns the linguistic messages which can present (unlike messages in other natural codes) a high degree of structural elaboration with a vast scale of linking and functional relationships between the elements which are arranged linearly . The reciprocal placement, in a linguistic sign, of the elements which replace is never unimportant: so much so that the relationship between the elements or parts of the signs gives rise to a close multiple structure which can be perceived in the syntax of the message , and which is called syntactic complexity .

The most relevant features are: 1) Order of contiguous elements: Joseph hits Hugo (linear positions in which they combine) 2)Structural connections and subordination which are operative between non-contiguous Elements 3)Embedding The dog which is barking is Hugos 4)The presence of parts of the message capable of providing information about the syntactic Structure: (conjunctions , coordinates , such as : and/but ; subordinates such as : that, because etc.) 5)Possibility of irregularity in the syntactic structure. To conclude what has been said up to now on the properties of human verbal language, we may assert that language is a typically ambiguous system; it is sufficient to note that the phenomenon of polysemy and homonomy (e.g., leaf referring to both the leaf of a tree and to the leaf of a book etc.). A system which sets not biunique but multiple (plurivoche ) similarities between the elements of a list and those of the list associated with these is ambiguous. Ambiguity must not be seen as a negative factor, but, contrary to what it might appear to be in an exclusively logical-formal key, as a valuable factor naturally connected closely with semantic omnipotence and productivity . In fact, together they allow for exceptional flexibility of the linguistic tool and , thanks to this adaptability, for the expression of new contents and experiences. The problems, however, which may derive from ambiguity are often systematically made unambiguous by the context which intervenes in the interpretation of messages. Language is a system which organizes: 'A system of signs with a mainly phonic-acoustic meaning', fundamentally arbitrary at all levels and doubly articulated which express every expressible experience , possessed as interiorized knowledge allowing us to produce an infinite number of sentences starting from a finite set of elements. The essential dichotomies that must be taken into consideration are, therefore: Synchrony/diachrony ( e.g. a phenomenon of Etymology ) abstract system and concrete achievement (between power and action, between energeia)

virtual activity, and ergon the carrying out process. Other distinctions crop up, in modern linguistics , in accordance with three main dichotomies: Opposition pairs langue/parole ( Saussure ) stem/use (Hjelmeslev ) competence/use (Chomsky) and as opposition between paradigmatic axis / syntagmatic axis which came into fashion after Saussure, where it appeared, moreover, as an opposition between associative/syntagmatic: Paradigmatic Axis: The dog barks The cat miaows The cock crows Syntagmatic Axis The young bitch chatters Explanation: One may maintain that the paradigmatic axis concerns relationships from a point of view of the system, whilst the syntagmatic axis concerns relationships from the point of view of the structures which realize the potentialities of the system. The paradigmatic axis supplies the resevoirs from which the single liguistic units can be drawn; the syntagmatic axis ensures that the combinations of units are formed according to the restrictions suitable for any language. *the barks dog *the miaows cat are sentences which are incorrectly formed I would say they are impossible given that they do not respect syntagmatic coherence or paradigmatic choices of the English language. This can be found in any language e.g. *il abbaia cane (Italian) ; *le boit chat (French).

Lesson 1: Linguistics and Language

Modern Linguistic Tendencies

 European Structuralism headed by Saussure asserts that the ideas concerning the consideration of language as a system of signs where all is held in mutual relationship therefore, the value of each element depends on its relationship with the other elements of the system developed in different directions in other European schools between the thirties and the fifties. School of Prague ( Jakobson, Trubeckoi, Mathesius etc) School of Paris (Martinet) School of Copenaghen (Hjelmeslev: Glossematic Theory is considered too abstract and mathematical) School of London (Firth) The main evident features of these schools ( except in the case of Glossematics) is the stress on a unctional prospective (or Functionalist) which sees language as a basic instrument of communication and the structures correlated, instead, to functions. In America, despite the anthropological and typological trend which was present at the beginning of XX century in Sapirs work, Structuralism is widespread, on the contrary, in a model which is strongly descriptive and positivist called distributionalism or Taxonimic Structuralism (worthy of great consideration is the scholar Bloomfield). This model aims at analysing language only on the behavioural basis which is empirically verifiable of the messages it produces apart from the functions and meanings. Opposed to Structuralism we have Generativism with its founder Noam Chomsky who tackles the study of language from a formal perspective contrasting any other linguistic trend that priveleges empirical data inductively. He is inspired by models which are, on the one hand, mathematical and, on the other psychological, considering language as a chiefly innate faculty with its autonomous organisations which must be studied according to strictly deductive methods. The generative theory has, however, in almost 40 years, undergone to continuous change of results and a significative re-orientation which have slowly changed its order and main categories: from the "standard theory at the end of the years 60 70 to the so-called theory of Principles and Parameters . There are many other modern linguistic tendencies which are of great importance : Pikes Tagmemics , tesnieres Grammar of Value (Valenza) , Hallidays Functional theories , the Amsterdam School of Dik and the studies of Typological Linguistics. The studies of Typological Linguistics are usually based on principles more functional than formal that try to understand which are the potential mecchanisms of language and which are those already effected . What is therefore universal and what changes in the structure of language referring above all to the different ways in which the disparate languages of different linguistic families existing in the world realize the categories of the linguistic system. STRUCTURALISM IN EUROPE SAUSSURE ( FREI , BALLY , etc. ) Saussure emphasized a synchronic view of linguistics in contrast to the diachronic

historical study) of the 19th century . The synchronic view sees the structure of language as a functioning system at a given point in time. This distinction was a breakthrough and became generally accepted. A sign is the basic unit of langue (language ) (a given language at a given time). Every langue (language )is a complete system of signs. Parole (word ) (the speech of an individual ) is an external manifestation of langue (language ). Another important distinction is the one between syntactic relations, which takes place in a given text, and paradigmatic relations. School of Prague with Trubeckoj Jakobson To these we owe the phonological theory from which we draw the notion of phoneme based on the concept of opposition. Jakobson apart from setting out the principle of Diachronic Phonology , set up the analysis of phonemes in distinctive binary opposition. School of Copenaghen with Hjelmeslev Brondal To Hjelmeslev we owe the theory of Glossematics. He develops in a systematic way many intuitions belonging to Saussure, and his ideas have turned out to have a great influence on literature, especially concerning literary theory through the semilogical elaboration of the concept sign and the attempt to deepen the notion of form of contents that leads to the introduction of structural semantics. Structuralism in U.S Sapir: his influence is still of vital importance even nowadays. He contributes in an original way to the elaboration of phoneme and he has also written pages worthy of consideration concerning the cultural and psychological aspects of language. Bloomfield: we owe to him the strict elaboration of analysis in immediate constituents which is the basis of Syntagmatic Grammar with tree graphs which will be used by Chomsky (the founder of the so called Generative Grammar) in the context of generative Grammar'. Halliday s functionalism: his semiotic theory whereby language being a pragmatic and social phenomenon must be explained in all its aspects in relation to its linguistic usage.

Lesson 1: Linguistics and Language

Conclusions
The study of Linguistics concerns language in general. People speak between 3000 and 6000 different languages around the world. We always think to ourselves what is that these languages have in common, and what is it that differentiates them? Each language is a very complicated system which includes thousands and thousands of different words

where many difficult rules are necessary to combine these words into sentences. Children for instance learn their language relatively fast and they do not need any kind of language lessons. How it is possible that children have no trouble learning such a complicated system while, at the same time, there are still many problems in teaching a computer to understand language responding in a natural way? Being languages are so complicated, the study of Linguistics shall be divided into several subfields. Each subfield deals with a different aspect of language. Morphology, for example, is the study of word form. How do speakers of a language combine words to make new ones (compounds) mooreland, moonlight, honeymoon, senzatetto, pellerossa, etc.. How do we know what the tense aspect is of a verb we have never heard before? Syntax, on the contrary, refers to the study of a sentence formation. Which step do speakers have to take to transform an indirect question into a direct question (reported speech into direct speech). What is the best way to represent the structure of a coordinate sentence? The study of word meaning is called Semantics. There are many words which have more than one meaning called polysemic words but this does not seem to bother the listeners in understanding what the speakers say. Pragmatics concerns the way people behave in daily life. It studies the factors that govern our choice of language in social interaction and the effects of our choice on others (David Christal). Textual analysis (textual linguistics) deals with the communicative functions, cohesion, co-reference, etc. In writing texts we consider the structure in paragraphs, connective elements such as titles, explanations, cross references, etc. Moreover a typology of texts (from a tale to an article, from a law to a piece of crime news, from the words of a song to an advertising spot etc) is developed in order to individualize the structure, functions and the conditions of intelligibility. Not only do we have the capacity to manipulate a great number of words and sentences but also we can adapt the usage of our language by considering the context itself. Sometimes it happens that we cannot understand a word that we read or hear. Notwithstanding this we are often able to fill the gaps thanks to the context itself. In a given situation where it is difficult to understand the other person owing to the high volume of music or to the noise of traffic we can do necessary adaptations in order that the communication may work well. Moreover peoples who speak in the same way do not exist. It is just the existence of this kind of variations that allows us to identify our interlocutor, for instance, when we are at the telephone. Notwithstanding these interpersonal divergences we can understand a lot of sentences we

hear. At the moment there is not a complete grammar for any human language. We know how to speak but as a whole we have much difficulty in explaining what we know. Consequently it is the duty of Linguistics to render explicit what we know about language. Semantics studies the meaning of words and it surely deals with the creativity of language thanks to the presence of several rhetorical figures or tropes (imagery, metaphor, connotations etc). Imagery, icon, metaphor and symbol are figures of speech or artistic conventions, in which one thing stands for another in a kind of semantic relation. Image is the representation of an object or scene which conveys only itself. In common usage, the word image refers to a physical depiction of something, as in a photographic image, or in common speech: he is the image of his father. The words are used with the intention of describing something. By extension, however, the image also exits in a mental representation, as in the memory or the imagination. There is a good physical example of this in the common experience of looking at a bright light source, then closing ones eyes and still seeing the afterimage, apparently on the backs of the eyelids. Metaphor compares two things that are alike in some way so as to clarify our understanding of one of them. The metaphor is used above all by poets because they want to make their readers seeing an aspect of something they have not noticed before. Writers of prose take use of metaphors to make a difficult idea easier to understand, by comparing something which is unfamiliar to something which is familiar; in ordinary speech people use metaphors for emphasis. All metaphors, however, have one fact in common, that is, they do not announce they are comparing one thing to the other. They say for instance that Mark is John, and leave to the reader or the hearer to figure out in what way Mark is like John. The difference between metaphor and simile is that in metaphor the comparison is implied, while in simile it is explicit. So metaphors have a way of activating previous experiences and associations. At first glance they can seem ambiguous and paradoxical, but in practice they can explain complex concepts both quicker and more accurate than a more literal explanation. In many areas, especially where instant communication of complex messages must be achieved, metaphor have become more and more important. Linguistics and its subfields (see for example Semantics) have a prominent place being the basis of each deepened study of words and sentences. The search of the origin of words have involved since ancient times (antiquity) many scholars who sought for not only the history but also the destiny itself of terms (nomen est omen). We need to know the forms and meanings of words but chiefly we need to travelling in time learning the mystery of words, the iron phonetic rules, the charm of analogies, the curiosity of apparent equalities of sounds or meaning among languages. And all this is given by Linguistics which is science, art and intuition.