text - Style - страница 1

Страницы:
1  2  3 

Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine

Luhansk Taras Shevchenko National University

Department of Russian Linguistics and Communication Technologies

L.N. Sinelnikova, G.P. Dzhindzholiya, Y.V. Grischenko

STYLE - TEXT - DISCOURSE HISTORY OF LINGUISTIC STUDIES

Educational and methodical guide for Students of Master's Course in Philology

Luhansk 2011

Sinelnikova L.N., Dzhindzholiya G.P., Grischenko Y.V.

Style. Text. Discourse. History of linguistic studies. Educational and methodical guide for students of Master's Course in Philology. - Luhansk: Globus, 2011. - 52 pages.

Authors of chapters: L.N. Sinelnikova (chapter "Style. Text. Discourse"); G.P. Dzhindzholiya, Y.V. Grischenko (chapter "History of linguistic studies").

The guide deals with the most meaningful features of operationally significant notions for a philologist - "style", "text", "discourse"; problems of stylistic analysis, text analysis and discourse analysis. The most important questions of theory and history of linguistics in terms of the course "History of linguistic studies" are examined.

The guide includes recommendations on studying the courses "Style. Text. Discourse" and "History of linguistic studies".

It contains summaries of the lectures, plans for the seminars, module tests, questions and tasks for self-control, essay topics, lists of required and suggested reading for the courses.

For university students of Master's Course in philology.

Reviewers:

Fedicheva N.V. - Candidate of Pedagogical Sciences, Associate Professor, the Head of the Speech Practice Department

Burdina S.V. -   Candidate of Pedagogical Sciences, Associate Professor, the English Philology Department

ISBN 966-95527-6-25

Approved at the meeting of the Department of Russian Linguistics and Communication Technologies Luhansk Taras Shevchenko National University (Meeting protocol No. 2 dated February 4, 2011)

STYLE - TEXT - DISCOURSE

Introduction

Paradigmatic relationships (i.e. connected with each other on the set of consolidating and distinguishing signs) between the notions which are included in the course - "Style. Text. Discourse" - can present modern linguistic knowledge (and also linguistic awareness and language picture of the world) entirely.

Spheres of modern communication are presented diversely in different genres, texts and discourses. Functional styles -scientific, official, journalistic, informal - help to develop the understanding of the specific character of communicative-cognitive activity in any social sphere. The text can have single-style character (all language means are agreed stylistically) and poly-style character (functional and semantic characteristics and transformations of language means are subordinated to communication purpose of the addresser who is oriented to the addressee as a definite linguistic personality).

Discourse in its general characteristics can be defined as 'text' taken in the event aspect which includes cognitive and pragmatic aims (intentions) of the author, who, in the process of meaning-generating, interacts with the addressee (the author expects to get the appropriate understanding in order to achieve communicative success).

Specification of the aforementioned relations will enable Master students to study a number of notions (terms) and problems of modern linguistic science which is oriented to the communicative-active approach to the analysis of language units, categories and phenomena.

Course goal: to study and learn the following notions "style", "text", "discourse", to gain skills of stylistic, text and discourse analyses.

Objectives (necessary to achieve the course goal):

3

1. To study required course scientific and methodic literature, to analyze it in order to detect problem states and approaches.

2. To give definitions to the following notions "style", "text", "discourse" (after having studied required reading and dictionaries).

3. To study methods and strategies of stylistic analysis, text analysis and discourse analysis.

4. "Language in action" is studied by different sciences -Text Theory, Functional Stylistics, Pragmatics, Social Linguistics which work with the notions of text, style, discourse. Definitions of these notions reflect stages of the development of the science which tends to understand the essence of connected speech, to expand spheres and aspects of observation.

5. Text - connected by semantic relation sequence of speech units (encyclopedia «Русский язык»); sequence of sign units, the main characteristics of which are cohesion and integrity (Лингвистический энциклопедический словарь); a set of sentences put in a definite order which are connected by the unity of the communicative task (university textbooks).

6. Style - a kind of language fixed according to the tradition in this society in a definite sphere of social life; selection and combination of language means.

7. Discourse - sequence of speech acts which form a cohesive text studied in the extralinguistic context; a process (not a finished 'product') which occurs when there are minimum two participants who interpret each other's utterances and who together develop the structure of discourse every given moment.

8. If the text is a 'result', then discourse is a 'process'. If a functional style and its normative regulations are mainly abstracted from speakers (subjects of speech), then discourse is very close to socially defined addresser and addressee. "The unity of the communicative task" in discourse proves itself as an

4

interpersonal communicative action. Motivation, relevance in language use is connected with "conditions of success" which can change in different moments of communication, and role-switching makes a personality work in different stylistic conditions.

Methodic recommendations for the work at the course:

Dear Master students and colleagues! We present all necessary materials to organize the distance learning course "Style. Text. Discourse". We hope that you will be attentive, disciplined and responsible towards all forms of learning. Only in this case your completion of the course can be successful.

We suppose that a set of motivations in studying three parts of the course can be a guarantee of success. The section "Style" can help to learn stylistic differentiation of language units on different levels of language system (first of all - on its lexical level), invariant (basic, invariable) signs of functional styles of language and speech and their variable characteristics which depend on peculiarities of modern language situation (dialogic and personalized forms of communication, appearance of new genres and types of speech), and also to study the meaning of the notion "stylistic norm". The section "Text" is focused on the understanding of this phenomenon as a structural and communicative unit; and studying categories of the text, principles of combination and usage of language means in it will give an opportunity to understand 'text' as a complicated language phenomenon. The section "Discourse" develops the understanding of the character of communication describing it in a sociocultural environment. Mastering stylistic and text-discursive analyses will provide the foundation of your professionalism.

Procedural materials stated below will be a navigator for you in learning all the material.

How to work at the course

The material is given in sequence taking into account the "build-up" of information: from the 'style' to the 'text' and then to the signs of discourse as a "speech" situation in which there is an

6

addresser and an addressee who together develop the structure of discourse every given moment.

The sequence is supported with the order of consultation

hours.

The schedule of consultation hours

consultation

Topic

Date

№1

"Stylistics     and its subject".

Stylistic differentiation of

language means.

The notion of "Stylistic

norm".

November

№2

"Text Linguistics". Theory of the text. Text analysis, its categories.

December (1.12 - 15.12)

№3

"Discourse". Theory of discourse. Discourse analysis.

December (15.12 -30.12)

The final step is a written test devoted to the complex analysis of the text (stylistic aspect, categories of the text, discourse analysis). Master students choose a text for the complex analysis on their own (we recommend to analyze the modern media social and political journalism whose texts are stylistically rich and discursively expressive, some texts are offered in our electronic reading book in room № 1-325).

Stylistic analysis algorithm:

1. Functional purpose of the text (communication, message, effect / influence).

2. Sphere of communication and situation this text is oriented to.

3. Stylistic features typical of the text taking into account its stylistic markers.

4. Language marks of a style (phonetic, lexical-phraseological, grammatical).

5. Communicative frame of the text: author - addressee (who wrote the text and for whom it is written).

6. Form (written, spoken) and kind of speech (monologue, dialogue, polylogue).

Text analysis algorithm:

1. Name the topic of the text.

2. Define the composition (structure) of the text (introduction, main part, conclusion).

3. Divide the text into meaningful parts, ascertain relations between them on the basis of the composition (structure) of the text.

4. Name key words (meaningful dominants).

5. Describe rhetorical methods (tropes and figures).

6. Define character / kind of speech (monologue, dialogue, polylogue). Ascertain functions of the text (description, narration, reasoning).

7. Name a functional style this text belongs to.

The aim of discourse analysis: complex analysis of the content of the text including extra-text (social and cultural) characteristics.

Categories of discourse analysis:

1. The category of the addresser.

2. The category of the addressee.

3. Message (subject of speech and ways of its language presentation).

4. The category of interactivity.

The category of the addresser.

The means which help to identify: How the addresser introduces and interprets her/himself; Which roles (social, moral, cultural) s/he chooses for her/himself;

In what time and space frame s/he acts (past, present, future, mixed or time shift).

The category of the addressee.

Nomination of the addressee, etiquette forms, characteristics of the addressee's image (epithet, metaphor, irony and other methods of introduction of the addressee).

The category of interactivity.

The choice of speech behavior (style, tone): distancing from or "getting close" to the addressee; tolerant, empathetic or intolerant, confrontational. Opposition "friendly/native" -"alien/strange".

In order to get a credit on the course Master students are required to know:

Part "Style":

- The definition of 'style';

- Signs of the main styles - scientific, official, journalistic, informal, belles-lettres.

Part "Text":

- The definition of 'text';

- The main text-generating categories (cohesion, coherence, wholeness).

Part "Discourse":

- The definition of 'discourse' (compare with the definition of 'text');

- Discursive markers (special words which define mental processes of the speaker and control mental processes of the addressee).

Key words of the course

Key words to the part "Style": literary language, stylistic norm, functional style.

Key words to the part "Text": text-generating categories, structure of the text, 'strong' positions of the text.

Key words to the part "Discourse": discourse, interaction, addresser, addressee.

How to get ready to pass the test:

1. Accumulate knowledge on the topics of three parts (and consultations): "Style', "Text", "Discourse".

2. Study required literature on every part, make notes on every notion "Style', "Text", "Discourse" paying attention to their definitions.

3. Learn the system of key words of the course (study the meaning of every component of the system).

4. Make a complex analysis of any chosen text combining algorithms of stylistic and text-discursive analyses.

5. If necessary ask your lecturer questions.

Evaluation criteria:

Maximum rating score for the course is 100 (33 points for each kind of analysis).

Glossary (Latin - 'dictionary') - notions and their definitions

which are necessary to study the course

Literary language - the main, above-dialect form of language's existence which is characterized by being processed, by being compulsory for every member of this language society, by its historical changeability, stylistic differentiation, polyvalency, i.e. its ability to represent all spheres of life.

Stylistic meaning - is that additional (to lexical and grammatical meaning) characteristic of a language unit which 1) connects it with definite conditions and spheres of communication (social-genre stylistic meaning); 2) expresses the speaker's attitude to reality, to the content of message, to the addressee (emotional-expressive stylistic meaning).

Functional style (from Latin stilus - sharp-pointed stick for writing, manner of writing) - a kind of language use which is fixed according to the tradition in this society in a definite sphere of social life and which represents a set of language units and their organization into a whole unit (text), that reflects speaker's attitude to the subject of speech (situation) and interaction with the addressee.

Language norm - the body of most stable, traditional presentation of units of the language system which were selected and fixed in language practice.

Cohesion of the text - the term of Text Linguistics which means that its related parts are connected (when parts of the text combine well to form a unit).

Coherence of the text - global connection of the text when the unity of the topic is represented in all the text and its structural unity is preserved (coherent - reasonable and sensible; in which all the different parts fit together in a sensible way).

Retrospection - the term of Text Linguistics which means that a part of the text includes information which is presented in previous parts.

'Strong' positions of the text - heading, beginning or end of the text and its formally defined parts (chapters, stanzas, etc.). Differential signs of 'strong' positions of the text are a place in it, character of information, presence or absence of images.

Addresser - the anthropocentric subcategory which represents the personality of the addresser (author) in discourse, expressing his/her ideas, attitudes, outlooks.

Addressee - the anthropocentric subcategory which represents functions of the addressee in discourse.

Axiology - the presence of estimation ("good" - "bad", "better" - "worse") in speaker's/individual's mind.

Anthropocentrism - the text-discursive category which means that all the units of discourse are focused on a person/man.

Dialogue - an integral part of discourse which enables interaction of its components.

Discourse - a coherent text in sociocultural, psychological and other factors; speech behavior in a definite social sphere (political, scientific, belles-lettres and other kinds of discourse).

Integration - the text category which enables the creation of the whole text.

Interactive model - interaction which provides interpersonal communication, the most important peculiarity of which is the ability to assess (understand) what is/was said by another person.

Interpretation - transformation of the content of the text into a word-sign form.

Factuality - the informative subcategory which reflects information about facts and events in the 'world' of the text.

Wholeness - the text-discursive category; discourse is a self-contained/closed whole unit, a macrosign.

Segmentation - the category of the text which means that it can be divided (structurally, meaningfully, compositionally, etc.).

Emotiveness - the informative subcategory which deals with emotional elements and components of discourse, units of the text.

Required reading (in the Russian language):

1. Винокур Т.Г. Говорящий и слушающий. Варианты речевого поведения. - М., 1993.

2. Горшков А.И. Русская стилистика. - М., 2001.

3. Кожина М.Н. Стилистика русского языка. - М.,

1983.

4. Синельникова Л.Н., Лапотько А.Г. Риторика как научная и учебная дисциплина. - Луганск, 1999.

5. Синельникова Л. Н. Текст, стиль, дискурс // Социолингвистика: ХХІ век. - Луганск, 2002.

6. Синельникова Л.Н. Теория текста: аксиомы и версии // Вестник ЛГПУ. Филологические науки. - 2003. -№2 (58).

7. Стилистический энциклопедический словарь русского языка. - М., 2003.

8. Гальперин И.Р. Текст как объект лингвистического исследования. - М., 1981.

9. Каменская О. Л. Текст и коммуникация. - М., 1990.

10. Лосева Л.М. Как строится текст: Пособие для учителя. - М., 1980.

11. Серио Патрик. Как читают тексты во Франции. Вступительная статья / Квадратура смысла. Французская школа анализа дискурса. - М., 1999.

12. Арутюнова Н.Д. Дискурс // Лингвистический энциклопедический словарь. - М., 1990.

13. Филлипс Л., Йоргенсен М.В. Дискурс-анализ. Теория и методика. - Харьков, 2004.

Required reading (in the English language):

1.        Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Second Edition. Editor-in-Chief: Keith Brown. - Elsevier, 2006 (or http://www.twirpx.com/file/281665/).

2. Landmarks of American Language and Linguistics. -Editor: Frank Smolinski. - Washington, D.C., - Volumes 1,2. -

1993.

3. New Webster's Dictionary and Thesaurus of the English Language. - USA, 1993. (text, style, discourse)

HISTORY OF LINGUISTIC STUDIES

Introduction

The history of linguistics is closely connected with the development of culture. The evaluation of conceptions of different linguistic schools implies their correlation with the modern understanding because it is difficult to determine their place in the onward movement of the language science without it. However, we evaluate them relying not on our level of knowledge but on linguists' of the past contribution to linguistics in comparison with their predecessors and the importance of their conceptions for that time. It is essential to analyze individual peculiarities of every linguistic school, every linguistic circle, every linguist while studying the history of linguistics.

Historical principle implies succession, connection of the past and present as everything new in science can never be the negation of the past but only its significant change, extension and generalization in accordance with modern state of science. It is known that every subsequent period in the development of linguistic thought appeared as a way of overcoming contradictions typical of the previous period of the development of linguistic science; new achievements result from already discovered laws and theories but on a new, higher level of the development of the science.

Research on factual material is not only specific verification of theoretical prerequisites but it helps Master students outline the perspectives on how to use already familiar notions. That is why we suppose that studying the course "History of linguistic studies" will encourage Master students' research work.

The aim of the course is to acquaint Master students with the history of the development of linguistic thought (on the material of key linguistic ideas), to show the origins and evolution of ideas which prepared (preceded) the modern understanding of

17

nature and essence of the language; to give the understanding of such problems as object, subject, methods of linguistics, role of linguistics in the system of sciences, language and society, language and thinking, language sign, language and speech, system and structure of language, general and special in language, language development.

The structure of the course "History of linguistic studies" includes 54 hours of auditorium hours (6 hours of lectures and 20 hours of seminars) and 28 hours of self-learning which will help Master students give answers to the basic theoretical questions and write the module paper.

Master students are required to:

1.

Study lecture material.

2.

Study required and suggested reading.

3.

Get ready for the seminars (the plans are presented

below).

 

4.

Study the key terms of the course thoroughly.

5.

Write an essay (analytical resume) and the final test (the

topics are presented below).

Master students' work at the seminars implies that they take part in discussions on problematic issues.

At the seminars Master students get their rating score (see evaluation criteria below) as a general result which includes: a) knowledge of theory and definitions, b) participation in discussions on problematic issues, c) practical application of theoretical knowledge in discourse-oriented analysis.

Evaluation criteria

Maximum rating score for the course is 100. The highest mark for every seminar and essay (analytical resume) is 10 points. For the final test - 40 points.

Grade "Excellent" - 90 - 100 points (90 - 100% according to the module-rating system) - for exceptional knowledge of the course (when students are knowledgeable about the course).

Grade "Very good" - 83 - 89 points (83 - 89% according

to the module-rating system) - for good (above the average) knowledge of the course (when students make some mistakes).

Grade "Good" - 75 - 82 points (75 - 82% according to the module-rating system) - for good knowledge of the course (when students make some serious mistakes in material interpretation).

Grade "Adequate" - 63 - 74 points (63 - 74% according to the module-rating system) - for average knowledge of the material (with a number of mistakes).

Grade "Acceptable" - 50 - 62 (50 - 62% according to the module-rating system) - for studying the course with minimal criteria.

Grade "Unsatisfactory" - 0-20 - 21-49 points and %

(indicates lack or absence of knowledge and requires serious self-learning).

1. Summary of the lectures

From classical ancient times to the beginning of the 19th century linguistics was not separated from logic, and common universal ways of expressing thoughts were considered to be its subject. In the 19th century linguistics grows into a separate science, the attitude to language, views on language change evolutionary; different languages in their historical development become the subject of linguistics. In the 20th century linguistics studies language as a universal, integral man's possession, and languages in their varied, specific and historical forms.

The ancient period of linguistics (Ancient Greece and Ancient India) is characterized as a logical approach. Language analysis is only logic's auxiliary means; language is studied as a way of forming and expressing thoughts - 'implementing' language concepts are basic. The first special work on linguistics in European science was/is Plato's dialogue "Cratylus" (428 or 427 B.C. - 348 or 347 B.C.). However, Plato's general system of philosophy becomes interesting to linguistics (especially in his dialogues "Sophist" and "Parmenid"). Aristotle (384 - 322 B.C.) in his works "Category", "On interpretation", "Topica" introduced a whole logic conception. Ten Aristotle's categories (essence, number, quality, attitude, etc.) are a hierarchically built list of all forms of a predicate which can be met in a simple clause in Ancient Greek. The main type of judgement for Aristotle was an utterance "noun-subject - noun-predicate" [for example, The man is running as "The man is someone/smth that is running"(being, creature)], other types of judgements-utterances he treated as transformations of the main type. Aristotle was the first philosopher of antiquity who started to study the problem of a grammatical form, and he developed the theory of parts of speech. Aristotle's conception was continued in European logic and grammar of the Middle Ages. Some grammatical terms in Russian grammar are loanwords of terms introduced by Aristotle.

20

Different attitude was introduced by philosophers-stoics. The Stoics (3-2 centuries B.C. - Zenon, Kleanf, Chrisiph) first discovered that an utterance had two subjects: firstly, a thing, an object of real world ("body"; in logic and linguistics' terminology of the 20th century it is the "object of nomination", "denotatum", "meaning", "extensional"; secondly, some specific mental essence ("lekton"; in logic and linguistics' terminology of the 20th century it is "signifie", "sense", "intentional"). The Stoics created the basis of the study of semantic syntax, completed the classification of the parts of speech.

Unlike Plato, Aristotle and Stoics, the ancient Indian grammarian Panini (5 - 4 centuries B.C.) studied language as such, mainly formally. His normative grammar "The Astadhyayi" ("Eight books set") fully describes phonetics, morphology, morphonology, word formation and aspects of syntax of the ancient Indian language. Panini was the first who linguistically and exactly introduced the terms 'initial form' (root), origination, morphonology, null element; he was the first who started to use conventional symbolic language description. Panini's work appeared in the Indian tradition and in turn influenced the development of subsequent Indian schools, and later (19th century) all linguistics in whole.

The logical approach in linguistics completed in logic and Port-Royal grammar in France in the 2nd half of the 17th century and existed until the 19th century. In ancient times scientists used forms of their native language in studies (Ancient Greek, Ancient Indian), Port-Royal scientists treated logic forms of language, which were defined on the basis of Greek and Latin - notion, judgement and nine parts of speech, as universal forms of all languages. Thus, in terms of the logical approach a very important step was taken to language study, language as a universal man's possession. National and historical peculiarities of languages were considered to be the subject of grammatical and stylistic "art" but

21

not the science. The Port-Royal conception became a very important stage of further development of the universal grammar, particularly in the Linguistic Circle of Copenhagen and other modern directions of linguistics.

Port-Royal scientists had some predecessors. Among them were so called 'modus researchers' (they studied "modus meaning") of 13 - 14 centuries and a Spanish linguist Sanches de las Brosas, the author of the universal grammar "Minerva" (1587).

The beginning of the 19th century is marked by comparatively-historic linguistics which was based on the following principles: 1) every language has its own peculiarities different from other languages; 2) these peculiarities can be discovered when languages are compared; 3) comparison reveals affinity of some languages; kindred languages are grouped in 'families'; 4) differences in kindred languages can be explained only with their continuous historical change which was named to be the most important characteristic of every language; 5) sounds change quicker than other units; their transformation in one language 'family' is strictly consistent and objective; basic language units (word roots, inflexions and affixes) are stable, sometimes over a period of a thousand of years; the scheme of a common source-language, the original parent language can be reconstructed on the basis of this data (originally, it was considered to be possible to re-establish the parent language in whole).

The first ideas of comparatively-historic linguistics were enunciated by a Dane, Rasmus Rask (1818) and a German linguist Franz Bopp (1816), in Russia by A.C. Vostokov who studied grammar and lexis of the Old Slavonic language, Russian versification on the basis of comparatively-historic method. Some comparatively-historic grammars appeared in the 19th century: Germanic languages (J. Grimm), Romanic languages (F. Dietz, later W. Meyer-Lubke),    Slavonic languages

22

(F. Miklosich), and also generalizing works - grammars of Indo-European languages by F. Bopp (1833 - 49, 1856 - 61), A. Schleicher (1861 - 62), K. Brugmann and B. Delbruck (1886 -1900). Fundamental theoretical research works by A. Meillet, F.F. Fortunatov, H. Hirt were written according to this approach.

In the sphere of general language theory comparatively-historic linguistics evolved greatly from pure language comparison (Rask, Bopp, Grimm, Vostokov) to "biological naturalism" (A. Schleicher) influenced by the Darwinian theory and then to psychological analysis (H. Steinthal). Russian linguists of the end of the 19th - the beginning of the 20th century A.A. Shakhmatov, F.F. Fortunatov, also K. Buga in Lithuania, J. Endzelin in Latvia, whose ideas were close to the Neogrammarian school, became the originators of national schools of comparatively-historic linguistics and provided a foundation for modern integrated East European comparatively-historic linguistic school. Comparatively-historic linguistics is still successfully developing including the study of classification of languages and culture history (works by C. Watkins, W. Lehmann in the USA; F. Bader in France; T. Gamkrelidze in Georgia; V.V. Ivanov, V.N. Toporov, O.N. Trubachov and others in Russia).

In the psychological approach in linguistics, which emerged from comparatively-historic linguistics in 1850s influenced by W. von Humboldt's language philosophy, any connections between language and logic were denied, the unity of the human language was accounted for the unity of psychic laws, and variety of languages - for psychological peculiarities of different nations (works by Steinhtal and others). The founder of one of the biggest linguistic schools in the 19th century -Ukrainian and Russian scientist A.A. Potebnya - supported this approach. According to this conception, language study reveals integrated principles of how the man realizes objective world in the language, psychic, thinking and art. A.A. Potebnya developed

23

the first conception of semantic transformations which included the word ("inner form of the word") and the sentence ("parts of speech substitution").

At the end of the 19th century a new approach -Neogrammarian movement - was founded in Germany (works by K. Brugmann, H. Osthoff, H. Paul). The neogrammarians studied sound processes, reconstructed morphology in detail. However, systematic 'doubling' of the research subject: on the one hand, language, on the other hand, psychic (sound and "mental presentation of the sound", meaning and "mental presentation of the meaning", etc.); fragmentation of the language system into "atomic facts" - sounds, wordforms, etc.; exaggerating the importance of individual psychology and individual speech, and as a result the only genuine reality recognized was the speech of a person/individual. All these aspects resulted in Neogrammarian movement's crisis.

F.F. Fortunatov contrasted the neogrammarian school's psychological analysis with the necessity of the search of linguistic, "informal" criterion in language study for all branches of linguistics; unlike neogrammarians he concentrated his attention on the structural and sign-oriented aspect of language and became the founder of a special approach in linguistics which is called a 'formal school' (Moscow Fortunatov's school).

A new approach - linguistic structuralism - came to existence at the beginning of the 20th century when F. de Saussure's book "The course in General Linguistics" was published. This approach appeared on general basis of structuralism which involved other spheres: psychology (Gestalt psychology), literature theory and art theory (formal school), etc. In linguistics it was prepared by the work of Kazan school, mainly by works of I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay (F. de Saussure and I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay are considered to be the predecessors of structuralism in linguistics).

Страницы:
1  2  3 


Похожие статьи

text - Style