By Mladenova, Olga M.
In its evolution from a man-made to an analytic language, Bulgarian obtained a grammaticalized class of definiteness. The ebook provides the 1st try to discover intimately how this occurred through evaluating the earliest sleek Bulgarian texts with modern dialect and traditional Bulgarian information. the fundamental devices of research are many of the kinds of nominal buildings headed by way of nouns or pronouns. The research calls for the stern terminological disentanglement of shape from content material and the adoption of a default inheritance version of definiteness that let the exhaustive category and tagging of nominal constructions encountered within the texts. Tagging makes it attainable to use quantitative research to nominal constitution and to evaluate the kinds to be had within the early texts from a present native-speaker viewpoint.
Read Online or Download Definiteness in Bulgarian: Modelling the Processes of Language Change PDF
Best language & grammar books
The outline for this publication, heritage of Rhetoric, quantity I: The artwork of Persuasion in Greece, might be drawing close.
Linguistic version in examine Articles investigates the linguistic features of educational examine articles, going past a standard research of the generically-defined study article take into consideration various realizations of analysis articles inside of and throughout disciplines. It combines corpus-based analyses of 70+ linguistic positive aspects with analyses of the situational, or non-linguistic, features of the tutorial magazine Registers Corpus: 270 examine articles from 6 various disciplines (philosophy, background, political technological know-how, utilized linguistics, biology, physics) and representing 3 sub-registers (theoretical, quantitative, and qualitative research).
This examine is anxious with the purchase of intonation through German/English bilingual young children. Nucleus placement, pitch circulation and intonational phraseology have been analysed on either the phonetic and the phonological point. The research used to be performed utilizing either the tonetic (British) and the ToBI transcription structures.
The papers take care of quite a number questions raised for linguistic thought and outline through polysynthetic languages. Prototypical polysynthetic lamguages, chanced on between unrelated language households in such various components of the realm as North the United States, Meso-America, Siberia, northern Australia, and Papua New Guinea, exhibit remarkably comparable suites of grammatical features.
- Linguistic Change and Reconstruction Methodology
- Code-Switching in Early English
- The encyclopedia of applied linguistics
- Language Complexity: Typology, contact, change (Studies in Language Companion Series)
Additional resources for Definiteness in Bulgarian: Modelling the Processes of Language Change
Stanev) Table 14. Complementarity of personal and demonstrative pronouns in the third-person Anaphoric contexts Non-anaphoric contexts Strict Identity of sense Non-person Person 0M1 or equivalent + – – + 0M5 or equivalent – + + + Table 14 summarizes these findings. The choice between 0M1 and 0M5 nominals (or equivalent) is made at the intersection of two embedded oppositions – non-anaphoric vs. identity of sense anaphoric context vs. strict anaphoric – and inside the former – personal vs. non-personal referent.
Tja si e takava. FEM Expression 37 i xlopa du˘skata. THE ‘No matter what you do, you cannot change anything. She is like that. ’ Types 0M1-1 (az) and 0M5-1 (tazi) have specialized for strict anaphoric and non-anaphoric use, respectively, and have counterparts in the damaskin language, cf. (110) i pode do posteljata s[ve˛]t[o]mu symeonu. FEM with worms and from smrad˘ı ne mozˇe da stoi tam. MASC is like novy iov˘ı. MASC Job ‘And he went to St. 26 Besides these two types, the personal pronouns and the demonstrative third-person pronoun clearly form one paradigm in nominals of type 0M8, where the substitution of the third-person personal pronoun for the demonstrative one in non-anaphoric positions is at least awkward.
A. D. Sˇmelev proposes a model of (in)definiteness in Russian that makes use of oppositions such as trivial vs. non-trivial individualizing (first introduced by M. G. Seleznev), constant vs. variable denotative space and concrete vs. generalized reference (1992). An attempt to systematize the meanings of the grammatical category ‘definiteness’ in Bulgarian, based on the search for a stable ‘invariant’ core of the varying manifestations of definiteness was made by Valentin Stankov (1987). Moving away from this idea in his later work, he increased the number of dimensions relevant for definiteness to four: identifiability, totality, referentiality and significativity (Stankov 1995: 104).