Cococu Reader Summary

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
CoCoCu Reader Summary
Communication Code and Culture (Universität Wien)
Scansiona per aprire su Studocu
Studocu wird von keiner Universität gesponsert oder unterstützt.

Heruntergeladen durch Author 1 (nonodebra@gmail.com)
lOMoARcPSD|37909893
Core Lecture Linguistics

Test 13.04.2010
1. The difference between semantic and pragmatic meaning
2. How do social factors influence language? (variation, language vs. dialect)
3. Hymes, the appropriate, how is it linked to the other 3 concepts?
4. How does applied linguistics differ from other linguistic theories?
5. What is the co-operate principle? Do people always conform to it? (why do we lie?)
6. Grammatical reasons for ambiguity?
7. What does corpus analysis reveal about a language?
8. Linguistic model
+2 others
03.03.2009
The difference between semantics and pragmatics
2. How do languages vary /What is language variation?
3. How can you distinguish between a language and a dialect?
4. Hymes, the appropriate, how is it linked to the other 3 concepts?
5. What is the scope and purpose of applied linguistics?
6. A text is defined as going beyond the sentence. How can this be defined/answered in grammatical
terms?
7. What is the co-operate principle? Do people always conform to it?
8. Why does ambiguity occur?
9. What does corpus analysis reveal about a language?
10. What does a linguistic model reveal about reality?
1.Why does a linguists model of language differ from how we perceive reality? so irgendwie
2. What is a language? Who says so and on what grounds?
3. Why do languages vary and change?
4. What does Hymes mean by "the appropriate"? How can it be linked with the other three principles?
5. Doris Lessing - reactions on her book. How can discourse analysis explain this?
6. What does a corpus tell us about reality?
7. A text is defined as going beyond the sentence. Do you agree?
8. Do people always co-operate?
9. Difference between theoratical, descriptive and applied linguistics
10. What is ambiguity and why does it occur?
SS 2010/Core Lecture Linguistics ©Julia Herzog

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
The scope of linguistics

Language so much bound to our everyday life  go out of the wood to see it!
Purpose of linguistics  explain language (explanation depends on dissociation from
our immediate experience).
Language not only reflects reality but creates it  therefore we are provided
with an explanation of experience. As language happens now, every moment we live,
we can constantly observe it and investigate and question it again and again! NB:
The explanation of language always depends on cultural customs and linguistic
convention. Although we try to abstract from the actual process of thinking, and try to
describe language “from the outside” we will always have to create categories, define
certain things and therefore will never be able to capture everything  constantly
calling created categories into question – language allows for endless accounting for
things!
Our abstracting competence allows us intellectual enquiry  emergence of
different ways of accounting for language  different “schools” / academic
disciplines. The latter are like cultures with different ways of thinking and talking
about things. They draw abstractions form the actuality of experience (it is always
present)!
Special about linguistics is that it uses the abstracting potential of language to
categorize and explain language itself! We use cognition to abstract from language
as experience in order to explain it. It seeks to determine from the data of
“performance” the underlying systems of rules that has been mastered by the
speaker-hearer and that he puts to use in actual performance. Linguistic theory =
mentalistic  discovering mental reality underlying actual behaviour.
Every linguist must be detached from actual experience of language – needs to be

able to abstract – otherwise, he would not have a purpose. Linguists have to reason
(überlegen) over experience. They must scientifically enquire but NOT correspond to
actual experience at all. E.g. A carpenter experiences a table completely different
than people who consider it an article of daily use. They also produce E.g. models
that are not really conform to reality. Language is an abstraction – NO ONE SPEAKS
“LANGUAGE”. There are:

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
 Theoretical linguistics – Theory of human language. Most concerned with

developing models of linguistic knowledge. The core of their studies are
syntax, phonology, morphology, and semantics. It is also searching for
linguistic universals – sth that all languages have in common.
 Descriptive linguistics – describe languages and how their theory is realised in
their language. Always a particular language in mind. Objectively analyzing
how languages are spoken.
 Applied linguistics – How does the abstract relate to real world experience?
What can abstract tell us about the real world. Experience of language of
actual users is central.
Applied linguistics
How does abstraction now refer back to reality? How can we make us of abstract and
help users out there in the world . Tries to clarify and explain certain experiences. It
takes of a role of mediation between abstract and the real speaking world. On the
basis of having understood the language oneself/having the expertise of it linguists
can intervene with reality and exploit abstract knowledge to create new realities. It
engages with real-world problems and tries to solve them professionally. E.g.
Language Teaching
Models and Maps

Abstraction involves idealization of actual data  constructing models of linguistic
description. Such models are intended to be removed from familiar reality and are
supposed to have little resemblance to it – NO INVALIDATION! The validity of models
lies in the fact that it reveals what is not so apparent. Linguistic models are therefore
an abstraction, at a remove from familiar experience.  A model is an idealized
version of reality  incidental information removed to give way to essential. Models
comparable to maps. Map: does not show things as they really are – vast amount of
detail left out because there is not enough room and to avoid distraction. E.g. map of
London underground: little resemblance to real tracks, its twists and turns, no
indication about distance between stations, no connection to world above ground.
This map – useless for finding way on foot. Merely designed for people to be able to
use the tube and leaves out everything else which is not relevant to this purpose. 

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
The same true for maps of complex landscape of language. Certain issues will be
identified as being particularly significant and they are given prominence by avoiding
distraction of detail. Models = simplified and selective. They are idealized versions of
reality, designed to reveal certain things by concealing others. No all purpose
model/No all purpose map. Their validity is always relative, never absolute. Designed
to explain experience but not expected to correspond with it. None can capture the
whole truth. The purpose dictates the design of the model. Both, in cartography and
linguistics important to know about what scale to use, what dimensions to identify
and where, in the interest of explanation, to draw the line between idealized
abstractions and actual reality.
Dimensions of idealization
language = means of interaction between people = social phenomenon. Serves to
give public expressions to private issues, to communicate with others, to arrive at
agreed meanings and to regulate relationships  languages have to have very
stable codes people accept as condition of membership of communities that use
them. There have to be generally agreed ways of using language in different kinds of
social context!  learning languages act of social conformity. BUT there is always
some room for some private, personal movement by exploiting the potential of the
code (produce unique expressions).
Generally, people are constrained to conventions of the code and its use, but
they can also exploit the potential differently, on different occasions and for different
purposes – a person’s use of language as distinctive as a fingerprint. On the one
hand, language very general and abstract, a shared and stable body of knowledge of
linguistic forms which is established by conventions of community. At the same time,
language is very particular and variable if we consider the actual linguistic behaviour.
The nearer you get to actuality, the more abstractions appear.
Language and parole

Ferdinand de Saussure:

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
 langue  shared social code, the abstract system. A collective body of

knowledge, kind of common reference manual copies of which were acquired
by all members of a community of speakers.
 parole  particular actualities of individual utterances
This distinction is justifiable as it limits the area of enquiry down to an amount which
is manageable and that the concept of language can be said to capture central
aspect of language itself.
Issues arising out of this distinction: “langue” eliminates from language its
intrinsic instability. Language = dynamic, a process – not a state and changes over
time and accommodates the needs of its users. Historical linguistics distinguishes
between diachronic and synchronic changes of languages. Diachronic  account for
language changes over the course of time. Synchronic  at a particular point in time.
Language varies at any one time, no matter how small the time slot is
(speakers of different ages, use language differently. Diachronic change over time is
simply, and inevitably, a result of synchronic variation at any one time. E.g.
Synchronic/Diachronic distinction - chess game: We can contemplate the disposition
of the pieces on the board without considering the diachronic dimension (the moves
that were made before, or those that are planned in the future. We can see it as a
state of a play and disregard it as a stage in the game.
Competence and Performance
Comparable distinction to Saussure’s “langue” and “parole” is made by Chomsky.
 Competence  knowledge native speakers have of their language as a

system of abstract formal relations. The focus on what is essential and
primary.
 Performance  their actual behaviour, it is particular, variable, dependent on
circumstances. It may offer evidence of competence, but circumstantial
evidence and not really reliable. The residual category of secondary
phenomena, incidental, and peripheral.
“Knowledge” of language  a bit delicate as we do not necessarily act upon what we

know but are “forced” into the usage due to particular circumstances in our life that

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
which set constraints and conditions upon us as we act. Linguistic behaviour

conditioned by all manner of factors other than a knowledge of language as such.
The abstract concepts of competence and actual speech acts are quite different and
cannot be inferred one from the other.
 Similarities to Saussure’s model: same kind of dichotomy of knowledge
and behaviour and a similar demarcation of the scope of linguistic
enquiry.
 Discrepancies: Saussure – “parole” is a social construct (socially
shared common book, copies distributed among society), but Chomsky
sees “competence” as a psychological aspect: not so much printed, but
imprinted, not a shared generality, but a genetic endowment. “Langue”
conceived of as knowledge determined by membership of social
community  focus: What makes each language different – what is
distinctive about particular languages as social phenomena?
“Competence” on the other hand, knowledge determined by
membership of human species – focus: What makes individual
competence alike – What is distinctive about language in general, and
as specific to the human species?
Chomsky’s definition of “competence”, then, = a definition of linguistics as principally
concerned with the universals of human mind. Chomsky has defined linguistics as a
branch of cognitive psychology. His idealisation is formalist  fixes on the forms of
language as evidence of these universals without regard to how these forms function
in communication – it leaves out social considerations entirely. The communicative
functions in actual contexts of use are of no interest. They furnish no reliable
evidence of underlying cognitive principles – too many distractions in data by way of
performance.
Furthermore, if “competence” = knowledge of abstract principles of linguistic
organization, which may not be evident in actual behaviour  what evidence for its
existence? Some linguists (as representatives of the language they speak) draw
evidence from their own intuitions (very doubtful as they are very analytical and
cannot count for everyday speakers of a language).  Problem between abstraction
and actuality – the further language is removed from its natural surroundings, the

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
greater the problem becomes / the more you place it in its natural surroundings, the
more less you see in significant generalization.
How do we get linguistic data?

 Introspection: related to 1st person. Consider yourself as a native
speaker of language. Problem  we always have our aim in mind – we
are not objective. Moreover, this is quite limited because we only get
data from one person.
 Elicitation: already includes 2nd person. We ask different people, with
different opinions. The framework is imposed by the person carrying it
out.
 Observe: 3rd person is involved. Observe what people do when they
use language. People observed should act as if the observer would not
be there  ideal case!
When we consider Chomsky’s issue about “competence” we encounter

another difficulty in terms of “linguistic enquiry – what your statements should actually
be about.” For him an abstract set of organising principles defining an area of human
cognition, a specific language faculty and parameters determining Universal
Grammars – are central. From this point of view, the most important fact about
language is that it is evidence for a faculty in the human mind, uniquely and innately
specific to the species.  Leads to assume that what is central in language is that it
is not of itself central. According to him, linguistics is about grammar (which is
concerned with the structural relations of sentence constituents – syntax).
Knowledge and ability

One objection to Chomsky – defines nature of language too narrowly (a
knowledge of grammatical forms – syntax). Knowing language is more than knowing
syntax – namely HOW it functions. E.g. not only knowing words as formal items, but
also as units of meaning interacting with syntax complexly. We cannot abstract form
from function entirely! Here, semantics = study of how languages mean, enter the
discussion.

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
Chomsky’s “formal grammar” wants to identify particular features of syntax

with reference to universal and innate principles of human cognition. ALTERNATIVE
– think about “functional grammar” – how language is differentially influenced by its
environment, how it is shaped by social use, and reflects the functions it has to serve.
Knowing language also involves knowing how to access grammar in order to
express meanings appropriate to context. This is not about what language means,
but what people mean by the language. We need this because knowledge in abstract
has to be put into actual and this is done by its communicative use when people act,
regulated by certain conventions.  Therefore, “competence” is not only knowledge
of the abstract, but also the ability to put knowledge into use appropriately.
2 Ways of revising Chomsky’s concept of “competence”:
 Can redefine the “internal language” by including aspects that reflect
the nature of language as a communicative resource.  results in a
functional grammar.
 Extend the notion of “competence” by including “knowledge” and
“ability” to act upon it. “Performance” then becomes particular behaviour
resulting from the exercise of ability and is then not simply the reflexes
of knowledge. Ability = executive branch of competence, enabling us to
achieve meaning by putting our knowledge to work = communicative
competence. This suggests – If we did not have the access to our
“ability” the abstract and internalized structures of language would
never see the light of day – Imprisoned in a paralysis of cognition.
Communicative competence consists of grammatical competence (speakers

ability to form and interpret sentences) and pragmatic competence (ability to use
expressions to achieve desired effect).
Grammar
Generally, the position of most of the founders of modern general linguistics
has been: an ideal speaker/listener, in a completely homogenous speech community
knowing his/her language perfectly well and is unaffected by memory limitations,
distractions, shifts of attention, interest and errors.

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
Grammar purports to be a description of the ideal speaker-hearer’s intrinsic

competence. When a grammar does not rely on the intelligence of the understanding
reader, but rather provides an explicit analysis of his contribution  generative
grammar.
Things that languages have in common, or that are necessary to every
language are treated in a science called “Universal or Philosophical grammar”. It
accommodates the “creative aspect” of language and expresses the deep-seated
universal regularities. On the other hand, there is also a “particular grammar “ which
deals with things that are exclusively part of one language only.
What all languages have in common – “creative aspect”  it provides the
means for expressing indefinitely many thoughts and the possibility for reacting
adequately within an indefinite range of new situations.
The grammar of a language can only provide full account of the speaker-
hearer’s competence if both, a universal, as well as a particular grammar are given.
A generative grammar, then, is a system of rules that assign structural

descriptions to sentences. Wikipedia: Refers to a particular approach of syntax. A
generative grammar attempts to give a set of rules that will correctly predict which
combinations of words will form grammatical sentences. It tries to provide a
description of linguistic competence people know about their language, not only
surface and constituents, but also in terms of the underlying structure. Every
speaker has internalized such a generative grammar, but he must not necessarily be
aware of this fact. A generative grammar is not a model for a speaker or a hearer. It
tries to account for the knowledge of language which helps us for actual usage –
grammar assigns structural description to the sentence. An interesting generative
grammar will be dealing with mental processes that are beyond the level of actual or
potential consciousness. It attempts to specify what the speaker actually knows, not
what he may report about his knowledge. E.g. a theory of visual perception would
also try to account for WHAT a person actually sees and the MECHANISMS that
determine this. They would not ask the patient what he sees and why.
The study of performance deals with the concept of “acceptability”. Utterances
are acceptable when they are perfectly natural and immediately comprehensible.
E.g. a) I called up the man who wrote the book that you told me about. b) I called the

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
man who wrote the book that you told me about up. The more acceptable sentences
are those that are more likely to be produced, more easily understood, less clumsy
and in some sense more natural. The unacceptable sentences are avoided and
replaced by their acceptable counterparts. “Acceptable” (performance) not to be
confused with “grammatical” (competence). So sentence b) is low on the scale of
acceptability but high on the level of grammaticalness. Grammaticalness is only one
of many factors that determine acceptability.
Communicative Competence
A competence involving the acquisition of language as appropriate E.g. when to
speak, when not, what to talk about when, etc. This competence goes hand in hand
with attitudes, values, and motivations for language, its features and uses. Moreover,
it involves the interrelation of language with the code of other participants in
speaking. This competence is about the internalization of attitudes towards a
language and its uses. The acquisition of such a competence is fed by social
experience, needs, motives, and issues in action that are, again, full of motives,
needs and experiences. Language is not only about referential meaning and sound!
The communicative competence designs language as a face toward communicative
conduct and social life.
The rules of syntax can control aspects of phonology, semantics can control
syntax, then, rules of speech acts enter as a controlling factor for linguistic form in
general. A reasoning to show the requirement of the level of speech acts: What is the
same on one level of representation has in fact two different statuses which brings
about that there has to be a further level. Then, what is different on one level may
have in fact the same status at the further level E.g. “He decided on the floor.” This
utterance is ambiguous as it disguises two structures and this points to a further level
at which the sameness of structure is shown. What is grammatically the same
sentence may be a statement, a command, or a request.
The taxonomic approach to language  for describing sentences, we break
them up into constituents. But when we only look at the sequence mirrored on the
surface of sentences, we cannot immediately see the underlying structure. Therefore,
the taxonomic approach can leave out a lot of important, underlying aspects. The
10

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
surface structure can also be decoded in many different ways  ambiguity E.g. they
decided on the boat on the train. = On the train, they decided on the boat / On the
boat, they decided on the train. Chomsky made a distinction between the surface
structure (sequence of constituents) and the deep structure (all things not signalled
on the surface).
 Divergence: generated from one common structure, but realised in 2 different
ways on the surface. The deep structure diverging into two surface structures
E.g. Passive and Active Structures.
 Convergence: One realisation on the surface which can be decoded into two
underlying structures. Convergence of two deep structures. Two different
things converge into two surface structures.
Considerations of “performance” and “competence”

When moving to the depths of language, realise that one common deep structure
can be realised differently on the surface – can have a serious of different surface
realisations that are all interrelated!
Children already have competency for use of language, but for this study, the
notions of “performance” and “competence” have to be analysed and revised.
Chomsky’s notion of “performance” omits almost everything of sociocultural
significance. “Performance” = the actual usage of language in concrete situations. 
Performance in this sense is competence underlying – “performance” itself underlies
data E.g. performance models, stylistic “rules of performance”.
When talking about “performance” do we mean behavioural data of speech? Or
everything that underlies speech, beyond the grammatical? The difficulty is:
 (underlying) competence vs. (actual) performance
 (underlying) grammatical competence vs. (underlying) models/rules of
performance.
Performance and competence under a sociocultural point of view.

There are several sectors of communicative competence: There is behaviour, and,
underlying it, there are several systems of rules reflected in the judgements and
abilities of language users. Judgements can be made of two kinds: on account of
grammaticality (refers to competence) and on account of acceptability (refers to
11

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
performance). However, some argue that judgements can be made on the account of
4 aspects:
 Whether (and to what degree) something is formally possible
 Whether (and to what degree) something is feasible
 Whether –“- something is appropriate (adequate, happy,
successful) in relation to the context given
 Whether something is in fact done, actually
“performed” and what this performance brings about.
On account of those questions, some observations can be made: a normal member
of a speech community has knowledge of all four aspects mentioned above.
Furthermore, it cannot be assumed that the formal possibilities of a system and
individual knowledge are identical  system may contain possibilities which are not
part of the present knowledge. Moreover, we cannot assume that the knowledge
acquired by individuals is identical.
Competence  most generally – capabilities of a person. It is dependent on
underlying knowledge (being distinct from competence) and the ability for using it. All
four questions presented before have a knowledge of their own. Ability to use also
refers to all four of them. The ability for use as part of competence entails
noncognitive factors, such as motivation. Taking an even more comprehensive view
on “competence” issues like courage, gallantry, dignity etc. have to reckoned as well.
In terms of “judgement” the most common criterion for it is notion of being
“acceptable”. The source of acceptability are to be found in the four parameters just
noted.
Performance  existing performance models = models of aspects of “ability
for use” and as distinct, contributory factor in general competence. The performance
of a person is here not identical with a behavioural record, or the imperfect or partial
realization of individual competence. It takes into account the interaction between
competence (knowledge, ability for use), the competence of others, and the
emergent properties of events themselves. Performance may, under certain
circumstances, not be reducible to individual or standardized competence.
A word on grammar
12

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
Grammar as such is very hard to define. Crucial issue  What is it for? One possible
way of defining it: grammar is a limited set of devices for expressing necessary
meaning that cannot be done by referential vocabulary alone.
Generally speaking, we can say that grammar consists of three essential elements:
ordering (syntax), inflection (pre- suffixes) and function words (do not label anything
in the world – show function of other words “may”). Grammar seeks to solve the
following problems:
 Identifying participant roles
 Showing how items belong together
 Marking the functions of utterances
Word classes
Words naturally divide into classes, related to their functions. There are:
event/situation words (run, hit, hide etc), participant words (tree, dog, house etc.),
shared qualities (old, good, tired, green etc.), Furthermore, language is to express
relationships between the elements in our world: inside, above, after, before, cause,
because etc. We also have to identify an agent and a patient in our language.
Naturally, all words fall at least into two functional classes: into participants and all the
others which are no participants (e.g. event words). We also distinguish between
classes of content words (referring to elements in the world) and function words
(mainly signal language-internal relationships. However, the number of word classes
we define in English will always depend on our purpose and how exact we have to be
in our distinction. Unclear word class boundaries reflect the unavoidable mismatch
between language and the world. The world is enormous and massively complex,
and the categories through which we perceive it flow into each other.
Code and Message

Roughly: language = code used to construct messages. The words of a language =
code items.
E.g. “Sweater, please!”  I may have several sweaters and the person in question
will not know which one exactly I want to have. How do we get the transition from
general to particular?
13

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
Considering language as a message, phrases will be the unit required. An

utterance is not only a sequence of words, but of subsequent phrases, that, as a
whole, get the message in question across. There are E.g. Noun Phrases (NPs) “that
old man” that convey much more than only the word “man”. Furthermore, pronouns
refer to phrases, and not to people alone: E.g. The doctor said that she was buffled.
“She” does not refer to “the” or “doctor” alone, but to “The doctor” as a whole Noun
Phrase. Changes in word order usually involves moving whole phrases E.g. “Mrs.
Potter came round the corner”  “Round the corner came Mrs. Potter” and NOT
“Potter round the corner came ...” Accordingly, we can assume that grammatical
processes are always, in some sense, sensible to the internal structure of phrases!
Clauses
Clauses: combining phrases to higher-level structures. A typical clause will contain at
the very minimum 1 Verb Phrase and one or more NPs.
Subjects and Objects
Clause structures may indicate “participant roles”, such as agent and a patient. In
their grammatical sense, they are referred to as subject and object having different
positions in the clause. When more than one participant – distinction between direct
and indirect object. Agents mostly categorized as subjects – not always the case.
English takes the grammatical structure “subject-verb-object” for agent-patient
scenarios and imposes it on other configurations like “perceiver-thing perceived”,
“experience-thing experienced”. All those issues are in conformity with our cognitive
preference for human-centred representations of the world.
Verbs have so called “selection criteria” – they require certain participants with
them (animate, inanimate etc.). We can simply process language more easily if its
organization follows fixed and predictable patterns. The redundancy achieved by
over-explicitness adds to the comprehensibility. English makes its speakers structure
almost all sentences as if they were potentially ambiguous, therefore the agent-
patient utterances requiring grammatically-marked subjects. English really rigidly
forces itself into this “subject-verb-(object)” mould – in other languages e.g. subjects
and objects only used to avoid ambiguity.
Mood
14

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
Clause structure also features mood. Are we asking, or telling? Talking about what is
happening, what is not, what we think may happen, what has happened, what we
would like to happen – all those examples show different possibilities for mood. This
is achieved by adding grammatical words, E.g. Uncertainty  “perhaps”, “possibily”
etc., by modifying clause structures E.g. She has phoned – Has she phoned? or by
adding auxiliaries E.g. She went – Did she go?
Analysing phrases and clauses

E.g. “My old yellow sweater”  not only cluster of words from different word classes,
they all have different status in comparison to one another. E.g. “sweater” is identified
as a very specific type, namely as “my”. In this case, “sweater” is the core (head of
particular Noun Phrase) and “my” “old” “yellow” act like satellites (like modifiers of the
core). Again, there has to be made a difference within the modifiers (adjectives,
determiners etc.) When breaking clauses up into their constituents, its important to
distinguish form and function. E.g. formally “My younger brother” is a NP, but
functionally, it may be a subject in one clause, an object in another clause etc.
Finite verbs – meaning includes time notion e.g. I will go, you wanted it etc. Non-
Finite Verbs – have no specific time indication e.g. past participles, infinitives,
progressive form. There can be nesting clauses – one clause embedded into different
phrases e.g. A nesting VP in a NP.
The units of language

The core of language- code and utterance are not necessarily only words and
phrases. Words are composed of smaller, meaningful elements like morphemes e.g.
“work-ed”, “un-happi-ness”.
The multifarious forms of language, the different choices of constructing it call for
various kinds of grammar. This wide variety of different grammar schools always boil
down to either taking a formal, or a functional approach which is the fundamental
divide in the study of grammar.
15

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
Formal approaches:
 syntax seen as “autonomous”
 meaning and function of language do not necessarily bring syntax about
 syntax reflects human cognition
Functional approaches:
 consider language structure by taking function it has to perform into account.
 mental system represents the world enables speakers to communicate by
providing serial codes
Compromise position: Grammar exists to make communication of meaning possible,

but that once in existence of the human brain – it takes a life of its own  Therefore
both, functional and autonomous features. It not only corresponds to job it has to do,
but also to the way it is organised in human brain.
Different cultures encode different aspects of reality in grammars of their

language
E.g. Chinese: “Man kill duck” / English: “The man kills the duck”.
The literal English translation of the Chinese sentence leaves us with quite a childish,
empty feeling, but a Chinese man/woman would never be aware of this.  The
notion of subject and object are solely express by means of position in the sentence.
Chinese does not account for: definiteness and indefiniteness of reference, number,
personality, tense, gender. However, there as to be the appropriate context for
complete intelligibility.
When we, then, compare English and Kwakiutl Indian, for those natives, the English
language leaves out a lot of things as well. For example the idea of possession. “The
man kills the duck” – the duck that belongs to whom? The man (who lives in our
neighbourhood etc.)
Whorfian hypothesis
The main idea is that language shapes the thoughts we think. Why is this claim
reasonable?  Imagine the following scenario: When speakers of Turkish retell a
16

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
story, they always have to indicate who witnessed the incident. However, speakers of
English have the option if they want to tell it or not. As a result, it is possible that
Turkish people, as constantly accounting for who witnessed an event, will transport
this into their mind and encode whether an event has been witnessed, even when
they are not actually telling the story themselves.
Case grammar
Developed by Fillmore in 1960ies as a modification of Chomskies “transformational
grammar”. The problem with the latter is that it does not account for the function of
clause items or their categories E.g. The PP “towards the moon” besides the fact that
it is a prepositional phrase simultaneously indicates location or “with a sharp knife”
accounts also for an instrument. Doing case grammar involves analysing the
underlying syntactic structure and to look for a case symbol that indicates the
thematic role of the phrase. Every element of a clause should be analysed in terms of
case makers and case symbols. Case grammar focuses on the link between the
valence (number of subjects, objects) of a verb and the grammatical context it
requires. The main idea of case grammar proposes that if you look at the deeper,
underlying structure of sentences you can actually identify two basic and immediate
constituents: a proposition and a modality. Case grammarians did not see case
present in deep structure, but as a inflectional realization on the surface structure. As
a result, Fillmore argues that case deserves a place in the base component of the
grammar of every language.
Case grammar is based on two assumptions:
 the centrality of syntax in the determination of case
 importance of covert (versteckt) categories
In traditional grammar, case is morphologically identified - one can identify cases by
the form certain nouns take and are only understandable in the by reference to the
function of the nouns. In English, the only remaining case marker of singular nouns is
the Genetive with its “’s”, also the personal pronouns have case markers (I, me, my
etc.).
17

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
Case relationship cannot only be seen from morphological indications, but also
from the organization of the whole sentence – consequently we can say that the
notion of case is also to find in functional, semantic, deep-structure relations between
verb and noun phrases associated with it. English may not always have surface
markers to indicate case  covert category.
Case is said to identify the underlying syntactic-semantic relationships. Case
notions are made up of universal/innate concepts which stand for certain judgements
that humans can make about the events they communicate E.g. “Who did it?”, “Who
did it happen to?” “What got changed?”.
In its basic structure, sentences consist of a verb in the first place, and one or
more NPs , which are each associated with the verb in a particular case relationship.
The various ways in which cases occur in simple sentences define sentence types
and verb types of a language.
According to case grammarians, sentences consist of two basic parts:
 a proposition (tenseless set of verb-case relationships)
 modality (negation, tense, mood and aspect)
Sentence = Modality (M) + [Proposition (P) = Proposition + Verb (V) + one or more
case categories]
Case grammarians like Fillmore see the different, possible case categories as the
following:
 Agentive (A): animate, carrying out the action
 Instrumental (I): inanimate force or object involved in the action given by the
verb
 Dative (D): the animate being affected by the state/action
 Factitive (F): object/being resulting from the action E.g. The mother
bakes a cake.
 Locative (L): identifying the location or spatial orientation of state/action
 Objective (O: semantically most neutral case. Case of anything
representable by a noun whose role in the action is identified by the semantic
interpretation of the verb. However, should be limited to things which are
affected by the action/state. NOT to be confused with O4! E.g. The door
18

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
opened
 Benefactive: perceived beneficiary of a state/action

 Comitative: where prepositions have comitative function like “and”.
Case grammar suggests that verbs are selected according to their case frames -
their case environments the sentence provides E.g. The verb “run” may be inserted
into ______+A / the verb “remove, open” into ____O + A etc. Another case frame
The frame features impose a classification of the verbs of a language.
The different roles fulfilled by the things being referred to in the various cases.
 Agent
 Experiencer
 Instrument
 Object
 Source
 Goal
 Location
 Time
The idea is that case information can tell us about the surface structure in terms of
hierarchy e.g. which will come first, second etc (Agent/Action/Object  is
grammatical, Object/Action/ Agent  not grammatical.
Criticism on case grammar
Agent and Dativ cases are not necessarily animated! Furthermore it is not possible to
identify case with items having specific properties .
The obvious attraction of case grammar is the clear semantic relevance of notions,
such as agency, causation, location, advantage to sb. etc. These are easily
identifiable across languages. However, it is not seen as a viable alternative to
standard theory, because when it comes to classifying the totality of verbs in terms of
their deep structure cases that they govern, the semantic criteria that govern them
are too often unclear. Nevertheless, case grammar has been important to draw
19

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
attention to the importance of relating semantic cases or thematic roles to syntactic

descriptions.
Functional Grammar
This has been influenced greatly by M.A.K Halliday. He concentrates on functional
parts of grammar by interpreting grammatical patterns in terms of how they function.
It is based on the notion how languages have evolved as socially influenced by
functions they are required to serve. Halliday has a functional, rather than a formal
approach. Halliday describes his “systemic functional grammar” as a “natural
grammar”, in the sense we can explain everything of it when we consider how the
language is actually used.
Premise (Vorraussetzung): language has certain functions for its users as a
social group  language is primarily of sociolinguistic nature. For Halliday grammar
is a “meaning potential” (no distinction between grammatical/pragmatic competence)
shared by a language and its speakers. Hallidays functional grammar is based on the
premise that language has two major functions. Those functions are a means of
reflecting on things, and a means of acting upon things: the “ideational ‘content’
function” and the “interpersonal function”. Both functions mentioned rely on a third
the “textual function” which enables the other two to be realized and ensures that the
language use is relevant. The textual function represents the language user’s text
forming potential.
He sees those three functions embedded within a semantic system that he
calls language: Language is a system for making meaning – a semantic system with
other systems for encoding the meanings it produces. “Semantics” does not only
refer to meaning of words, but the entire system of language is meaningful (grammar
and vocabulary). The meaningful grammar enables the three functions to come into
play at every point in the text. It receives meaning from each component an puts
them together in the words. The clause as realisation of communicating meaning is
chosen because it is a grammatical unit which can combine “three distinct
structures”, each of them expressing one kind of semantic organization.
 Ideational meaning = representation of experience (our experience of
the world that lies about and inside us – our imagination). It is meaning
in the sense of content. The ideational function of the clause is that of
20

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
representing what we can broadly call “processes”: actions, events,

processes of consciousness and relations.
Ideational meaning = transitivity system  way in which I encode
aspects of third person reality. The clause as representation.
 Interpersonal meaning: meaning as a form of action: the speaker/writer
doing sth. to the listener/reader by using language. Interpersonal
function of clause: exchanging roles in rhetorical interactions:
statements, questions, offers and commands, together with
accompanying modalities.
Interpersonal function = mood system = the clause as exchange. How
the first person is related to the second person in question. How P1
relates to the proposition of P2.
 Textual meaning: relevance to the context (text or context of situation).
Textual meaning of clause: constructing a message.
Textual meaning = theme system – the clause as message.
Sentences map all those three systems, one on top of the other. When does one use
one theme system – this is answered by the question of appropriateness.
E.g. “The duke killed my aunt.”

Representation  The duke killed my aunt (ideational)
Exchange  Did the duke kill... (interpersonal)
Message  My aunt was killed by the duke (textual)
English messages are constructed with the help of “theme/rheme”. Theme = element
which serves as the point of departure of the message (usually put first). It is with
what the clause is concerned. Rheme: the rest of the message after the “theme. E.g.
“Thomas = theme gave Sophie that Easter egg (rheme).
Ambiguity
Ambiguity derives from coding deficiency. One utterance can have one surface
structure but two different underlying structures – convergence. “The nun pitied the
man with the wooden leg. In this case, “with the wooden leg” cannot be interpreted
21

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
as an instrumental, but this PP is a constituent of the NP “the man...”. Consequently,

it does not give account on the instrument used, but is a modifier of the noun “man”.
Psycholinguistics
comprehension: understanding what we hear
Psycholinguistcs deals with in how far individuals use and understand language and
link this to mental processes. People do not process linguistic information in a neat ,
linear fashion. They don’t move smoothly from one linguistic level to another.
Research shows that in most situations, listeners and speakers use a great deal of
information other than the actual language , in order to help others to decipher what
they want to say.
What we hear is influenced by psycholinguistic variables. E.g. Experiment: Write
down the sixth word in the following sentences. The 6 th word was always “eel”, but
people said they heard “heel, wheel” etc. They all did not accurately record what they
hear, but they report what they expected to hear from the context even if this involves
adding a sound that was actually never there  phoneme restoration principle.
Comprehension is not the passive recording of what we hear (NO tape
recorders), we do not hear every single word that is spoken to us – not simple item
by item analysis.
Listeners/Readers process chunks of information. We seem to seek contextual
consistency and plausibility.
VOT (voice onset timing) – significant difference between e.g. “p” and “b” is the time
between the first puff and the first voicing in the throat. Native speakers are able to
comprehend the voicing delay between the two sounds on the account of
milliseconds that distinguish them. The simple thing of recognizing what person is
being talked about in a conversation is based on isolating subtle phonological
features from the myriad sounds hitting our ear.
Psycholinguists have discovered that we are actually born with the ability to
focus on VOT differences in language. What is more, we comprehend language with
the help of categorical perception – this is an all-or-nothing acoustic perception, we
always classify one sound or the other, nothing in between. This proves that some
parts of human language are modular = reside in the mind/brain as independent
system.
22

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
The successful comprehension = innate ability to recognize fine distinctions in

sound + the ability to adjust ones acoustic categories to the parameters given – a
merger between “nature” and “nurture”.
The comprehension of words – lexical processing

One model psycholinguists have provided for the complex process of comprehending
words is the PDP – Parallel Distributed Processing = we use several separate but
simultaneous processes when understand. The processes are used at all possible
levels of linguistic analysis. The logogen model of comprehension is about how we
access the words stored in our mind. When we hear/read a new word we stimulate
an individual logogen/lexical detection device for that word. Logogens can be linked
to individual neurons in a gigantic neuronal network. When activated they work
parallel with a lot of other logogens/nerve cells to enable comprehension. There are
high- and low frequency words. We can account for the comprehension of words in
several ways: some are stored due to differences in spelling (homophones), in terms
of their pronunciation or the grammatical function the word might fill.
In order to account for the usefulness of the PDP approach let us consider the
TOT “tip of the tongue” phenomenon  our long term memory storage is better for
recognition than for recall. So we often know that we “know a word” but we cannot
recall it in this moment but we would instantly recognise it if it was presented to us.
We are often left with some TOT – memory of how the word actually begins. Often
we have vague memories of the beginning and ending of the missing word but not
the middle  “Bathtub effect”. This brings about a lexical search process and for this
we make us of our “schematic knowledge” = we know we are looking for a specific
type of word/schema and in this process reject all the others that do not fit into that
schema.
Spreading activation networks – The more we think about a missing word, the
more we contrast it with similar terms – the more pieces of knowledge we activate
and this makes the network of association spreading. Even if some words do not fit,
they help to accelerate the activation of lexical relationships.
Rather, it seems that comprehension involves a dynamic, growing, and active
process of searching for relevant relationships by spreading activation networks. The
23

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
logogen model suggests that familiar words connect rapidly, whereas unfamiliar
words take time because connections have not been automated.
People do not rely on a general rule for comprehending they simultaneously
make use of the top-down (involving context/meaning) and the bottom-up principle
(pronunciation/spelling of words to assist decoding).
Comprehension of sentences
Comprehension is more than decoding sounds, letters, and lexical meanings. It also
involves the untangling of the semantics of sentences. Chomsky’s model, namely
that all phrases are generated from a “phrase structure” skeleton which is then
brought to light in everyday utterances by a series of transformation rules (
transformational-generative grammar), was taken into account. In its original version,
this grammar notion foresees a lot of different and powerful transformations that
could create a variety of ‘surface structures’ by rearranging, deleting, adding, or
substituting words which were found in the “deep structure” of the original PS
skeleton.
E.g. The dog is chasing the cat.
Isn’t the cat being chased by the dog?
Considering this example in terms of TG-grammar, the second sample sentence is
much more complex, not only because it contains two new words “n’t” and “by” but
also because, in terms of the underlying phrase structure skeleton it has undergone
three transformational changes: transformed into a negative, passive and
interrogative sentence.  logical that simple sentences are easier to understand
than complex ones.
The Derivational Theory of Complexity (DTC) – this theory says that difficulty
of comprehension derives from the number of transformations that were added on to
the original structure of the “easy understandable – kernel sentence”. However, DTC
was not as straightforward as specialists hoped.
It is suggested that semantics and not syntax are the root of comprehension
difficulty E.g. (1) The struggling swimmer was rescued by the lifeguard. (2) The
struggling swimmer rescued the lifeguard.  Experiments have shown that the first
sentence, although it includes a Passive construction, was easier comprehensible
24

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
than the second because the first is semantically more plausible  Semantics
intervene as more important variable than the DTC.
Negative sentences E.g. “It’s not true that Wednesdays never comes after a
day that is not Tuesday” seem to confuse more than passive constructions – again
undermines the DTC.  Is suggested that transformational rules in the way treated
before are, psycholinguistically not relevant.
What else does affect comprehension? For one, it is ambiguity which slows
down comprehension considerably.
Automated Transition Networks (ATNs): Words tend to be processed in a left
to right order, they also seem to be processed sequentially. This means that each
new word is expected to serve to add to the meaning of those words that came
immediately before it. Each new word is also expected to help us anticipate the next
word. The ATNs can be used to predict the next word/sequence at any moment in the
sentence. Nevertheless, this approach is not very popular –too simplistic to explain
sentence comprehension on basis of sequential prediction. The Parallel Distributed
Processing (PDP) is more robust as it suggests the existence of various and parallel
sequences of psycholinguistic processes, operating at the same time whenever we
attempt to understand new utterances.
However, “Garden-Pathing” = a general tendency for all listeners to make
confident predictions about sentence meaning. E.g. “Since Jay always jogs a mile
(seems like a short distance to him.) We would expect “he” rather than “seems” as
the obligatory comma after “jogs” is missing. This shows the way comprehension is
temporarily is affected when the listener meanders down the wrong garden path in
comprehension.  Linguistic structure of sentences affect the processing time.
The comprehension of texts

Our memory seems to be very poor for structure but comparatively very accurate for
content. We tend to remember sentences in their simpler form, even if the original
was more complex. The basic contents are remembered, not specifically the
grammar. Only when sentences violate our expectations, E.g. “The struggling
swimmer rescued the life guard.” We tend to change the meaning into sth that is
more comfortable to remember.
25

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
It is suggested that the presence/absence of background information can

dramatically affect the way we remember pieces of discourse. E.g. Texts which are
given an accurate title hand help the reader to “locate” the story, helps to remember it
 Top-down information (which provides general background knowledge) is useful in
comprehending larger pieces of texts because it helps to activate mental
associations.
Sociolinguistics
Most of linguistic schools focus on an idealised idea of language, abstracted from all
social contexts. Psycholinguistics deals with how individual speakers acquire and use
language and relates it to mental processes. Sociolinguistics, however, considers
language in situ and in vivo, alive in its geographical and social setting and space.
The main field of interest for sociolinguists is, as the name already suggests, the
social dimensions of language. Speech communities is the abstract space that is
studied by sociolinguists.
As far as social space is concerned, we can locate different varieties of speech
in various certain social units/speech communities. A speech community is all the
people who speak a single language and consequently share notions of what is
same or different in phonology and grammar. The underlying idea is a group of
people who could, if they wanted, speak to each other. Such a community is a
complex interlocking network of communication whose members share
knowledge/attitudes towards a language and use common patterns. A speech
community does not have e.g. geographical boundaries (la francophonie, the
internet, a coffee shop chain, etc. ) it all boils down to using a shared set of language
varieties and a set of norms that govern them.
Members of a speech community share norms about the selection of varieties
(they must not know and use each of the varieties). Very important, community
members recognize the conditions under which other members use varieties but do
not necessarily speak them themselves E.g.Londoners recognize “Cockney” or
“Mayfair” as varieties of English but do not use them. The crucial thing for
sociolinguists is to relate the significant language varieties to significant social
groups/situations.
26

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
E.g. small Isreali Palestinian villages, commonly have four varieties.

 the village vernacular (for most daily activities),
 Classical Standard Arabic (taught at school, used for writing and public
speaking. Used in educational, religious or formal settings),
 Modern Israeli Hebrew (learned by those who have been outside the village or
went to high school. Kept for outside the village),
 some school-learned English (educational use).
In big cities like New York or London English is spoken, but is found sharing its
repertoire with dozens of immigrant languages.
There is also variation within a single language. Consider German after
reunification. It shows signs of new linguistic differentiation between the Western and
the Eastern parts.
Speech communities do not always have to be very big, there are also smaller
networks that contain consistent patterns E.g. communicative repertoire in a modern
office: Different stylistic choices for e.g. e-mail writing compared to a “face to face
meeting.
Dialect
Investigated language variation as a result of geographical location. It is
obvious that people, who consider themselves to speak the same language, have
different words/different pronunciation for the same thing. There are two principles
underlying dialect variation:
 languages change over time E.g. new words added in order to deal with new
concepts, through contact with other languages, phonetic drift)
 people who communicate with each other tend to speak similarly
Dialectology  search for locally and geographically determined differences in

language. For each locality they encounter, dialectologists want to find out the typical
local vocabulary/pronunciation. Accounting for different variants of a language E.g.
“toot” for “bag” help scientists to recognize major regional differences.
27

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
Geographical space is not enough to account for language variation E.g.

Franco-Italian border, the political distinction is enough to make clear that Italian
dialects are talked here now, and no more French ones.  Then, what language a
dialect belongs to is socially and politically influenced, rather than purely linguistic.
It has been remarked that a language is a dialect with a flag and an army.
Geographical or spatial (räumlich) isolation are regularly transformed into powerful
mechanisms for asserting (geltend machen, behaupten) and recognizing social
differences.
Styles
There are also variations within individual speakers coming from a single location
E.g. usage of “don’t” and “do not”. Research has proved that everybody has
patterned variation in pronunciation of single words, and in grammar.  Why? = due
to notion of style and dimensions of formality. At times, we are more careful, and at
times we are more relaxed about the way we speak. Consequently, we have varying
levels of attention to how we speak. Our language provides us with diverse levels
which can be divided up in different ways – and each language has its own way of
doing this.
There are clearly levels of stylistic variation in language. A very important
research in this field was carried out by Labov in New York. He conducted
sociolinguistic interviews and found evidence for the informal style being used when
addressing a child, when offering a cup of coffee to interviewer, or when interviewee
became excited about certain things. He elicited formal style by given the
interviewees a passage to read or by reading a list of words given. Labov elicited the
informal style by asking subjects to tell an emotional story.
In bilingual communities style may be indicated by using the varieties in
different situations E.g. for official and intimate purposes.
One can explain this stylistic variation with the care that speakers/writers take.
 The more formal the situation  the more careful we are about our language use.
Due to this principle we are more likely to conform to the favoured and educated
norms within the society we live. This results from the effects that formal education,
that wants to pass on the prestigious norms that we consider to be literacy, has on
individuals.
28

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
Attention and care are good reasons for stylistic language use, but it leaves
open the question of where the norm actually comes from? 
 audience design = speakers who can control more varieties chose them
according to the audience they are confronted with E.g. choose
informal style when talking to strangers to sound friendly etc. The
speaker, consciously or not, chooses stylistic level appropriate for the
audience he/she wishes to address.
 unconscious accommodation  we automatically adjust our speech in
order to be more like that of our speaking partner.
Both those notions show us the importance of language in establishing social

relations and representing a speakers sense of identity. The two concepts mentioned
are in opposition to normativism – purist who claim that there is only one ‘correct’
version.
 Dialects are variations that are located regionally/socially, whereas style

refers to differences in degree of formality.
 A third set of variation is register = marked by special set of vocabulary
E.g. technical technology which is often associated with a profession or
occupation or other defined social groups. Is a variety of language to be
used in specific situations with particular roles distributed.
 A jargon is then an “in-group variety” brought to live by invention of new
words for new concepts of the group E.g. computer vocabulary –
“hacking”.
Such jargons do not only serve to label new and needed words, but they are
especially socially important as they establish bonds between members and enforce
boundaries for outsiders. E.g. If you cannot understand my jargon, you don’t belong
to my group. E.g. The goal of Thieves and underworld jargons was to make it
incomprehensible for outsiders.
Dialects, styles, and registers are ways of labelling varieties of language. They
result out of the try to explain linguistic variation by associating it to social features.
29

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
By classifying social situations, we can analyse them into three defining

characteristics, making up typical domains:
 Place
 Role-relationship
 Topic
E.g. A very common domain is “home”. Domains are usually named for a place or an
activity one can do in it “home” then refers to the place. The role-relationship
associated with home: family members etc. Topics: there are suitable sets of topics
like activities of the family etc.
Usually, a particular variety of language is appropriate to the domain. In
multilingual communities, different languages may be appropriate for different
domains. In a multilingual family, different role-relationships involve different
language choices.
E.g. domain work  place: factory, store, office, role-relationships involved: boss,
colleague, worker etc, topics: work related
When we speak, we can choose a register/language to show which
relationship/domain we are in at the moment.
Slang and solidarity

As a lot to do as slang helps to establish social identity. Slang = special intimate in-
group speech. It is kind of a jargon marked by its rejection of formal rules, its
comparative freshness, its brevity and its use to claim solidarity. It is basically a
speech, claiming group membership. It also makes use of taboo expressions E.g. To
use the word “fuck” or “shit”in public media has become a sign of liberation.
Solidarity = common group membership has an important social force and has major
impact on language. The solidarity relations underlie the accommodation principle
mentioned above (we adjust ourselves to the speech of the others). Slang serves
social functions: setting/proclaiming social boundaries, permitting speakers to assert
or claim group membership or not. Slang is a feature of the speech of the young and
the powerless.
Language and Gender
30

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
There are gender differences in language. Gender can be grammatically marked E.g.
by pronouns. In French even unisex things like “la table” have a grammatical sex.
The gender differences in language can be expressed by vocabulary or in the whole
language as such. Certain stereotypes are given - already children learn that
women’s talk is associated with the home and domestic activities, whereas the men’s
is associated with the outside and economic activities.
From a neuropsychological point of view, there have been accounts for
differences in certain aspects of language between men and women. E.g. male
phonological processing was located in the left part of the brain, while women used
both sides simultaneously. However, no difference in efficiency could be shown. 
The causes for differences are social, rather than biological.
Such social causes can be education which accounts for the major causes of
differences. Another very considerable power is stereotyping E.g. a poet is taken
more serious than a poetess. The generic masculine, actually meaning a neutral
form, even reinforces the secondary status of women in many social groups.
Social stratification
This term refers to the study of class distinction in speech. Labov’s survey in New
York showed the class distinction in speech. In the beginning, the usage of post-
vocalic “r” after a vowel could have been due to free variation = sometimes use
certain features, then, they don’t. This principle foresees that the choice of variants
was uncontrolled and without significance  unsatisfactory. The percentage or “-r
coloration, correlated closely with the social level of the customers of the store.
Labov actually found a higher percentage of use of the prestigious “-r less”
pronunciation on the more expensive floors of the store. In cities, variations in speech
provide clear evidence of social status.
Historical differences may on the one hand, be the original cause of social
differentiation E.g. immigrants in cities. There may also be socially marked
stratification within a single language E.g. New York is the classic case Each social
level showed had a similar gradation (Staffelung) according to style or degree of
formality. E.g. In casual speech, the upper-middle class would use a stigmatized form
31

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
10 % of the time, the lower-middle class about 20 %, the working class 80 % and the
lower class about 90 %.  Thus, the same feature differentiated the stylistic level
and the social level.
These fairly fine differences do not interfere with intelligibility, but help New
Yorkers to identify themselves and each other socially. Sometimes these subtle
markers do this more effectively than criteria like income and education.
There is also the phenomenon of hypercorrection  to overuse socially
desirable features in careful speech. E.g. It was found that the upwardl-y mobile and
insecure lower-middle class would tend to overuse such expressions.
Accommodation and audience design

How doe dialectal and stylistic differences occur? – People tend to talk like the
people they are together with the most. Physical and social isolation of speech
communities account for the fact why languages/dialects remain rather distinct and
unaffected E.g. social differences like the Castes in India lead to differences in
speech.
Accommodation – tendency for speech to move closely together. Choice of
vocabulary, grammatical form, and even pronunciation moves towards that of your
interlocutor (Gesprächspartner). The opposite is also true: When people choose to
move away from the other party, rather than converging. One can choose to
converge with an absent audience of speech community (slang for presenting group
membership).
Thus, we can conclude that the existence of language variation is not
accidental or meaningless. It adds a vital set of social dimensions which make it
possible for language to reflect and record an individual’s demographic, geographic,
sociological, educational and religious background. It helps to constitute identity,
claim solidarity, expresses attitudes towards power and prestige. Making use of
language for identifying group members can be harmful in terms of prejudices. The
more stratified (geschichtet) a society, it is more likely that speaking a prestige variety
will be rewarded, and that speaking a non-standard variety will lead to prejudicial
treatment.
32

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
Understanding Language Change

Comparative linguistics involves the identification, enumeration and evaluation of
cross-linguistic similarities E.g. English, German, French have certain similarities.
Basis = close inspection of vocabulary and structures  allows them to group
language.
Historically speaking, related languages may once have been the same 
derived through linguistic change from earlier, common ancestor language.
Patterns in language are very arbitrary - there is no real correlation between
sound and meaning of the thing we want to describe. No natural connection between
E.g. word “cat” and the fury creature in reality. This is all a result of convention, and
not of essential natural connections.
Similarities in languages also result of borrowing  language contact!! E.g.
“Wein” and “wine” = Latin “vinum”. Changes do not occurring very abruptly E.g.
parents need to understand their children and vice versa.  Change is gradual and
regular. Proof to this is the fact that we can still, after thousands of years, trace back
similarities. The arbitrariness of language ensures the non-arbitrariness of change.
Language = vehicle of communication, must ensure comprehensibility  limits on
how much can change.
2 ways to study and account for history of languages : study language change
and doing linguistic reconstruction (trace oldest data available and try to ascertain
(bestimmen) the common ancestor.
Whole languages do not change wholesale (en gros), but rather small
elements of it at any particular time. As language is purpose of communication,
people constantly change it (unawarly)
Language not a single entity  made up of dialects, accents etc. We have to
recognise that linguistics talk of an idealized system of language. Certain Changes
must finally affect all speakers. However, this idealised system is shared by speakers
of a language, as well as of dialect speakers. There are individual idiolects, shared
norms, and an idealised linguistic system  areas were we can study language
change.
Interactional approach to language change:
An individual or group of individuals produce novell pronunciation which contributes
to speech variation in community. May be adopted by more speakers and cause a
33

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
change in the norms of community. Finally, it may become expected, or standard

usage incorporated into shared linguistic system.
We can approach language change diachronically (consider history and
development of language) or synchronically (investigate it at a certain moment in
time).
Synchronically data can be tested against historical data and vice versa  go
together.
Language change sneaks quietly into a language, like a seed, which enters
the soil and germinates unseen. At some point, it sprouts through the surface.
Why is always that gradual, long?
 Prescriptivism holds that language change always incorporates damage to the
language and are results of sloppiness, laziness and a lack of attention to
logic.
 Sociolinguists have shown that variation and change go hand in hand.
Changes preceeded by variation.
 Groups within same community may react differently to change (attitudes,
choices of variants)
Two models of language change

The variationist model of change  identifying changes involves investigating
language- and social system. All change preceeded by variation. NOT the same as
all variation leads to change!
An exemplification of sound change:

1. Basis for sound change = constant phonetic variability. Differences between
sounds often not noticed.
2. A certain phonetic variable becomes socially significant as marker of group
identification/stylistic reasons.
3. Through social marking, variable becomes linguistically significant. This
variant generalised/extended to new linguistic environments.
4. Extended to new social groups
5. Spreads through vocabulary system – throughout whole speech community.
6. Part of community’s repertoire. CHANGE COMPLETED
34

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
Sociolinguists – two kinds of language change  Changes from above / Changes

from below.
“Above” and “below” refer to conscious awareness and social hierarchy.
 Changes form above  new sounds introduced by dominant classes. Often

consciously modelled on sounds used in more prestigious social classes E.g.
Use of post-vocalic “r” New York city is a change from above.
 Changes from below  words originally part of vernacular. Phonetic
processes based on making pronunciation easier. E.g. deletion of consonant
before another “half-past”. Working class dialects – often suppressed by
middle-class.
The Lexical Diffusion  suggests, sound changes happen word by word. First
theory: sound change doesn’t occur in all words or environments at the same time
E.g. some environments more susceptible to change. Moreover, change might be
incorporated in some words, before others.
General rate of change is “S-curve” like. This pattern suggest:
 Phase A: In beginning, new pronunciation found in a few words only
(words belonging to sub-groups).
 Phase B: change spreads to other words more rapidly. Steep rise in
curve
 Phase C: rate of change slows down – a few last words undergo the
change.
Linguistic variability and social prestige

English = language of large-scale societies – socially stratified – BUT upward mobility
is possible! NOT like the “Caste” system in India. People can aspire
It has been argued that most people adopt variants of high social prestige and
not stigmatized ones. It is claimed to bring certain social advantages, however,
especially inner cities and rural areas maintain low-status varieties – vernacular
maintenance. For understanding this, social networking is important. There is
35

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
hypothesis that vernacular forms associated positively with integration into a

community’s social network. Social network = informal/formal social relationships
individuals maintain. Two criteria for social network description  density and
multiplexity.
Density  number of connections/links in a network. Low-density network –
individuals usually know central member but NOT each other. A high-density network
– members are known to each other and interact with each other.
Multiplexity  content of network links. When members are interlinked in more
than one function E.g. relative, friend etc. = multiplex network. Uniplex network –
members interlinked in only one relation.
Multiplex networks usually found in rural villages/urban working class = close-
knit networks. Upper classes = more uniplex and low network density. Mulitplex
networks  act as norm-enforcement mechanisms, imposing behaviour E.g. dress,
conduct, language. Those norms NOT necessarily prestigious!
Milroys fieldstudy in Belfast:
Three lower-working class communities: Ballymacarrett, the Clonard, the Hammer 
all haunted by “social malaise” = unemployment, sickness, juvenile crime etc.
Multiplex networks were found with all of them. AIM: access local vernacular in its
most natural form. Fieldwork strategy used  participant observation = researcher
becomes part of community, neither real insider, nor real outsider. RESULT: men
higher vernacular use due to stronger network ties which acted as norm –
enforcement mechanism. Furthermore, early adopters of change usually well
integrated into local network, but have regular/brief contacts with people from
“outside”. Using the standard language  high social status, using vernacular 
solidarity with local people, customs, norms. Vernacular use especially typical in
dense/multiplex network structures – typical for rural areas/old urban-working class.
Pragmatics
Speaker mean much more than words actually can say E.g. It’s hot in here. 
Please open the window. Pragmatics investigates the following: If speakers regularly
mean sth. different than they say – how is it comprehensible? When small utterances
36

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
like “It is hot in here” can mean so many different things, how do we actually know?
Why don’t people just say what they mean?
Definition: What do speakers actually mean when they use language? What
does it mean to them?
speaker meaning/utterance interpretation. Not all entirely satisfactory. Speaker
meaning  social view, focus on producer – no account for fact that interpreting
involves moving betw. several levels of meaning. Utterance interpretation 
cognitive approach. Receiver focused  ignoring social constraints on speaking.
Understand differences between two definitions if we consider levels of meaning:
 1st level: abstract meaning
 2nd level: contextual meaning (utterance meaning)
 3rd level: force (speaker’s intentions)
From abstract to contextual meaning

Abstract meaning = word, phrase, etc. COULD mean E.g. “cat” could refer to a pet,
car part, or even military life (which is a very restricted domain of discourse) 
confusion is possible. When we are in wrong ‘domain’ of discourse wrong assignment
is greater! BUT if we are in known domain of discourse, when we know what social
roles our interactant occupies – no difficulty in comprehension. What certain words
actually mean is a question of occasion and can only be determined in context.
Contextual meaning does not have to be searched for like it might be the case for
abstract meaning – it is so obvious – we would never interpret wrongly E.g. A friend
sends you a post card from London – picture post card? Playing card? Music card?
 if we not able for short cut interpretation – understanding wouldn’t be efficient.
Rapid changes of topic  difficulty in assigning contextual meaning. Problems
when people only understand abstract meaning (possible dictionary entries) without
understanding contextual level.
Two problems in understanding: 1) Assigning sense in context 2) Assign
reference in context.
Assigning sense in context
When engaged in conversation – intuitively look for contextual sense. Assigning
sense to words = rather straight forward. BUT problems with homonyms (same
spelling/pronunciation – different meaning). Assigning correct/intended sense to
37

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
polysemous /homonymous lexical items can be especially problematic for non-native

speakers. Cultural background can be vital for understanding – native speakers draw
heavily on it.
Assigning reference in context
Even if we understand every single word of an utterance E.g. And just think, if he
hadn’t fallen out of bed, I’d never have found out about it!  WHY not possible to
understand? – We do not know WHO she’s referring to, Who is “he”, what is “it”? 
impossible to assign reference to words. When we want to understand, we do not
only need the sense of words, but also the reference of them. E.g. “Do not touch” is
only effective when we know what it refers to. “this” and “that” = deictic expressions
 get part of their meaning from their context . E.g. place deictics like “here”
“there”/time deictics “yesterday” “tomorrow” do not mean much out of their context. All
deictic expression pose problems when removed from their context.
Personal pronouns are especially difficult as they have an almost infinite
number of possible referents.
Structural ambiguity
Ambiguity originates from a deficiency in decoding pieces of language E.g. The
Bishop walked among the pilgrims eating their picnic lunches.  Source of ambiguity
is syntactic. Bishop or pilgrims who ate the picnic???
Interaction of sense, reference and structure.
Ambiguity can be cause be ambiguities of sense, reference and structure. Assigning
sense and reference = mutually dependent. Unless you know what sth refers to, you
may not work out the sense, and conversely. If you don’t know sense of a word –
more difficult to find what it refers to. Structural ambiguity can lead to ambiguity of
sense E.g. Have you seen the dog bowl? – No, but I’ve seen it play several good
innings – exploiting “dog bowl” as a complex NP or VP.
Ambiguity and Intentionality
Ambiguous sentences are so ubiquitous (universell, generell) that speakers often fail
to notice their producing them. BUT there is also deliberate ambiguity! E.g. in poetry
or literary language.
Utterance meaning (1st level of speaker meaning)
38

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
When we have resolved all the ambiguities of sense, reference and structure – when
we have moved from abstract to what speaker actually does mean – we have arrived
at contextual meaning/utterance meaning = a sentence-context pairing”. The original
lexical meaning of an expression is not a good guide to the speakers intention in
employing expressions E.g. At court, the offense “Chinkey Bastard” was testified to
mean “wandering parentless child in the Ching Dynasty” and deemed inoffensive.
Force (2nd meaning):
There can often be disagreement on intentions of speakers E.g. Let him have it –
Murder him? Or “Give him the gun”? It is not always inability to hear, or understand
the words – we often fail to understand a speaker’s intention.
In pragmatics, form = speaker’s communicative intention. E.g. “Is that your
car?”  “that”/”your” is all perfectly clear to you – no problem in understanding
utterance meaning – YET one might not understand the force behind it – what does
he want from you? Why is he asking this (complaint, admiration etc)? Consequently,
one utterance can have various pragmatic forces.
The following situations are possible: understanding utterance meaning +
force / understanding utterance meaning but NOT force / understanding force BUT
NOT utterance meaning (girl is panicking – “Don’t have a cow!”) / understanding
neither of them (I’m well down my personal corridor.”)
Interrelationship of utterance/force
2 components of speaker meaning: utterance meaning + force. We frequently derive
force from speaker meaning (with help of intonation/tone of voice/gesture). We can
also mainly rely on context. If we fail the utterance meaning, we may also fail the
force  the two are closely related!
Pragmatics as speaker meaning actually confuses the fact that there are actually two
aspects: utterance meaning and force! These investigators were only interested in
force and to the factors that bring them about – primarily interested in speaker
intention.
Pragmatics as “meaning in interaction” suggests that word do not inherently
have meaning, nor does the speaker or hearer produced it alone. Making meaning is
a dynamic process, involving negotiation of meaning between speaker / hearer, the
context of an utterance and the meaning potential of what has been said.
39

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
When an utterance has a great meaning potential E.g. How are things?, the
hearer can choose/develop a topic appropriate to the circumstances given.
When a language is used – always related to a context and produced for a

purpose. Generally, there are always two partners in a discourse, P1 and P2 – and
they produce a piece of language according to context and purpose  discourse of
giving intentions. On the other hand, there is discourse of interpretation  making
sense of what is being said. A piece of language/text itself has no inert meaning – it is
only in the dynamic process of communication that words become meaningful.
For successful communication – context needed. P1 one has intention to say
something, P2, normally has the context for processing it rightly. Ideally, P1 and P2
should converge on the meaning because both have the meaning, context and
purpose  when outside, you don’t know any of these  problem in understanding
 text itself is inexplicit – does not signal its own meaning – is given meaning by P1
and P2. Text itself = inadequate for communication  always an imperfect of
expression/imperfect of interpretation. P1 and P2 share common knowledge about
their language and the way of looking/perceiving the world. You only converge in
these domains as much as possible for the sake of communication/for a particular
purpose. P1 and P2 both assume that the other shares this knowledge – both bring
systemic knowledge = about language system with them. P2 will recognise language
used and engage his systemic knowledge as well. P2 will also engage schematic
knowledge = way reality is perceived, cultural construction of world E.g. values,
beliefs. Culturally schematic knowledge  very important for making sense of
language.
How you see/interpret the world (schematic knowledge) overrides systemic
knowledge (about language system). When P1 and P2 communicate – establish
common schematic knowledge E.g. values believes – this schematic knowledge
applies to every communication. Problem  when having to compensate for
common schematic knowledge – those who share their view of the world with each
other = easy communication – things beyond the immediate  more difficult.
Convergence = what constitutes communication – NOT only transfer from P1
to P2  too simplistic. Pragmatic meaning  what people mean by language when it
is used, what it means to them. Relates to appropriate use of linguistic features in
40

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
order to achieve convergence which is opposed to semantic meaning = what is

possible/different dictionary entries of words. Semantic will complete the pragmatic
incomplete knowledge – You decipher semantic meaning / interpret pragmatic
meaning.
Speech act theory  there are three different kinds of pragmatic meaning
 Propositional Reference  referential: When referring to sth. you are always
into pragmatics E.g. “Fragile” This is used situationally on a parcel. What is
breakable? What is it referring to?  ANSWER: you know it from your
schematic knowledge that the thing inside the box is meant.
 Illocutionary force  force behind reference  Refers to possible
communicative activities E.g. an appeal, a threat, giving directions etc.
 Perlocutionary force  effect that utterances have. What P1 intends to
achieve an effect on P2. What aims is P1 pursuing? E.g. In the case of
“fragile” – perlocutionary force: make people more careful.
When we converge, we converge on these three kinds of pragmatic meaning.

Communication is the constant negotiation of these three levels of meaning.
E.g. A: Yours is crustier than mine. B: Well, you can’t complain, you chose it. A: I am
not complaining, I am making an observation.  Illocutionary Force was
misunderstood.
C: Have you sth. to drink? D: Yes, thanks! C: No, I wanted sth. to drink, I know you
have sth.!  Perlocutionary force misunderstood .
The Co-operative principle

Grice/philosopher: We make contribution to conversation, according to the stage, the
purpose, the direction which is appropriate in the talk of exchange we are in.
Both, P1 and P2 assume (have underlying knowledge) that it is NORMAL to

cooperate in order to reach their communicative goal  cooperative principle behind
every communication. The Cooperative consists of 4 maxims:
41

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
 Maxim of Quality  P1 assumes that what P2 says is true and vice versa. We
do not say what the other thinks is false – we always want to be taken serious,
we do not say sth. for which P2 lacks adequate evidence.
 Maximum of Quantity  P1 and P2 assume that both will say as much as is
necessary and not more or less – avoid unnecessary information – only as
much as P1 and P2 need in order to understand each other. Make contribution
as informative as the purpose requires – NOT more informative than required.
 Maximum of Relation  Both assume that they say sth. relating to ongoing
conversation. MAKE YOUR CONTRIBUTION RELEVANT.
 Maximum of Manner  P1 and P2 will speak as clearly, comprehensible and
understandable as possible.
Ground rules of conversation! All speakers have this in mind and agree to use these
cooperate principles.
P1 and P2 can make use of implicatures  helpers to create effect of utterance. Help
you to reveal attitude to sth. E.g. irony, sarcasm, dramatic tone etc. E.g. Tony Blair is
a poodle – both speakers know it is untrue, but it creates effect.
We can violate those four principles, but if other recognises it as intended violation, it
can create an effect. We always have to be careful about the conventions of
communication E.g. in a telegram it is common to be brief – in normal conversation
this can be considered impolite. E.g. poetry is aimed to be obscure - wants to create
interest – draw people in story.
The area of cooperation is also an area of shared territory. Both, P1 and P2

have a life space on their own (knowledge, personal feelings etc. – culturally
dependent) and we are all protecting this “territory”. We all have to respect the others
territory – not invading it! The assignment of territory is always made in advance and
is NOT NEGOTIATIABLE!!!
Therefore there is politeness which helps to protect our private space.
CONSEQUENTLY there are 2 forces operating: the force to converge/to cooperate
and the force for protecting one’s territory.  Those two features determine
communication greatly: We HAVE TO cooperate without infringing territory. E.g.
Telephone conversation in GB. P2 (picking up telephone) speaks first, NOT P1 who
is phoning.
42

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
Relations between P1 and P2 in terms of reference and address:

How I refer to sb is according to relation/attitude that I have towards this person.
Whenever we make reference to external event – resources available to position
ourselves – to express our attitude towards sth. Language provides us with a wealth
of differently connotated words – can be either loaded negatively or positively – we
chose what we think best fits what we want to convey. E.g. “fat” and “plumb” or “bold”
and “foolhardy” (töricht).
When P1 and P2 communicate they negotiate their relationship by using
different terms of address – The choice of reference signals the relationship – but
also to protect the territory.
Corpus linguistics
A corpus is a store of used language. Considering actual performed texts - gathers
together wide range of actual conversation products – store them and looks at them
closely. Reveals a lot of information that would not be possible to get out of Native
Speakers. BUT it does not contain new information.
Findings of corpora always dependent on the form of a word (Adverb,
Adjective, Verb etc.) and the context. If a corpus was actually very very big – it could
represent a language. Corpora most commonly made of writing native speakers
produce and it is descriptive (used for a particular purpose, interest in what it has
been used for) and NOT applied.
PROBLEMS WITH CORPORA

 They can only show what HAS HAPPEND – NOT what could have happened
or what will be performed. It is only a picture of the moment – these results
change over time – even within a short period of time all the results may not
really represent the speaking world anymore.
 Corpora only show their own contents E.g. a statement about evidence, is a
statement about this very corpus you got it from, NOT about language
 It can offer evidence but give no information – does not tell you what certain
phrases like “something of a” mean. Only offers plenty of examples – user has
to interpret them.
43

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
 Presents language out of its context – understanding certain aspects of

language depends upon encountering them in their visual and social context.
Corpora can show frequency, phraseology (how sentences are formed), and
collocation:
 Indicate relative frequency  Corpus can be arranged in order of the
frequency of words. 2 criteria (grammar words more frequent than lexical
words) most frequent conceptual meaning is given first. The more frequent a
word, the more general its meaning – semantically speaking they are more
empty – the meaning can only be added by the rest of the phrase – need other
words to their lexical meaning complete E.g. do, get, have can etc. Words that
appear only once = hapax legomena. Frequency useful for identifying possible
differences between corpora.
 Co-occurreces  shows the company words keep with others – collocations –
AND idiomatic features – they are stored as chunks.
 Patterns of occurrence  corpora can give account of how and how often
words occur and in which patterns What collocations do most frequently occur
with a word? E.g. “eye” “eyes” – do they enter in the same patterns in texts. –
Can tell you whether words are synonyms e.g.
It can tell us about the company of words, we can observe regularities or differences
we would not encounter when words were in their natural context. They can be used
for language teaching (how language works, get the nuances, establish norms of
frequency, investigate cultural attitudes.
2 Models of interpretation: Open choice + idiomatic principle
Open choice principle  text = result of a very large number of complex choices
where grammar serves as only constraint. Language = “slot-and-filler” principle. Texts
are a series of slots which have to be filled with the words from our lexicon available.
At each slot, virtually any word can occur – complex pattern of choices going on.
The idiom principle  Words don’t occur at random in texts. Nature and world
around us is reflected in organisation of our language. The principle is that speakers
44

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
have a large number of semi-prefabricated phrases available to them. When we want

to speak we don’t assemble word by word in the moment given  We draw on pre-
fabricated chunks stored in our head. We actually already know which words go
together with others - ! Non native speakers.
What reason for formation of collocations?  Mostly through conventions within a
community – it may reflect the reoccurrence of similar situations in human affairs.
LINK TO least effort principle  very economical to have prefabricated structures –
no composing of every bit of language.
45

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
Fragenausarbeitung
1.) Difference between semantic and pragmatic meaning?
Semantic meaning refers to what is possible in language. How you can assemble
the bits and pieces in order to formulate what you want. Semantic meaning refers to
what words, phrases, signs and symbols stand for – if focuses on the code of
language.
Pragmatic meaning what people mean by language when it is used, what it
means to them. Relates to appropriate use of linguistic features in order to achieve
convergence which is opposed to semantic meaning = what is possible/different
dictionary entries of words. Semantic will complete the pragmatic incomplete
knowledge – You decipher semantic meaning / interpret pragmatic meaning.
There are three different kinds of pragmatic meaning
 Propositional Reference  referential: When referring to sth. you are always
into pragmatics E.g. “Fragile” This is used situationally on a parcel. What is
breakable? What is it referring to?  ANSWER: you know it from your
schematic knowledge that the thing inside the box is meant.
 Illocutionary force  force behind reference  Refers to possible
communicative activities E.g. an appeal, a threat, giving directions etc.
 Perlocutionary force  effect that utterances have. What P1 intends to
achieve an effect on P2. What aims is P1 pursuing? E.g. In the case of
“fragile” – perlocutionary force: make people more careful.
2.) Language variation. How do they vary? Why do they change?

Whole languages do not change wholesale (en gros), but rather small
elements of it at any particular time. As language is purpose of communication,
people constantly change it (unawarly)
Language not a single entity  made up of dialects, accents etc. We have to
recognise that linguistics talk of an idealized system of language. Certain Changes
must finally affect all speakers. However, this idealised system is shared by speakers
of a language, as well as of dialect speakers. There are individual idiolects, shared
norms, and an idealised linguistic system  areas were we can study language
change.
Interactional approach to language change:
46

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
An individual or group of individuals produce novell pronunciation which contributes

to speech variation in community. May be adopted by more speakers and cause a
change in the norms of community. Finally, it may become expected, or standard
usage incorporated into shared linguistic system.
We can approach language change diachronically (consider history and
development of language) or synchronically (investigate it at a certain moment in
time).
Synchronically data can be tested against historical data and vice versa  go
together.
Language change sneaks quietly into a language, like a seed, which enters
the soil and germinates unseen. At some point, it sprouts through the surface.
Why is always that gradual, long?
 Prescriptivism holds that language change always incorporates damage to the
language and are results of sloppiness, laziness and a lack of attention to
logic.
 Sociolinguists have shown that variation and change go hand in hand.
Changes preceeded by variation.
 Groups within same community may react differently to change (attitudes,
choices of variants)
Two models of language change

The variationist model of change  identifying changes involves investigating
language- and social system. All change preceeded by variation. NOT the same as
all variation leads to change!
An exemplification of sound change:

7. Basis for sound change = constant phonetic variability. Differences between
sounds often not noticed.
8. A certain phonetic variable becomes socially significant as marker of group
identification/stylistic reasons.
9. Through social marking, variable becomes linguistically significant. This
variant generalised/extended to new linguistic environments.
10. Extended to new social groups
47

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
11. Spreads through vocabulary system – throughout whole speech community.

12. Part of community’s repertoire. CHANGE COMPLETED
Sociolinguists – two kinds of language change  Changes from above / Changes

from below.
“Above” and “below” refer to conscious awareness and social hierarchy.
 Changes form above  new sounds introduced by dominant classes. Often

consciously modelled on sounds used in more prestigious social classes E.g.
Use of post-vocalic “r” New York city is a change from above.
 Changes from below  words originally part of vernacular. Phonetic
processes based on making pronunciation easier. E.g. deletion of consonant
before another “half-past”. Working class dialects – often suppressed by
middle-class.
The Lexical Diffusion  suggests, sound changes happen word by word. First
theory: sound change doesn’t occur in all words or environments at the same time
E.g. some environments more susceptible to change. Moreover, change might be
incorporated in some words, before others.
General rate of change is “S-curve” like. This pattern suggest:
 Phase A: In beginning, new pronunciation found in a few words only
(words belonging to sub-groups).
 Phase B: change spreads to other words more rapidly. Steep rise in
curve
 Phase C: rate of change slows down – a few last words undergo the
change.
Linguistic variability and social prestige

English = language of large-scale societies – socially stratified – BUT upward mobility
is possible! NOT like the “Caste” system in India. People can aspire
It has been argued that most people adopt variants of high social prestige and
not stigmatized ones. It is claimed to bring certain social advantages, however,
48

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
especially inner cities and rural areas maintain low-status varieties – vernacular
maintenance. For understanding this, social networking is important. There is
hypothesis that vernacular forms associated positively with integration into a
community’s social network. Social network = informal/formal social relationships
individuals maintain. Two criteria for social network description  density and
multiplexity.
Density  number of connections/links in a network. Low-density network –
individuals usually know central member but NOT each other. A high-density network
– members are known to each other and interact with each other.
Multiplexity  content of network links. When members are interlinked in more
than one function E.g. relative, friend etc. = multiplex network. Uniplex network –
members interlinked in only one relation.
Multiplex networks usually found in rural villages/urban working class = close-
knit networks. Upper classes = more uniplex and low network density. Mulitplex
networks  act as norm-enforcement mechanisms, imposing behaviour E.g. dress,
conduct, language. Those norms NOT necessarily prestigious!
Milroys fieldstudy in Belfast:
Three lower-working class communities: Ballymacarrett, the Clonard, the Hammer 
all haunted by “social malaise” = unemployment, sickness, juvenile crime etc.
Multiplex networks were found with all of them. AIM: access local vernacular in its
most natural form. Fieldwork strategy used  participant observation = researcher
becomes part of community, neither real insider, nor real outsider. RESULT: men
higher vernacular use due to stronger network ties which acted as norm –
enforcement mechanism. Furthermore, early adopters of change usually well
integrated into local network, but have regular/brief contacts with people from
“outside”. Using the standard language  high social status, using vernacular 
solidarity with local people, customs, norms. Vernacular use especially typical in
dense/multiplex network structures – typical for rural areas/old urban-working class.
3.) What different kinds of language variation exist?

Dialect
Investigated language variation as a result of geographical location. It is
obvious that people, who consider themselves to speak the same language, have
49

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
different words/different pronunciation for the same thing. There are two principles
underlying dialect variation:
 languages change over time E.g. new words added in order to deal with new
concepts, through contact with other languages, phonetic drift)
 people who communicate with each other tend to speak similarly
Dialectology  search for locally and geographically determined differences in

language. For each locality they encounter, dialectologists want to find out the typical
local vocabulary/pronunciation. Accounting for different variants of a language E.g.
“toot” for “bag” help scientists to recognize major regional differences.
Geographical space is not enough to account for language variation E.g.
Franco-Italian border, the political distinction is enough to make clear that Italian
dialects are talked here now, and no more French ones.  Then, what language a
dialect belongs to is socially and politically influenced, rather than purely linguistic.
It has been remarked that a language is a dialect with a flag and an army.
Geographical or spatial (räumlich) isolation are regularly transformed into powerful
mechanisms for asserting (geltend machen, behaupten) and recognizing social
differences.
Styles
There are also variations within individual speakers coming from a single location
E.g. usage of “don’t” and “do not”. Research has proved that everybody has
patterned variation in pronunciation of single words, and in grammar.  Why? = due
to notion of style and dimensions of formality. At times, we are more careful, and at
times we are more relaxed about the way we speak. Consequently, we have varying
levels of attention to how we speak. Our language provides us with diverse levels
which can be divided up in different ways – and each language has its own way of
doing this.
There are clearly levels of stylistic variation in language. A very important
research in this field was carried out by Labov in New York. He conducted
sociolinguistic interviews and found evidence for the informal style being used when
addressing a child, when offering a cup of coffee to interviewer, or when interviewee
50

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
became excited about certain things. He elicited formal style by given the
interviewees a passage to read or by reading a list of words given. Labov elicited the
informal style by asking subjects to tell an emotional story.
One can explain this stylistic variation with the care that speakers/writers take.
 The more formal the situation  the more careful we are about our language use.
Due to this principle we are more likely to conform to the favoured and educated
norms within the society we live. This results from the effects that formal education,
that wants to pass on the prestigious norms that we consider to be literacy, has on
individuals.
Attention and care are good reasons for stylistic language use, but it leaves
open the
question of where the norm actually comes from? 
 audience design = speakers who can control more varieties chose them
according to the audience they are confronted with E.g. choose
informal style when talking to strangers to sound friendly etc. The
speaker, consciously or not, chooses stylistic level appropriate for the
audience he/she wishes to address.
 unconscious accommodation  we automatically adjust our speech in
order to be more like that of our speaking partner.
Both those notions show us the importance of language in establishing social

relations and representing a speakers sense of identity. The two concepts mentioned
are in opposition to normativism – purist who claim that there is only one ‘correct’
version.
 Dialects are variations that are located regionally/socially, whereas style

refers to differences in degree of formality.
 A third set of variation is register = marked by special set of vocabulary
E.g. technical technology which is often associated with a profession or
occupation or other defined social groups. Is a variety of language to be
used in specific situations with particular roles distributed.
51

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
 A jargon is then an “in-group variety” brought to live by invention of new

words for new concepts of the group E.g. computer vocabulary –
“hacking”.
Such jargons do not only serve to label new and needed words, but they are
especially socially important as they establish bonds between members and enforce
boundaries for outsiders. E.g. If you cannot understand my jargon, you don’t belong
to my group. E.g. The goal of Thieves and underworld jargons was to make it
incomprehensible for outsiders.
Dialects, styles, and registers are ways of labelling varieties of language. They
result out of the try to explain linguistic variation by associating it to social features.
4.) What does Hymes mean by "the appropriate"? How can it be linked with
the other three principles
The human competence to communicate consists of grammatical competence
(speakers ability to form and interpret sentences) and pragmatic competence (ability
to use expressions to achieve desired effect).
The “grammatical competence” refers to the possible – to the semantic meaning of
language and the “pragmatic competence” refers to what is appropriate E.g. What to
say WHEN, HOW etc.
When we want to appropriately produce language we take into account our audience,
the context given etc.
However, some argue that judgements about language use can be made on the
account of 4 aspects:
 Whether (and to what degree) something is formally possible
 Whether (and to what degree) something is feasible
 Whether –“- something is appropriate (adequate, happy,
successful) in relation to the context given
 Whether something is in fact done, actually
“performed” and what this performance brings about.
On account of those questions, some observations can be made: a normal member
of a speech community has knowledge of all four aspects mentioned above.
52

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
The Possible Refers to language code and what you can make with it  semantic
meaning. What is correct = !culturally dependent! How to formulate utterances to
make them processable for P2. E.g. The mouse the cat the dog the man the woman
married beat chased ate had white tail.  Is impossible to process even if it’s
grammatically correct..
The Feasibility – the processibility – area of what goes on in the brain. It is closely
linked to psycholinguistics - deals with in how far individuals use and understand
language and link this to mental processes. Speakers can estimate how feasible
certain grammar is. The feasibility controls our choice of what we pick from the
language code. There are certain principles we use when aiming for feasibility:
 Precautionary principle – Belt and braces principle: We select from wealth of
different possible choices to get our message across. Sometimes we
“overuse” our resources in order to overcome “the noise channel” E.g.
difficulty of hearing. In such situations we take out insurance for feasibility by
redundancy  we say more than is required E.g. provide same information
twice.
 Least-effort principle: Producing language = time costly process. We tend to
use as little as possible for our purposes. Reduce amount of language for
efficiencies sake.
The Derivational Theory of Complexity (DTC) – this theory says that difficulty of
comprehension derives from the number of transformations that were added on to
the original structure of the “easy understandable – kernel sentence”.
5.) What is the communicative competence?

Communicative competence consists of grammatical competence (speakers ability to
form and interpret sentences) and pragmatic competence (ability to use expressions
to achieve desired effect).
A competence involving the acquisition of language as appropriate E.g. when
to speak, when not, what to talk about when, etc. This competence goes hand in
hand with attitudes, values, and motivations for language, its features and uses.
Moreover, it involves the interrelation of language with the code of other participants
53

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
in speaking. This competence is about the internalization of attitudes towards a

language and its uses. The acquisition of such a competence is fed by social
experience, needs, motives, and issues in action that are, again, full of motives,
needs and experiences. Language is not only about referential meaning and sound!
The communicative competence designs language as a face toward communicative
conduct and social life.
6.) Difference between theoretical, descriptive and applied linguistics.

 Theoretical linguistics – Theory of human language. Most concerned with
developing models of linguistic knowledge. The core of their studies are
syntax, phonology, morphology, and semantics. It is also searching for
linguistic universals – sth that all languages have in common.
 Descriptive linguistics – describe languages and how their theory is realised in
their language. Always a particular language in mind. Objectively analyzing
how languages are spoken.
 Applied linguistics – How does the abstract relate to real world experience?
What can abstract tell us about the real world. Experience of language of
actual users is central.
Applied linguistics
How does abstraction now refer back to reality? How can we make us of abstract and
help users out there in the world . Tries to clarify and explain certain experiences. It
takes of a role of mediation between abstract and the real speaking world. On the
basis of having understood the language oneself/having the expertise of it linguists
can intervene with reality and exploit abstract knowledge to create new realities. It
engages with real-world problems and tries to solve them professionally. E.g.
Language Teaching
7.) What is the cooperative principle? Do people always conform to it?

The Co-operative principle
Grice/philosopher: We make contribution to conversation, according to the stage, the
purpose, the direction which is appropriate in the talk of exchange we are in.
54

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
Both, P1 and P2 assume (have underlying knowledge) that it is NORMAL to

cooperate in order to reach their communicative goal  cooperative principle behind
every communication. The Cooperative consists of 4 maxims:
 Maxim of Quality  P1 assumes that what P2 says is true and vice versa. We
do not say what the other thinks is false – we always want to be taken serious,
we do not say sth. for which P2 lacks adequate evidence.
 Maximum of Quantity  P1 and P2 assume that both will say as much as is
necessary and not more or less – avoid unnecessary information – only as
much as P1 and P2 need in order to understand each other. Make contribution
as informative as the purpose requires – NOT more informative than required.
 Maximum of Relation  Both assume that they say sth. relating to ongoing
conversation. MAKE YOUR CONTRIBUTION RELEVANT.
 Maximum of Manner  P1 and P2 will speak as clearly, comprehensible and
understandable as possible.
Ground rules of conversation! All speakers have this in mind and agree to use these
cooperate principles.
P1 and P2 can make use of implicatures  helpers to create effect of utterance. Help
you to reveal attitude to sth. E.g. irony, sarcasm, dramatic tone etc. E.g. Tony Blair is
a poodle – both speakers know it is untrue, but it creates effect.
We can violate those four principles, but if other recognises it as intended violation, it
can create an effect. We always have to be careful about the conventions of
communication E.g. in a telegram it is common to be brief – in normal conversation
this can be considered impolite. E.g. poetry is aimed to be obscure - wants to create
interest – draw people in story.
The area of cooperation is also an area of shared territory. Both, P1 and P2

have a life space on their own – their face which both do not want to lose.
(knowledge, personal feelings etc. – culturally dependent) and we are all protecting
this “territory”. We all have to respect the others territory – not invading it! The
assignment of territory is always made in advance and is NOT NEGOTIATIABLE!!!
55

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
Therefore there is politeness which helps to protect our private space.

CONSEQUENTLY there are 2 forces operating: the force to converge/to cooperate
and the force for protecting one’s territory.  Those two features determine
communication greatly: We HAVE TO cooperate without infringing territory. E.g.
Telephone conversation in GB. P2 (picking up telephone) speaks first, NOT P1 who
is phoning.
Relations between P1 and P2 in terms of reference and address:

How I refer to sb is according to relation/attitude that I have towards this person.
Whenever we make reference to external event – resources available to position
ourselves – to express our attitude towards sth. Language provides us with a wealth
of differently connotated words – can be either loaded negatively or positively – we
chose what we think best fits what we want to convey. E.g. “fat” and “plumb” or “bold”
and “foolhardy” (töricht).
When P1 and P2 communicate they negotiate their relationship by using
different terms of address – The choice of reference signals the relationship – but
also to protect the territory.
8.) Ambiguity – Why does it occur?

The surface structure can also be decoded in many different ways 
ambiguity E.g. they decided on the boat on the train. = On the train, they decided on
the boat / On the boat, they decided on the train. Chomsky made a distinction
between the surface structure (sequence of constituents) and the deep structure (all
things not signalled on the surface).
 Divergence: generated from one common structure, but realised in 2 different
ways on the surface. The deep structure diverging into two surface structures
E.g. Passive and Active Structures.
 Convergence: One realisation on the surface which can be decoded into two
underlying structures. Convergence of two deep structures. Two different
things converge into two surface structures.
Ambiguity can be cause be ambiguities of sense, reference and structure.
56

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
Structural ambiguity
Source of ambiguity is syntactic. Ambiguity originates from a deficiency in decoding
pieces of language E.g. The Bishop walked among the pilgrims eating their picnic
lunches.. Bishop or pilgrims who ate the picnic?
Ambiguity can happen through: homonymy (same spelling + same pronunciation
BUT different meaning), polysemy (a sign can have multiple meanings E.g. bank)
9.) What does corpus linguistic reveal about language

A corpus is a store of used language. Considering actual performed texts - gathers
together wide range of actual conversation products – store them and looks at them
closely. Reveals a lot of information that would not be possible to get out of Native
Speakers. BUT it does not contain new information.
Findings of corpora always dependent on the form of a word (Adverb,
Adjective, Verb etc.) and the context. If a corpus was actually very very big – it could
represent a language. Corpora most commonly made of writing native speakers
produce and it is descriptive (used for a particular purpose, interest in what it has
been used for) and NOT applied.
PROBLEMS WITH CORPORA

 They can only show what HAS HAPPEND – NOT what could have happened
or what will be performed. It is only a picture of the moment – these results
change over time – even within a short period of time all the results may not
really represent the speaking world anymore.
 Corpora only show their own contents E.g. a statement about evidence, is a
statement about this very corpus you got it from, NOT about language
 It can offer evidence but give no information – does not tell you what certain
phrases like “something of a” mean. Only offers plenty of examples – user has
to interpret them.
 Presents language out of its context – understanding certain aspects of
language depends upon encountering them in their visual and social context.
57

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
Corpora can show frequency, phraseology (how sentences are formed), and
collocation:
 Indicate relative frequency  Corpus can be arranged in order of the
frequency of words. 2 criteria (grammar words more frequent than lexical
words) most frequent conceptual meaning is given first. The more frequent a
word, the more general its meaning – semantically speaking they are more
empty – the meaning can only be added by the rest of the phrase – need other
words to their lexical meaning complete E.g. do, get, have can etc. Words that
appear only once = hapax legomena. Frequency useful for identifying possible
differences between corpora.
 Co-occurreces  shows the company words keep with others – collocations –
AND idiomatic features – they are stored as chunks.
 Patterns of occurrence  corpora can give account of how and how often
words occur and in which patterns What collocations do most frequently occur
with a word? E.g. “eye” “eyes” – do they enter in the same patterns in texts. –
Can tell you whether words are synonyms e.g.
It can tell us about the company of words, we can observe regularities or differences
we would not encounter when words were in their natural context. They can be used
for language teaching (how language works, get the nuances, establish norms of
frequency, investigate cultural attitudes.
2 Models of interpretation: Open choice + idiomatic principle

Open choice principle  text = result of a very large number of complex choices
where grammar serves as only constraint. Language = “slot-and-filler” principle. Texts
are a series of slots which have to be filled with the words from our lexicon available.
At each slot, virtually any word can occur – complex pattern of choices going on.
The idiom principle  Words don’t occur at random in texts. Nature and world
around us is reflected in organisation of our language. The principle is that speakers
have a large number of semi-prefabricated phrases available to them. When we want
to speak we don’t assemble word by word in the moment given  We draw on pre-
fabricated chunks stored in our head. We actually already know which words go
together with others - ! Non native speakers.
58

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
What reason for formation of collocations?  Mostly through conventions within a

community – it may reflect the reoccurrence of similar situations in human affairs.
LINK TO least effort principle  very economical to have prefabricated structures –
no composing of every bit of language.
10.) Linguistic models.

Models and Maps
Abstraction involves idealization of actual data  constructing models of linguistic
description. Such models are intended to be removed from familiar reality and are
supposed to have little resemblance to it – NO INVALIDATION! The validity of models
lies in the fact that it reveals what is not so apparent. Linguistic models are therefore
an abstraction, at a remove from familiar experience.  A model is an idealized
version of reality  incidental information removed to give way to essential. Models
comparable to maps. Map: does not show things as they really are – vast amount of
detail left out because there is not enough room and to avoid distraction. E.g. map of
London underground: little resemblance to real tracks, it’s twists and turns, no
indication about distance between stations, no connection to world above ground.
This map – useless for finding way on foot. Merely designed for people to be able to
use the tube and leaves out everything else which is not relevant to this purpose. 
The same true for maps of complex landscape of language. Certain issues will be
identified as being particularly significant and they are given prominence by avoiding
distraction of detail. Models = simplified and selective. They are idealized versions of
reality, designed to reveal certain things by concealing others. No all purpose
model/No all purpose map. Their validity is always relative, never absolute. Designed
to explain experience but not expected to correspond with it. None can capture the
whole truth. The purpose dictates the design of the model. Both, in cartography and
linguistics important to know about what scale to use, what dimensions to identify
and where, in the interest of explanation, to draw the line between idealized
abstractions and actual reality.
59

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
11.) What is social stratification?

Social stratification
This term refers to the study of class distinction in speech. Labov’s survey in New
York showed the class distinction in speech. In the beginning, the usage of post-
vocalic “r” after a vowel could have been due to free variation = sometimes use
certain features, then, they don’t. This principle foresees that the choice of variants
was uncontrolled and without significance  unsatisfactory. The percentage or “-r
coloration, correlated closely with the social level of the customers of the store.
Labov actually found a higher percentage of use of the prestigious “-r less”
pronunciation on the more expensive floors of the store. In cities, variations in speech
provide clear evidence of social status.
Historical differences may on the one hand, be the original cause of social
differentiation E.g. immigrants in cities. There may also be socially marked
stratification within a single language E.g. New York is the classic case Each social
level showed had a similar gradation (Staffelung) according to style or degree of
formality. E.g. In casual speech, the upper-middle class would use a stigmatized form
10 % of the time, the lower-middle class about 20 %, the working class 80 % and the
lower class about 90 %.  Thus, the same feature differentiated the stylistic level
and the social level.
These fairly fine differences do not interfere with intelligibility, but help New Yorkers to
identify themselves and each other socially. Sometimes these subtle markers do this
more effectively than criteria like income and education.
There is also the phenomenon of hypercorrection  to overuse socially desirable
features in careful speech. E.g. It was found that the upwardl-y mobile and insecure
lower-middle class would tend to overuse such expressions.
Accommodation and audience design

How doe dialectal and stylistic differences occur? – People tend to talk like the
people they are together with the most. Physical and social isolation of speech
communities account for the fact why languages/dialects remain rather distinct and
unaffected E.g. social differences like the Castes in India lead to differences in
speech.
60

lOMoARcPSD|37909893
Accommodation – tendency for speech to move closely together. Choice of

vocabulary, grammatical form, and even pronunciation moves towards that of your
interlocutor (Gesprächspartner). The opposite is also true: When people choose to
move away from the other party, rather than converging. One can choose to
converge with an absent audience of speech community (slang for presenting group
membership).
Thus, we can conclude that the existence of language variation is not accidental
or meaningless. It adds a vital set of social dimensions which make it possible for
language to reflect and record an individual’s demographic, geographic, sociological,
educational and religious background. It helps to constitute identity, claim solidarity,
expresses attitudes towards power and prestige. Making use of language for
identifying group members can be harmful in terms of prejudices. The more stratified
(geschichtet) a society, it is more likely that speaking a prestige variety will be
rewarded, and that speaking a non-standard variety will lead to prejudicial treatment.
12.) What is a language/What purposes does it serve?

language = means of interaction between people = social phenomenon. Serves to
give public expressions to private issues, to communicate with others, to arrive at
agreed meanings and to regulate relationships  languages have to have very
stable codes people accept as condition of membership of communities that use
them. There have to be generally agreed ways of using language in different kinds of
social context!  learning languages act of social conformity. BUT there is always
some room for some private, personal movement by exploiting the potential of the
code (produce unique expressions).
13.) Generally, people are constrained to conventions of the code and its
use, but they can also exploit the potential differently, on different occasions
and for different purposes – a person’s use of language as distinctive as a
fingerprint. On the one hand, language very general and abstract, a shared
and stable body of knowledge of linguistic forms which is established by
conventions of community. At the same time, language is very particular and
variable if we consider the actual linguistic behaviour. The nearer you get to
actuality, the more abstractions appear.
61

Cococu Reader Summary

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cococu Reader Summary

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

lOMoARcPSD|37909893

CoCoCu Reader Summary

Communication Code and Culture (Universität Wien)

Scansiona per aprire su Studocu

Studocu wird von keiner Universität gesponsert oder unterstützt.

Core Lecture Linguistics

SS 2010/Core Lecture Linguistics ©Julia Herzog

Heruntergeladen durch Author 1 (nonodebra@gmail.com)

The scope of linguistics

Every linguist must be detached from actual experience of language – needs to be

SS 2010/Core Lecture Linguistics ©Julia Herzog

Heruntergeladen durch Author 1 (nonodebra@gmail.com)

 Theoretical linguistics – Theory of human language. Most concerned with

Models and Maps

SS 2010/Core Lecture Linguistics ©Julia Herzog

Heruntergeladen durch Author 1 (nonodebra@gmail.com)

Language and parole

SS 2010/Core Lecture Linguistics ©Julia Herzog

Heruntergeladen durch Author 1 (nonodebra@gmail.com)

 langue  shared social code, the abstract system. A collective body of

 Competence  knowledge native speakers have of their language as a

“Knowledge” of language  a bit delicate as we do not necessarily act upon what we

SS 2010/Core Lecture Linguistics ©Julia Herzog

Heruntergeladen durch Author 1 (nonodebra@gmail.com)

which set constraints and conditions upon us as we act. Linguistic behaviour

SS 2010/Core Lecture Linguistics ©Julia Herzog

Heruntergeladen durch Author 1 (nonodebra@gmail.com)

How do we get linguistic data?

When we consider Chomsky’s issue about “competence” we encounter

Knowledge and ability

SS 2010/Core Lecture Linguistics ©Julia Herzog

Heruntergeladen durch Author 1 (nonodebra@gmail.com)

Chomsky’s “formal grammar” wants to identify particular features of syntax

Communicative competence consists of grammatical competence (speakers

SS 2010/Core Lecture Linguistics ©Julia Herzog

Heruntergeladen durch Author 1 (nonodebra@gmail.com)

Grammar purports to be a description of the ideal speaker-hearer’s intrinsic

A generative grammar, then, is a system of rules that assign structural

SS 2010/Core Lecture Linguistics ©Julia Herzog

Heruntergeladen durch Author 1 (nonodebra@gmail.com)

SS 2010/Core Lecture Linguistics ©Julia Herzog

Heruntergeladen durch Author 1 (nonodebra@gmail.com)

Considerations of “performance” and “competence”

Performance and competence under a sociocultural point of view.

SS 2010/Core Lecture Linguistics ©Julia Herzog

Heruntergeladen durch Author 1 (nonodebra@gmail.com)

SS 2010/Core Lecture Linguistics ©Julia Herzog

Heruntergeladen durch Author 1 (nonodebra@gmail.com)

Code and Message

SS 2010/Core Lecture Linguistics ©Julia Herzog

Heruntergeladen durch Author 1 (nonodebra@gmail.com)

Considering language as a message, phrases will be the unit required. An

SS 2010/Core Lecture Linguistics ©Julia Herzog

Heruntergeladen durch Author 1 (nonodebra@gmail.com)

Analysing phrases and clauses

The units of language

SS 2010/Core Lecture Linguistics ©Julia Herzog

Heruntergeladen durch Author 1 (nonodebra@gmail.com)

Compromise position: Grammar exists to make communication of meaning possible,

Different cultures encode different aspects of reality in grammars of their

SS 2010/Core Lecture Linguistics ©Julia Herzog

Heruntergeladen durch Author 1 (nonodebra@gmail.com)

SS 2010/Core Lecture Linguistics ©Julia Herzog