PHONETIC-PHONOLOGICAL AND PROSODICAL TYPOLOGY.
The typology of sound organization of languages arose in the 20th century. Its pioneers were members of the Prague Linguistic Circle. Thanks to the achievements of structural phonology (N.S. Trubetskoy), typological studies of the sound organization of languages developed quickly and successfully.
(1) According to the number of vowels in the language:
Vocalic (the number of vowels exceeds the average) - Danish, English, German, French.
Consonantal (the number of consonants exceeds the average) - Slavic languages, Arabic, Hebrew, Persian.
Due to articulatory and physiological reasons, in the languages of the world there are generally fewer vowel sound types than consonants. Therefore, even in maximally vocal languages, the number of vowels rarely exceeds 50% of total number phonemes. While the number of consonants in consonantal languages can reach 98% of the total inventory.
(2) By type of sound chains and syllable structure:
Syllabic, that is, languages in which there are many restrictions imposed by the entire phonetic structure of the language on the compatibility of sounds. Valid syllables are combinations of “given” sounds. The number of different syllables is also strictly limited. (languages of China and Southeast Asia)
Non-syllabic/phonemic, i.e. languages where the main unit of meaning is the phoneme. The number of allowed syllables is more varied, although different languages have very different restrictions (Arabic, Swedish, German, English)
(3) By the nature of the stress:
Tonic, i.e. languages with tonic stress (Chinese languages, ancient Greek, Serbian, Croatian, Swedish, Lithuanian). With tonic stress percussion sound stands out by raising or lowering the tone.
Atonic, i.e. languages with dynamic stress (English, German, most Slavic languages). At dynamic stress the impact sound is released by the high pressure of the exhaled breath air jet and greater muscular tension in the articulation of the stressed syllable.
Quantitative stress ( stressed syllable distinguished by the duration of its sound) is typologically possible, but in reality it does not occur independently.
In a particular language, as a rule, one type of stress is represented - tonic or dynamic. However, there are still languages in which two types of stress occur at once (Danish). Swedish uses all 3 types of stress, often in the same word.
MORPHOLOGICAL TYPES OF LANGUAGES.
Morphological typology is chronologically the first and most developed area of typological research. It takes into account the ways of expressing grammatical meanings and the nature of the connection of morphemes in a word.
(1) According to the way of expressing grammatical meanings:
Synthetic, i.e. languages that are characterized by the combination of a grammatical indicator (prefix, suffix, ending, change of stress, internal inflection) with the word itself (Slavic languages, Sanskrit, Latin, Arabic)
Analytical, i.e. languages that are characterized by the expression of grammatical meaning outside the word, separately from it. For example: using prepositions, conjunctions, articles, auxiliary verbs. (Romance languages, Bulgarian, English)
Insulating, i.e. languages in which a number of grammatical meanings (syntactic, relational) are expressed separately from the lexical meaning of a word (Chinese, Vietnamese, Khmer, Thai).
Incorporating/polysynthetic, i.e. languages in which words are “overburdened” with various auxiliary and dependent root morphemes. Such a word turns into a sentence in meaning, but at the same time remains formalized as a word. (some Indian languages, Chukchi, Koryak).
(2) By the nature of the connection of morphemes:
Agglutinative (Turkic, Dravidian, Australian languages). In an agglutinative word, the boundaries between morphemes are quite distinct, while each affix has only 1 meaning and each meaning is always expressed by 1 affix.
Inflectional/fusional (ancient Greek, Latin, Slavic languages, English, French). A fusion word is characterized by the fact that service morphemes simultaneously express several grammatical meanings. For example: in the word wall, inflection –a has 3 meanings: zh.r., im. case, singular)
CONTENSIVE TYPOLOGY.
CONTENSIVE TYPOLOGY is research whose objects are subject-object structures of sentences.
Typological similarities and differences in syntax different languages to a certain extent are revealed already in morphological typology. However, in the categories of morphology it is impossible to understand the main subject of syntactic typology - the similarities and differences of languages in the structure of the sentence. On this basis, the typology reveals syntactic types languages.
(1) According to the structure of the language:
Nominative, i.e. languages in which the entire structure of the sentence is aimed at maximizing the distinction between the subject of an action and its object (Indo-European, Turkic, Mongolian languages)
Ergative, i.e. languages in which the structure of the sentence is focused on maximum differentiation of more active actions and less active actions (Ibero-Caucasian, Papuan languages)
Active, i.e. languages in which the opposition of active and inactive action is expressed with greater consistency than in ergative languages (autochthonous languages of Northern and South America)
Cool, i.e. languages that are characterized by the division of the main parts of speech into semantic classes. For example: categories of animals, plants, long, narrow, short objects. Each class corresponds to certain sentence structures. (languages Central Africa)
Neutral, i.e. languages that (due to insufficient knowledge) can be characterized by the absence of those features that make up the differences between other systems (the languages of West Africa).
(2) In word order:
Languages with free vocabulary (Slavic languages)
Fixed word languages (Japanese, Korean)
(3) According to the relative position of members in subordinate constructions:
Centripetal/ascending (cheese → Dutch). (Caucasian, Dravidian, Ural-Altaic languages)
Centrifugal/descending (Dutch ← cheese). (Semitic, Australonesian languages)
Moderately centripetal (Greek, Latin, English)
Moderately centrifugal (Italian, Spanish, Celtic languages)
(4) According to the method of syntactic development of the phrase:
The natural development of a phrase - the order of words or phrases reflects the order in which the components of thought appear in the speaker’s mind, or even the chronology of events or the hierarchy of objects.
The syntactic development of a phrase - the order of words - is guided by the models and schemes for the realization of thought developed in the language.
SOCIOLINGUISTIC TYPOLOGY OF LANGUAGES.
The fate of languages, their social history and the perspectives are profoundly different. And there is no social equality between languages. In a sociolinguistic “questionnaire” of languages, it is advisable to take into account following signs:
1. communicative rank of a language, corresponding to the volume and variety of communication in a particular language. The volume of communication is distributed extremely unevenly among the world's languages. A significant part of the volume of communication on largest languages The world consists of communication outside those ethnic groups or countries for which the corresponding languages are autochthonous. In sociolinguistics, there are 5 communicative ranks of languages, determined depending on the functions of languages in interstate and interethnic communication:
World languages are the languages of interethnic and interstate communication that have the status of official and working languages of the UN: English, Arabic, Spanish, Chinese, Russian, French.
International languages– languages that are widely used in international and interethnic communication and have legal status state or official language in a number of countries (Portuguese, Spanish)
State (national) languages - languages that have the legal status of a state or official language and actually perform the functions of the main language in one country (Thai, Georgian)
Regional languages– languages of interethnic communication, usually written, but not having the status of official or state language(Breton, Catalan)
Local languages are generally unwritten languages spoken orally. informal communication only inside ethnic groups in multiethnic societies.
2. the presence of writing and the duration of the written tradition. Of the 5-6 thousand languages of the Earth, only 600-650 languages have a written language. The presence of writing expands the communicative capabilities of language. However, in modern world It is the multifunctionality of the language that ensures the viability of his writing.
3. the degree of normalization of the language, the presence and nature of codification. The sociolinguistic parameter “standardization of language” is associated with the assessment of the integrity of the language. Different ethnic languages may differ significantly from each other in how much their components language education(dialects, Koine, etc.) are close to each other. In other words, how uniform, internally homogeneous and consolidated is the national language? Standardization aspects:
Does the language have a supra-dialectal formation that speakers of dialects use in interdialectal communication? If there is no supra-dialectal form of communication, then a national language standard has not yet emerged.
The relationship between this supra-dialectal means of communication and dialects. How more people speak a literary language, the closer the literary language is to dialects, the stronger degree uniformity, i.e. standardization of the ethnic language.
The degree of codification, i.e. representation literary norm in normative grammars and dictionaries.
The degree of difference between national variants of multiethnic languages.
4. type of standardized (literary) language, its relationship with non-standardized forms of language existence (dialects, vernaculars, etc.).
5. legal status of the language (state, official, constitutional, title, official language of the state, language autonomous republic, language of indigenous nationality, language of nationality; official, working, authentic, documentary, semi-documentary, etc.) and its actual position in multilingual conditions
6. confessional status of the language. The main confessional functions of prophetic languages became available to languages - to be the language of Scripture and worship. However, while performing the functions of religious languages, new confessional languages are not considered sacred.
7. educational and pedagogical status of the language. IN educational institutions languages perform 3 main functions:
The language is used as an aid in teaching some other language
Language taught in
Language is academic subject
Genealogical classification of languages.
Genealogical classification of languages, a classification based on the genetic principle, i.e., grouping languages related by origin into language families. G.K.I. became possible only after the emergence of the concept of linguistic kinship and the establishment of the principle of historicism in linguistic research (19th century). It develops as a result of studying languages using the comparative historical method. Being historical and genetic in nature, G.K.I., in contrast to the multiplicity of typological and areal classifications, exists in the form of a single scheme. Being linguistic, it does not coincide with anthropological and, in particular, does not imply that peoples speaking related languages belong to one race. To prove the genetic relationship of languages, the existence in language development systemic trends. In this case, a specific criterion is the presence of systematic relationships - regular sound correspondences in the original material (in the dictionary, grammatical elements) of languages. However, the lack of identification of the latter between the languages being compared does not yet allow us to assert the absence of kinship between them, since it may be too distant for any systematic relationships to be detected in the material of the languages.
Although the formation of language families occurs constantly, their formation, as a rule, dates back to the era before the advent of class society. In the presence of phenomena of parallel and convergent development of languages, the leading role in this process belongs to the factor of linguistic differentiation. Language families are usually divided into more small groups, uniting languages that are genetically more closely related to each other; the emergence of many of them dates back to a very late time: cf. as part of the Indo-European languages Slavic, Germanic, Italic (which gave rise to Romance languages), Celtic, Indo-Iranian and other groups. Modern G.K.I. does not provide grounds for supporting the concept of monogenesis of the world's languages, popular in old linguistics.
Among the most famous language families of Eurasia and Oceania: Indo-European, Uralic, Turkic, Mongolian, Tungus-Manchu, Chukchi-Kamchatka, Tibeto-Chinese, Mon-Khmer, Malayo-Polynesian, Dravidian, Munda. In Africa they see only four large families languages: Semitic-Hamitic, or Afro-Asiatic (also widespread in the adjacent territory of Asia), Nilo-Saharan, Congo-Kordofanian, Khoisan. The least satisfactorily developed genealogical classification of the autochthonous languages of America (in particular, the opinion of E. Sapir on the distribution of the languages of North America between six language families has not yet been confirmed) and Australia, where it is not yet clearly distinguished from the typological one. Due to the difficulty of distinguishing remotely related languages and unrelated in some cases there are purely hypothetical constructions: cf. the concepts of Altaic (as part of the Turkic, Mongolian, Tungus-Manchu languages and sometimes Korean), Caucasian (as part of the Abkhaz-Adyghe, Kartvelian and Nakh-Dagestan languages) and Nostratic (as part of several large language families of Eurasia) families. Within the framework of known language families, the so-called also find their place. mixed languages: cf. the Indo-European identity of almost all creole languages. At the same time, certain languages are also known that do not display genetic connections with others that can be considered as the only representatives of special families: for example, Basque - in Europe, Ket, Burusha, Nivkh, Ainu - in Asia, Kutenai, Zuni, Keres - in America.
Morphological classification of languages.
Morphological classification of languages, classification based on similarities and differences language structure, as opposed to the genealogical classification of languages. Until linguistic typology set as its goal the creation of a typological classification of languages, all typological classifications were almost exclusively morphological, since morphology for a long time was the most developed area of linguistics. However, M. k. I. was not initially thought of as being associated exclusively with the morphological level of language, but received its name due to the fact that the focus of its creators was formal aspect language.
Basic concepts of M.K.I. - morpheme and word; main criteria: the nature of the morphemes combined in a word (lexical - grammatical), the method of their combination (pre- or postposition of grammatical morphemes, which is directly related to syntax; agglutination - fusion, which relates to the field of morphonology); the relationship between morpheme and word (isolation, when morpheme = word, analyticism / synthetism of word formation and inflection), associated with syntax. M.K.I. seeks to characterize not specific languages, in which several morphological types are always represented, but the basic structural phenomena and trends that exist in languages. M.K.I. was created and improved during the 19th century. German linguists A. Schlegel, H. Steinthal, W. Humboldt, A. Schleicher, and others. The American linguist E. Sapir tried to streamline the criteria of linguistic linguistics and introduced the concept of a degree of quality, based on the fact that a particular type can be realized in a language to a greater or lesser extent (for example, a language can be “almost amorphous” or “in highest degree agglutinative"), and created a flexible classification scale, bringing M.K.Y. data closer to real state specific languages. Since the beginning of the 20th century, i.e. since linguistic knowledge about the structure of language as a whole and the characteristics of languages has expanded significantly various types and language families, the creation of a general typological classification is neither the main nor the most pressing task of typology. It became obvious that a classification free from the shortcomings of traditional M.K.I. (fuzziness of basic concepts, lack of differentiation between different types of classification criteria, lack of development of ideas about necessary and sufficient criteria, inconsistency with specific language structures) and also includes phonological, syntactic, semantic characteristics language structure cannot currently be created. However, there are some trends in typology that fruitfully use the data of M.K.I. Thus, the American linguist J. Greenberg introduces a number of new criteria and the principle into Sapir’s classification quantification properties of the language.
Czech linguist V. Skalicka and other representatives of the so-called characterological typology study intrastructural patterns, according to which certain typological features are combined in one language, i.e. they develop characteristics of a language type. Soviet linguist B. A. Uspensky classifies linguistic elements and their groups according to ordered criteria, followed by languages according to the presence / absence of certain groups of elements in them, and languages are characterized relative to a certain standard language, structured in accordance with general principles M.K.I., interpreted accordingly.
Typological (morphological) classification (hereinafter referred to as TC) involves the division of languages into groups based on differences in the methods of formation of grammatical forms (independent of their genetic relationship).
In TC, languages are united on the basis common features, reflecting the most essential features of the language system.
Linguistic typology is a comparative study of the structural and functional properties of languages, regardless of the nature of the genetic relationships between them. The typological study of languages aims to establish the similarities and differences of languages (linguistic systems), which are rooted in the most common and most important properties language (for example, in the way morphemes are connected) and do not depend on their genetic relationship.
TC appeared after the genealogical (at the turn of the 18th-19th centuries.), although the material began to appear in the 16th century. If the genealogical classification is determined by the common origin of languages, then the TC is based on the commonality of linguistic type and structure (i.e., by the commonality of the word).
The founders of TC are considered to be August-Wilhelm and Friedrich Schlegel.
F. Schlegel compared Sanskrit with Greek, Latin, as well as with Turkic languages and came to the conclusion:
- that all languages can be divided into two types: inflectional and affixing,
- that any language is born and remains in the same type,
- that inflected languages are characterized by “richness, strength and durability”, and affixative ones “from the very beginning lack living development”, they are characterized by “poverty, scarcity and artificiality”.
August-Wilhelm Schlegel, taking into account the objections of F. Bopp and other linguists (It is clear that all the languages of the world cannot be divided into two types. Where should we include, for example, the Chinese language, where there is neither internal inflection nor regular affixation?), revised typological classification of his brother’s languages (“Notes on the Provençal language and literature”, 1818) and defined three types: 1) inflectional, 2) affixing, 3) amorphous (which is characteristic of the Chinese language), and in inflectional languages he showed two possibilities grammatical structure: synthetic and analytical.
I approached the question of types of languages much more deeply and finally theoretical principles formulated - W. von Humboldt (1767 – 1835).
Humboldt explained that the Chinese language is not amorphous, but isolating, i.e. the grammatical form in it is manifested differently than in inflectional and agglutinating languages: not by changing words, but by word order and intonation, thus this type is a typically analytical language.
In addition to the three types of languages noted by the Schlegel brothers, Humboldt described a fourth type; the most accepted term for this type is incorporative.
Humboldt noted the absence of “pure” representatives of one or another type of language, constructed as perfect model.
Significant contributions to the development of this typology were made by A. Schleicher, G. Steinthal, E. Sapir, I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay, I.I. Meshchaninov.
A. Schleicher considered isolating or amorphous languages to be archaic, agglutinating languages to be transitional, ancient inflectional languages to be an era of prosperity, and new inflectional (analytical) languages to be an era of decline.
F.F. Fortunatov very subtly showed the difference in the formation of words in Semitic and Indo-European languages, which until recently was not distinguished by linguists: Semitic languages are “inflectional-agglutinative” and Indo-European languages are “inflectional”.
According to this classification, types of (morphological) languages are distinguished:
- inflectional,
- agglutinative,
- insulating (amorphous),
- incorporating (polysynthetic).
Four types of languages.
Inflectional(inflected) languages (hereinafter - FL) - languages that are characterized by inflectional inflection, i.e. inflection through inflection (ending), which can be an expression of several categorical forms. For example, the ending -у in the form pish-u combines the meaning of the 1st person singular. present numbers indicative mood; the ending -a in the form of boards-a indicates nominative singular feminine
The main features of this type of language are: the presence of internal inflection and fusion (alternations are widely used); ambiguity and non-standardity of affixes, i.e. multifunctionality of grammatical morphemes; zero affixes are used both in semantically primary and semantically secondary forms (hands, boots);
the base of the word is often dependent: red-, zva-;
phonetic changes in the composition of the morpheme are carried out by word-formation and
inflectional functions (phonetically not determined root changes);
large number phonetically and semantically unmotivated types of declension and
conjugations.
Typically, FLs are divided into two subclasses: with internal and external inflection.
Inflectional languages include Indo-European languages (Russian, Belarusian, Ukrainian, Czech, Polish, etc., i.e. all Slavic languages, except Bulgarian, Latin, Lithuanian), Semitic languages.
Agglutinative (agglutinating) languages– languages in which word forms
are formed not by changing inflexion, but by agglutination.
Agglutination(from Latin agglutinare - to stick) - a method of forming word forms and derivative words by mechanically attaching standard affixes to unchangeable, devoid of internal inflection, stems or roots (note that each affix has only one grammatical meaning, just as each meaning is always expressed by the same affix). In Turkish, the word form dallarda “on the branches” includes the following morphemes dal – branches, lar – plural. number, da – locative case. On the branch you can translate to Turkish like dalda.
Signs of languages of this type:
- word-formation and inflectional affixation are highly developed;
- there is an immutable root in them,
- weak connection between morphemes,
- standard and unambiguous affixes,
the variation of affixes is regular and is caused by the laws of phonemic alternations (laws of vowel harmony, synharmonism and consonant assimilation), the boundaries of morphemic segments are characterized by clarity,
the phenomena of simplification and re-decomposition are not typical.
Agglutinative languages include Turkic, Finno-Ugric, Altai, Urallanguages, Bantu languages, Japanese, Korean and some other languages.
Insulating(amorphous (Greek amorphos from a- – non-, without- + morphē – form), formless, root, root-isolating) languages – languages that do not have affixes and in which grammatical meanings (case, number, tense, etc.) .) are expressed either by joining one word to another, or by using function words. Since in the languages of this group the word consists of one root, there are no affixes, therefore, there is no such grammatical structure as affixation (the word is equal to the root). For example, in Chinese the same sound complex can be in different parts speech and, accordingly, different members offers. Therefore, the main in grammatical ways are stress and word order in a sentence. semantic distinguishing function in given language performs intonation.
In Chinese, words are formed approximately this way from the word write: rewrite = write - redo, letter = write - subject.
Its main characteristics:
- unchangeable words
- underdeveloped word formation,
- grammatically significant sequence of words,
- weak contrast between meaningful and function words.
Isolating languages are considered Chinese, Burmese, Vietnamese, Laotian,Siamese, Thai, Khmer.
Incorporating (polysynthetic) languages– languages whose grammatical structure is based on incorporation.
Incorporation(Latin incorporatio - association, inclusion in one's composition) (holophrasis, encapsulation, agglomeration, incorporation) - a way of forming words-sentences by adding stem roots (in these languages the root equal to the word) individual words and service elements.
The peculiarity of this type of languages (Indian in America, Paleo-Asian in Asia) is that the sentence is constructed as a complex word, i.e. unformed word roots are agglutinated into one common whole, which will be both a word and a sentence. Parts of this whole are both elements of a word and members of a sentence. The whole is a word-sentence, where the beginning is the subject, the end is the predicate, and additions with their definitions and circumstances are incorporated (inserted) into the middle. Humboldt explained this using a Mexican example:
ninakakwa, where ni is “I”, naka is “eat-” (i.e. “eat”), kwa is the object “meat-”. In the Russian language, three grammatically formed words are obtained: I meat-o eat, and, conversely, such a fully formed combination as an anteater does not constitute a sentence. In order to show how it is possible to “incorporate” in this type of language, we give another example from the Chukchi language: you-ata-kaa-nmy-rkyn - “I kill fat deer”, literally: “I-killed a fat deer -do”, where the skeleton of the “body”: you-nmy-ryn, into which kaa – “deer” and its definition ata – “fat” are incorporated; The Chukchi language does not tolerate any other arrangement, and the whole is a word-sentence, where the above order of elements is observed.
Thus, incorporating languages are characterized by the following features: along with in independent words, these languages have complex complexes: the verb form includes an object, a circumstance of action, and sometimes a subject.
Incorporating languages are similar to agglutinating languages by the principle of combining morphemes, and to inflecting languages by the presence of an internal form.
TO this type languages include Paleo-Asian, Eskimo, Indian languages.
Comparative and typological study of languages. It is highly human nature to compare. This applies to any phenomena of reality, including those languages that a person encounters by chance. So, starting to study foreign language at school, we cannot help but notice its differences from our native language. Especially comparison as a way of cognition underlies any scientific classification. American linguist Edward Sapir wrote in his book “Language”: “Moving from Latin to Russian, we feel that approximately the same horizon limits our views, and this despite the fact that the closest, familiar roadside landmarks have changed. When we come to English language, it begins to seem to us that the surrounding hills have become somewhat flatter, and yet general character we recognize the landscape. But when we get to the Chinese language, it turns out that a completely different sky is shining above us. Translating these metaphors into ordinary language, we can say that all languages are different from each other, but some are much more different than others, and this is tantamount to saying that it is possible to classify them into morphological types.
Comparative-typological linguistics deals with the comparison and subsequent classification of languages by type. The typology can be based on different sides language. Yes, there is phonetic classification languages according to the predominance of vocalism (vocal languages) and consonantism ( consonantal languages). However, the phonetic aspect of language is formal, it is not associated with thinking, and the “linguistic worldview” is not reflected in it (W. Humboldt). The grammar is much more revealing. The typological classification of languages consists of identifying the main types of grammatical structure of languages. The type of language is determined by inflection, word formation and syntax.
Most deeply developed in linguistics morphological classification languages.
Morphological classification of languages, taking into account
the predominance of certain ways and means of expressing grammatical meanings.
The morphological system is a stable level of language, and morphological types have a fairly stable set of features that can become the basis for classification. The first experiments in morphological classification date back to the 18th century; detailed description morphological types were proposed in the works of W. Humboldt ( early XIX century), A. Schleicher (mid-19th century), E. Sapir (early 20th century). It continues to be developed by modern typological linguistics, although the content of the concept “type of language”, which is basic for this area of linguistics, has changed significantly during this time. IN modern linguistics tin of language is understood as research model, as a set of signs, which is used to guide the morphological classification of languages.
Principles of morphological classification of languages. The morphological classification is based on three principles:
- 1) the number of morphemes in a word, i.e. the presence or absence of affixes in a word, especially inflectional type affixes: on this basis, languages with affixes (for example, Russian, German, Tatar, Swahili, Eskimo, etc.) are contrasted with root languages (for example, Chinese);
- 2) the nature of the linkage between the root (base) and affixes: but this feature distinguishes between languages with fusion (inflectional) and languages with agglutination (agglutinative) => [Ch. 6, p. 219];
- 3) predominance of the way of expressing grammatical meanings inside the word (synthetic structure of the language) or outside it (analytical structure of the language).
These principles overlap each other, making it possible to distinguish not only the main morphological types, but also their varieties. Traditionally, four morphological types are distinguished: inflectional, agglutinative, root (isolating) and incorporating (polysynthetic), although the latter type is not recognized by everyone => [p. 334]. In the 19th century these types were considered as stages in the formation of the structure of human language from the root type to the inflectional type; accordingly, inflectional languages were assessed as the pinnacle of development => [Chronicle: p. 344, Sapir|. This was, in particular, the point of view of A. Schleicher. Modern science has long moved away from such an evaluative approach, considering all morphological types of languages as equal possibilities for organizing grammatical content.
Languages can be classified not only according to their origin from a common ancestor language, but also based on the characteristics of their morphological structure. This classification is called morphological.
According to the morphological classification, all languages of the world are divided into four types. The first type includes the so-called root-isolating or amorphous tongues. These languages are characterized by complete or almost complete absence inflections and, as a consequence of this, a very high grammatical significance of word order. Root-isolating languages include Chinese, Vietnamese, Dungan, Muong and many others. etc. Modern English is evolving towards root isolation.
The second type consists of inflectional or fusional languages. These include Slavic, Baltic, Italic, some Indian and Iranian languages. Languages of this type are characterized by a developed system of inflection and the ability to convey the entire range of grammatical meanings with one indicator. So, for example, in the Russian word “at home” the ending of the word “-a” is both a sign and masculine, And plural and nominative case.
The third type of language is called agglutinative or agglutinating. These include Turkic, Tungus-Manchu, Finno-Ugric, Kartvelian, Andamanese and some other languages. The principle of agglutination is also the basis of grammar artificial language esperatno. Languages of this type are characterized, like inflectional languages, by a developed system of inflection, but, unlike inflectional languages, in agglutinative languages each grammatical meaning has its own indicator.
For example, let’s take the instrumental case of the plural of the Komi-Permyak word “sin” (eye) - “sinnezon”. Here the morpheme “nez” is a plural indicator, and the morpheme “on” is an indicator instrumental case. Agglutination, in which the morphemes that form grammatical form words are found after the root, called postfiguring. Along with it, there is agglutination, which uses morphemes that precede the root - prefixes - to form the grammatical form of a word. This agglutination is called prefiguring.
Prefiguring agglutination is widespread in Bantu languages (Africa). In Swahili, for example, verb form anawasifu - “praises” the prefix a- denotes the third person, - na - present tense, and - wa - indicates that the action denoted by this verb is performed by a living creature. In Georgian and other Kartvelian languages we encounter bilateral agglutination: the morphemes that form the grammatical form of a word are located on both sides of the root. Thus, in the Georgian verbal form “vmushaobt” - “we are working”, the prefix v- denotes the first person, and the suffix t - the plural.
Agglutinative languages are characterized by the presence of a common type of declension for all nouns and a common type of conjugation for all verbs. In inflected languages, on the contrary, we are faced with a large variety of types of declension and conjugation. So, in the Russian language there are three declensions and two conjugations, in Latin there are five declensions and four conjugations.
The fourth type consists of incorporating or polysynthetic languages. These include the languages of the Chukotka-Kamchatka family, some Indian languages North America. Languages of this type are characterized by combining a whole sentence into one large complex word. At the same time, grammatical indicators are not drawn up individual words, but the whole word-sentence as a whole.
Some analogue of incorporation in the Russian language can be replacing the sentence “I fish” with one word - “fishing”. Of course, such constructions are not typical for the Russian language. They wear a pronounced artificial character. Moreover, in Russian in the form compound word one can only imagine a simple unextended proposal with a personal pronoun as the subject. It is impossible to “condense” the sentence “The boy is fishing” or “I am catching good fish” into one word.
In incorporating languages, any sentence can be represented only as one complex word. So, for example, in the Chukchi language the sentence “We protect new networks” will look like “Mytturkupregynrityrkyn”. We can say that in incorporating languages up to to a certain extent the boundary between word formation and syntax is blurred.
Speaking about the four morphological types of languages, we must remember that just as there is no chemically pure, unadulterated substance in nature, there is not a single completely inflectional, agglutinative, root-isolating or incorporating language. Thus, the Chinese and Dungan languages, which are predominantly root-isolating, contain some, albeit insignificant, elements of agglutination. There are elements of agglutination in inflectional Latin (for example, the formation of forms of the imperfect or future first tense). Conversely, in agglutinative Estonian we encounter elements of inflection. So, for example, in the word töötavad (work), the ending “-vad” denotes both the third person and the plural.
A.Yu. Garbage. Fundamentals of the science of language - Novosibirsk, 2004.
According to which languages are distributed through abstract concept type in the following four classes:
- 1) isolating, or amorphous, for example Chinese, Bamana, most languages of Southeast Asia. They are characterized by the absence of inflection, the grammatical significance of word order, and weak opposition between significant and function words. 2) agglutinative, or agglutinating, for example, Turkic and Bantu languages. They are characterized by a developed system of word-formation and inflectional affixation, the absence of phonetically not determined allomorphism, a single type of declension and conjugation, grammatical unambiguity of affixes, and the absence of significant alternations. 3) incorporating, or polysynthetic, for example Chukchi-Kamchatka, many languages of the Indians of North America. They are characterized by the possibility of including other members of the sentence in the predicate verb (most often direct object), sometimes with an accompanying morphonological change in the stems.
- 4) inflected languages, for example Slavic, Baltic. They are characterized by the multifunctionality of grammatical morphemes, the presence of fusion, phonetically unconditional root changes, and a large number of phonetically and semantically unmotivated types of declension and conjugation. Many languages take intermediate position on the scale of morphological classification, combining characteristics of different types; for example, the languages of Oceania can be characterized as amorphous-agglutinative.
First scientific T.K. I. is the classification of F. Schlegel, who contrasted inflectional languages (meaning mainly Indo-European) with non-inflectional, affixal ones. Thus, inflections and affixes were contrasted as 2 types of morphemes that create the grammatical form of a word. He assessed uninflected languages according to the degree of their “evolutionary proximity” to inflected ones and considered them as one or another stage on the way to an inflectional system. F. Schlegel declared the last type to be the most perfect (the idea of assessing the aesthetic perfection of language was central to his concept central place, which corresponded to the generally accepted philological views of the era). A. V. Schlegel improved F. Schlegel’s classification, highlighting languages “without grammatical structure", later called amorphous or isolating, which marked the beginning of the identification of another parameter of language - synthetism and analytism. W. von Humboldt, based on the Schlegel classification, identified 3 classes of languages: isolating, agglutinating and inflectional. In the classroom agglutinating languages are distinguished with a specific syntax of a sentence - thereby incorporating into the subject of consideration. Humboldt also noted the absence of “pure” representatives of one or another type of language.
constituted as an ideal model. In the 60s 19th century in the works of A. Schleicher, basically all classes of T.K.I. are preserved; Schleicher, like his predecessors, saw T.K. in the classroom. historical stages in the development of the linguistic system from isolation to inflection, and the “new” inflected languages, heirs of the ancient Indo-European languages, were characterized as evidence of the degradation of the linguistic system. Schleicher divided linguistic elements into those expressing meaning (roots) and those expressing attitude, and he considered the latter to be the most essential for determining the place of language in the human race. and in each typological class he consistently identified synthetic and analytical subtypes.
At the end of 19 it will become multidimensional, taking into account data from all levels of language, thus turning from morphological into general grammatical classification. Müller is the first to use morphonological processes as a criterion for human identity; Misteli introduced into the practice of typological research material from languages new to linguistics - Amerindian, Austroasiatic, African, etc. One of Fink's criteria - massiveness/fragmentation of the structure of a word - is noted on a graduated scale, thereby showing not so much the presence/absence, but rather the degree of manifestation of the feature.
At the beginning of the 20th century. tasks Because I. still attract the attention of linguists, however, its shortcomings - the possibility of an unmotivated combination of historically or logically unrelated features, the abundance of empirical material that does not fall under any one type, the instability and sometimes arbitrariness of criteria and limited explanatory power - force a critical reconsideration of its basic principles construction. Noting the shortcomings of the existing T.K.I., E. Sapir made an attempt in 1921 to create T.K.I. a new type - conceptual or functional. Taking T.K. as a basis. types of functioning of formal grammatical elements, Sapir identifies 4 groups grammatical concepts: I - basic specific concepts, II - derivational III - concrete relational, or mixed relational IV - purely relational. In accordance with these groups, languages are divided into purely relational and mixed relational. Sapir's work is distinguished by its systematic approach, focus on the functional aspect of typologization, and the desire to cover phenomena different levels language, but the very concept of class in it turned out to be unclear, as a result of which the grouping of languages is not obvious. The introduction of precise methods into linguistic research led to the emergence of the quantitative typology of J. H. Greenberg, who, taking Sapir's criteria as a basis and transforming them according to his goals, proposed calculating the degree of a particular quality of linguistic structure manifested in syntagmatics.
