In the morphological classification of languages, they are distinguished. Typological morphological classification of languages

Presentation description Morphological typology of languages ​​and morphological classification of languages ​​by slides

Plan 1. Introduction. Classification in linguistics 2. Principles of morphological classification 3. Inflectional languages ​​4. Groups of inflectional languages: . Synthetic. Analytical. Polysynthetic 5. Agglutinative languages ​​6. Root (isolating) languages ​​7. Incorporating (polysynthetic) languages ​​8. Conclusion

Classifications in linguistics Comparison as a way of cognition underlies any scientific classification. Comparative-typological linguistics deals with the comparison and subsequent classification of languages. American linguist Edward Sapir in his book "Language" wrote that "all languages ​​are different from each other, but some. . . more than others." So, when learning English or even Latin, we feel that "approximately the same horizon limits our views", i.e. we feel a familiar way of organizing the language, at the same time, learning Chinese will be a more difficult task for most - all because that this language does not seem to have any points of contact with Russian, similar linguistic forms. We can conclude that languages ​​are grouped according to morphological types, languages ​​with similar morphology can be combined into one type group.

In modern linguistics, the type of language is understood as a research model, a set of features that are guided by when classifying languages. By types, languages ​​can be divided based on various classifications: phonetic (vocal languages ​​- the predominance of vocalism, consonantal languages), according to the syntax of languages, word formation, inflection. Languages ​​can be combined into one typological group based on morphological similarities. In this case, the typological classification will be called morphological. It should be noted that this type of classification is the most common and well-known, therefore, the term "typological classification" and "morphological classification" are often used indiscriminately. However, it must be remembered that the first concept is wider than the second. Better than others, a morphological classification has been developed, taking into account the predominance of certain methods and means of expression. grammatical meanings.

1) The number of morphemes in a word, the presence or absence of affixes. Opposite languages ​​with affixes (Russian, Tatar, Eskimo, etc.) root (Chinese). 2) the nature of the connection between the root and affixes. There are languages ​​with fusion (inflectional) and with agglutination (agglutinative). 3) the predominance of the way of expressing grammatical meanings within the word (synthetic structure of the language) or outside it (analytical structure). Based on these principles, 4 main morphological types are distinguished: inflectional, agglutinative, root (isolating) and incorporating (polysynthetic) *. * not recognized by all Principles of morphological classification

Inflectional is the morphological type of languages ​​in which the prevailing grammatical device is flexion, connected to the base according to the principle of fusion. Inflection is a linguistic ending, the last part of a word that changes with declension, conjugation. Internal inflection is the alternation of phonemes in the root, which serves to form the grammatical forms of the word. Fusion is a linguistic merger of morphemes, accompanied by a change in their phonemic composition at the boundaries of morphemes. Example: the morphemes "muzhik" and "-sk-" give the adjective "muzhik ky". A kind of inflection is the contraction of unstressed elements of the phrase, their merger with the core. Example: “I will come” from “with” and “I go”. Inflectional languages

Groups of inflectional languages ​​The division of languages ​​into synthetic and analytic languages ​​was proposed by August Schleicher (only for inflectional languages), then he extended it to agglutinative languages. The basis for dividing languages ​​into synthetic, analytic, and polysynthetic is essentially syntactic, so this division intersects with the morphological classification of languages, but does not coincide with it. 1) Synthetic - with a clear predominance of synthetic forms (Latin, Russian, Czech) 2) Polysynthetic - with a relative balance of synthetic and analytical forms (German, Bulgarian) 3) Analytical - with a predominance of analytical forms (French, English)

Synthetic languages ​​In synthetic languages, grammatical meanings are expressed within the word itself (affixation, internal inflection, stress, suppletivism, i.e., the formation of forms of the same words with a different root), that is, the forms of the words themselves. To express the relationship between words in a sentence, elements of the analytical system (functional words, order of significant words, intonation) can also be used. Morphemes included in a word in synthetic languages ​​can be combined according to the principle of agglutination, fusion, undergo positional alternations(for example, Turkic vowel harmony, likening subsequent vowels in the affixes of a word to the preceding vowels to the root of the same word). Since a language, in principle, is not typologically homogeneous, the term "synthetic languages" is applied in practice to languages ​​with a sufficiently high degree of synthesis, for example, German, Russian, Turkic, Finno-Ugric, most of the Semitic-Hamitic, Indo-European (ancient), Mongolian, Tungus- Manchu, some African (Bantu), Caucasian, Paleoasian, American Indian languages.

Analytic languages ​​are those in which grammatical meanings are mostly expressed outside of the word, in the sentence: English, French, and all isolating languages, such as Vietnamese. In these languages, the word is a transmitter lexical meaning, and grammatical meanings are transmitted separately: by word order in a sentence, function words, intonation, etc. A typical example illustrating the difference between synthetic and analytical grammatical forms: a phrase in Russian - “father loves son”. If you change the order of words - “the father loves the son”, then the meaning of the phrase will not change, the word “son” and the word “father” change case ending. The phrase in English is "the father loves the son". When the word order is changed to “the son loves the father”, the meaning of the phrase changes exactly the opposite - “the son loves his father”.

Polysynthetic languages ​​are languages ​​in which all members of a sentence (full incorporation) or some components of a phrase (partial incorporation) are combined into a single whole without formal indicators for each of them. Notable examples of polysynthetic languages ​​are Chukchi-Kamchatka, Eskimo-Aleut and many language families North America. In the Abkhaz-Adyghe languages, with a very simple noun system, the verb system is polysynthetic.

Agglutinative languages ​​Agglutinative is the morphological type of languages ​​in which new words and word forms are formed by serial connection unambiguous standard affixes - "prilep". The main features of agglutinative languages ​​are: the relative independence of morphemes; the absence of a multi-variant system of declensions and conjugations, phonetic variation of affixes is allowed according to the law of synharmonism, and in some languages, also according to lobbyization. Examples of languages: Turkic, Finno-Ugric, Dravidian, Indonesian, Tungus-Manchurian, the languages ​​of the peoples of Africa, as well as Japanese and Korean. They are divided according to the location of affixes into postfixal (suffixal) and prefixal. The first variety is the largest number group languages: Turkic, Finno-Ugric, etc. prefix agglutination occurs, for example, in Swahili, one of the largest languages ​​in Africa. Example: for in Kyrgyz language expressions of case values, plural values ​​and possessive values, three affixes are used, following one after another in strict sequence and, finally, a case indicator: ata - lar - ymyz - yes - “from our fathers”.

Root (isolating, amorphous) languages ​​Root is a morphological type of languages ​​in which a word is equal to a root (or 2-3 roots) and grammatical relations between words in a sentence are expressed analytically (particles, prepositions, word order). Example languages: Chinese, Vietnamese, crossed languages ​​- pidgin languages ​​Words in root languages ​​live longer independent life in a sentence than in inflectional or agglutinative languages, and grammatical categories are not expressed clearly, therefore, according to the grammatical “technique”, such languages ​​are called isolating. Example: the properties of amorphousness in the Chinese expression cha wo bu he. All four words are roots. The word cha means “tea”, wo means “I”, bu means “no”, he means “to drink”. All together means "I don't drink tea". Relationships between words in this example are expressed by word order

Incorporating (polysynthetic) languages ​​Incorporating languages ​​are a morphological type in which the boundaries between the word and syntactic units(phrase and sentence). An incorporative complex is formed as a compound word, the elements of which perform syntactic function. According to the method of agglutination, the stems of full-valued words are attached, which are similar in function to the members of the sentence. Example: the Chukchi “You-meyny-levty-pygty-rkyn” can be translated literally as “I-head-strongly-swells”, but in reality it means in Russian “I have a severe headache”. It should be noted that incorporation in such languages ​​as Chukchi, Eskimo is not the only and necessarily present principle of their grammatical organization, but exists against the background of agglutination, therefore, many linguists do not recognize the incorporating type.

Main type Technique Degree of synthesis Example A. Simple purely relational languages ​​1) Isolating 2) Isolating with agglutination Analytical Chinese, Annam (Vietnamese), Ewe, Tibetan B. Complex purely relational languages ​​1) Agglutinating, isolating Analytical Polynesian 2) Agglutinating Synthetic Turkish 3 ) Fusion-agglutinating Synthetic Classical Tibetan 4) Symbolic Analytic Shilluk C. Simple mixed-relational languages ​​1) Agglutinating Synthetic Bantu 2) Fusional Analytical French B. Complex mixed-relational languages ​​1) Agglutinating Polysynthetic Nootka 2) Fusional Analytical English, Latin, Greek 3) Fusion, symbolic Slightly synthetic Sanskrit 4) Symbolic-fusion Synthetic Semitic. The classification of languages ​​is very abstract, ideal system, since "pure" languages ​​that would belong to only one morphological type do not exist. The classification of languages ​​according to E. Sapir is a confirmation of this fact.

The Russian language as an inflectional language of a synthetic structure Latin and ancient Greek have always been considered as the standard of inflectional languages. Of the living languages, it is Russian (like some other Slavic languages) is considered as a typical representative of this morphological type. Paradigm quality adjective includes 101 inflectional forms, the system of tenses of verbs is also characterized by inflection. But, being a language of a synthetic structure, the Russian language has a certain number of analytical forms of the name and the verb. Analytic verb forms of the future tense of the imperfective form and subjunctive mood, compound degrees comparison of adjectives. However, inflections do not disappear here either, forming analytic-synthetic word forms. Example: ending with the meaning of gender, number and case of the function word "most" - an indicator superlatives at the adjective (the strongest, the strongest). Purely analytical forms are rare in Russian. One can also find elements of an isolating type in Russian: adverbs, indeclinable nouns, verb forms denoting instantaneous action: “jump”, “shmyak”. However, they still differ significantly from words in languages ​​of an isolating type: if a noun in Russian has nothing but a root, a zero ending is implied, then “pryg” and “shmyak” are perceived by native speakers as truncated “jump”, “shmyak”. Thus, the presence in the Russian language of signs of different morphological types does not cancel, but only emphasizes its characterization as a language with pronounced inflection and synthetism.

Conclusion Turning to the morphological classification of languages ​​allows us to see the diversity of the device of the languages ​​of the world. There is no language that would belong to only one of the distinguished types: inflectional, agglutinative, root, or incorporating. In each of the languages ​​that have ever existed, elements of several of the 4 systems are presented, which once again proves the mobility, "liveness" of such a system as language.

Languages ​​can be classified not only according to their origin from one common ancestor language, but also based on the features of their morphological structure. This classification is called morphological.

According to the morphological classification, all the languages ​​of the world are distributed among four types. The first type includes the so-called root-isolating or amorphous languages. These languages ​​are characterized by a complete or almost complete absence of inflection and, as a consequence, 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 is inflectional or fusional languages. These include Slavic, Baltic, Italic, some of the Indian and Iranian languages. Languages ​​of this type are characterized by a developed system of inflection and the ability to convey the entire gamut 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 of both the masculine gender and the plural and nominative case.

Languages ​​of the third type are called agglutinative or agglutinative. These include Turkic, Tungus-Manchurian, Finno-Ugric, Kartvelian, Andaman and some other languages. The principle of agglutination is also the basis of grammar artificial language esperatno. For languages ​​of this type, as well as for inflectional languages, a developed system of inflection is characteristic, but, unlike inflectional languages, in agglutinative languages ​​each grammatical meaning has its own indicator.

For example, let's take the instrumental plural of the Komi-Permyak word "sin" (eye) - "synnezon". Here the morpheme "nez" is an indicator of the plural, and the morpheme "on" is an indicator instrumental. Agglutination, in which the morphemes that form grammatical form words found after the root is called postfiguring. Along with it, there is agglutination, which uses morphemes in front of the root - prefixes to form the grammatical form of the word. Such agglutination is called prefiguring.

Prefiguring agglutination is widespread in the Bantu languages ​​(Africa). In Swahili, for example, in verb form anawasifu - "praises" the prefix a- denotes a third person, -na - the present tense, and -wa - indicates that the action denoted by this verb is performed by a living being. In Georgian and other Kartvelian languages, we encounter bilateral agglutination: morphemes that form the grammatical form of a word are located on both sides of the root. So, in the Georgian verb form “vmushaobt” - “we work”, the prefix v- denotes the first person, and the suffix t is 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 inflectional languages, on the contrary, we encounter a wide variety of types of declension and conjugation. So, in Russian there are three declensions and two conjugations, in Latin there are five declensions and four conjugations.

The fourth type is made up of incorporating or polysynthetic languages. These include the languages ​​of the Chukotka-Kamchatka family, some languages ​​of the Indians of North America. For languages ​​of this type, the combination of a whole sentence into one large compound word is characteristic. At the same time, grammatical indicators form not individual words, but the whole word-sentence as a whole.

Some analogue of incorporation in Russian can be the replacement of the sentence "I fish" with one word - "fishing". Of course, such constructions are not typical for the Russian language. They are clearly artificial. In addition, in Russian, only a simple word can be represented as a compound word. non-proprietary proposal with a personal pronoun as the subject. It is impossible to "fold" into one word the sentence "The boy is fishing" or "I am catching good fish."

In incorporating languages, any sentence can only be represented as a single compound word. So, for example, in the Chukchi language, the sentence “We guard new networks” will look like “Mytturkupregynrityrkyn”. It can be said that in incorporating languages ​​the boundary between word formation and syntax is blurred to a certain extent.

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. Yes, Chinese and Dungan languages, predominantly root isolating, contain some, albeit minor, elements of agglutination. There are elements of agglutination in inflectional Latin(for example, the formation of forms of the imperfect or the future first tense). And vice versa, 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. Musorin. Fundamentals of the science of language - Novosibirsk, 2004

Morphological typology of languages- the most developed area of ​​typological research. Typological linguistics began to develop precisely from the morphological classification of languages, that is, among other areas of typological research, morphological typology is chronologically the first.

In the languages ​​of the world, there are two main groups of ways of expressing grammatical meanings- synthetic and analytical.

For synthetic methods expressions of grammatical meanings characteristic connection grammatical index with the word itself. Such an indicator that introduces the grammatical meaning "inside the word" can be prefix, suffix, ending, internal inflection(alternation of sounds in the root: lie down - lie down - bed), stress change ( ss?ypat - pour), suppletivism (child - children, take - take) (see A.A. Reformatsky, 1997, pp. 263–313). The term "synthetic" is motivated, from the Greek. synthesis- "combination, compilation, association."

For analytical methods characteristic expression of grammatical meaning outside words, apart from it: with the help of prepositions, conjunctions, articles, auxiliary verbs, other service words; using word order through general intonation statements. Recall that analytical - from the Greek. analysis- "separation, decomposition, dismemberment" - this is a separating, decomposing into its component parts; associated with analysis.

Scientists identify the following ways expressions of grammatical meanings:

affixation(attachment to the root of grammatical morphemes - affixes);

internal flexion(significant alternation of phonemes in the root of the word, such as English. sing–song or Russian lie down - lie down);

stress;

intonation;

reduplication(repetition of a root morpheme or a whole word);

official words(prepositions, conjunctions, particles, articles, auxiliary verbs, etc.);

word order.

Sometimes this list is added composition(although this grammatical method does not serve for inflection, but for the formation of new words) and suppletivism- using a different root to convey grammatical meaning, like Russian. man - people, put - put or English. good-better).

In principle, each language uses different grammatical methods from among those named, but in practice they are grouped in a certain way, combined with each other. Namely: in some languages, grammatical meaning is expressed mainly within the (significant) word itself: with the help of affixation, internal inflection, stress. Lexical and grammatical meanings appear here in a complex, jointly forming the semantics of the word. Such languages ​​are called synthetic languages. Examples are ancient Latin, and from modern languages– Finnish, Estonian, Lithuanian, Polish. In other languages, grammatical meaning is expressed outside significant word: using function words, word order, intonation. In such languages, grammatical and lexical meanings are presented separately, they are embodied in different material means. This is analytic languages; these include modern English, French, Danish, Bulgarian, etc.

Many languages ​​combine the features of analyticism and synthetism in their grammatical structure. In particular, modern Russian belongs to the languages mixed order(with some preponderance in the direction of synthetism, although the share of analytical tools in it is steadily increasing); they also include German(although elements of analyticism predominate in it), see about this: (B.Yu. Norman, 2004, p. 205).

There are languages ​​in which there are almost no synthetic methods. These are Chinese, Vietnamese, Lao, Thai, Khmer. AT early XIX in. some linguists have called them amorphous(formless), that is, devoid of form. W. von Humboldt clarified that these languages ​​are not formless, he called them isolating. It was found that these languages ​​are not devoid of grammatical form, but grammatical meanings are expressed in them separately, in isolation from the lexical meaning of the word. The "morphemes" of such languages ​​are extremely isolated from each other, independent, that is, the morpheme is both a root and single word. How are words formed in such languages? Do they only contain words like write but no rewrite, nor letter? New words in isolating languages ​​are formed according to a different principle. To form new words, in such languages, you just need to put the roots (words) side by side and you get something in between a compound word and two words. For example, this is how Chinese words are formed from the word write:

rewrite = write + remake, letter = write + subject etc. (on isolating languages, see: N.V. Solntsev, 1985).

On the other hand, there are languages ​​in which the root of the word is so heavily overloaded with various auxiliary and dependent root morphemes that such a word, growing, turns into a sentence in meaning, but at the same time remains shaped like a word. Some words in such languages ​​seem to be introduced into others. At the same time, complex alternations often occur at the junctions of morphemes. Such a word-sentence device is called incorporation(lat . incorporation - inclusion in its composition, from lat. in- in; corpus- the body, a single whole), and the corresponding languages incorporating, or polysynthetic. Polysynthetic languages ​​are Eskimo-Aleut, Chukchi, Koryak, most of the Indian languages ​​of North and Central America.

J. Greenberg even identified language synthesis index.

According to which languages ​​are classified by means of the abstract concept of type into the following four classes:

• 1) insulating, or amorphous, for example Chinese, Bamana, most languages South-East Asia. They are characterized by the absence of inflection, the grammatical significance of word order, a weak opposition of significant and functional 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 unconditioned 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 verb-predicate (most often direct complement), sometimes with an accompanying morphonological change in stems.
• 4) inflectional languages, such as Slavic, Baltic. They are characterized by the polyfunctionality of grammatical morphemes, the presence of fusion, phonetically unconditioned root changes, big number phonetically and semantically unmotivated types of declension and conjugation. Many languages ​​occupy an intermediate position on the scale of morphological classification, combining features different types; for example, the languages ​​of Oceania can be characterized as amorphous-agglutinative.

The first scientific T. to. I. is the classification of F. Schlegel, who contrasted inflectional languages ​​(meaning mainly Indo-European) with non-inflectional, affixal. Thus, inflections and affixes were opposed as 2 types of morphemes that create the grammatical form of a word. Non-inflectional languages ​​were evaluated by him according to the degree of their "evolutionary closeness" to inflectional ones and were considered 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 ​​evaluating the aesthetic perfection of a language occupied a central place in his concept, which also corresponded to the generally accepted philological views of the era). A. V. Schlegel improved the classification of F. Schlegel, highlighting languages ​​"without grammatical structure", later called amorphous or isolating, which marked the beginning of the selection of another parameter T. to. I. - synthesis and analytics. W. von Humboldt, based on the Schlegel classification, identified 3 classes of languages: isolating, agglutinating and inflectional. In the class of agglutinating languages, languages ​​with a specific sentence syntax are distinguished - incorporating; thus in the subject of consideration T. to. I. a proposal is also included. Humboldt noted the absence of "pure" representatives of one or another type of language,

constituted as ideal model. In the 60s. 19th century in the works of A. Schleicher, basically all classes of T. to. I are preserved; Schleicher, like his predecessors, saw in the classes T. to. I. historical stages development of the language system from isolation to inflection, and the "new" inflectional languages, the heirs of the ancient Indo-European ones, were characterized as evidence of the degradation of the language system. Schleicher divided linguistic elements into those expressing meaning (roots) and those expressing attitudes, and he considered the latter to be the most essential for determining the place of language in T. to. I. and in each typological class he consistently singled out synthetic and analytical subtypes.

At the end of 19, it will become multidimensional, taking into account data from all levels of the language, thus turning from a morphological into a general grammatical classification. Müller for the first time draws morphonological processes as a criterion of T. to. I.; Misteli introduced into the practice of typological studies the material of new languages ​​for linguistics - Amerindian, Austroasiatic, African, etc. One of Fink's criteria - the massiveness / fragmentation of the structure of the word - is marked on a graduated scale, thus showing not so much the presence / absence, but the degree of manifestation of the feature.

At the beginning of the 20th century tasks Since I. still attract the attention of linguists, however, its shortcomings - the possibility of unmotivated association of historically or logically unrelated features, the abundance of empirical material that does not fall under any type, the fragility and sometimes arbitrariness of criteria and limited explanatory power - force a critical review of the basic principles of its construction. Noting the shortcomings of the existing T. to. I., E. Sapir made an attempt in 1921 to create T. to. I. new type - conceptual, or functional. Taking as a basis T. to. I. types of functioning of formal grammatical elements, Sapir distinguishes 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 a systematic approach, focus on the functional aspect of typology, the desire to cover phenomena different levels language, but the very concept of a class in it turned out to be fuzzy, as a result of which the grouping of languages ​​\u200b\u200bis not obvious. Implementation precise methods in linguistic research led to the emergence of the quantitative typology of J. X. Greenberg, who, taking Sapir's criteria as a basis and transforming them according to his goals, proposed calculating the degree of one or another quality of the linguistic structure manifested in syntagmatics.

PHONETIC-PHONOLOGICAL AND PROSODIC TYPOLOGY.

The typology of the 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 rapidly and successfully.

(1) According to the number of vowels in the language:

Vocal (the number of vowels exceeds the average) - Danish, English, German, French.

Consonant (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 the most vocal languages, the number of vowels rarely exceeds 50% of the total number of phonemes. While the number of consonants in consonantal languages ​​can reach 98% of the total inventory.

(2) According to the type of sound chains and the structure of the syllable:

Syllabic, i.e., languages ​​in which there are many restrictions imposed by the entire phonetic structure of the language on the compatibility of sounds. Allowed 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 basic semantic-distinctive unit is the phoneme. The number of allowed syllables is more varied, although there are very different restrictions in different languages ​​(Arabic, Swedish, German, English)

(3) By the nature of the stress:

Tonic, i.e. languages ​​with tonic stress (languages ​​of China, ancient Greek, Serbian, Croatian, Swedish, Lithuanian). With tonic accent percussive sound distinguished by an increase or decrease in tone.

Atonic, i.e. languages ​​with dynamic stress (English, German, most Slavic languages). With dynamic stress, the percussive sound is distinguished by a greater pressure of the exhaled air stream and greater muscular tension in the articulation of the stressed syllable.

Quantitative stress ( stressed syllable is distinguished by the duration of the sound) is typologically possible, but in reality it does not occur independently.

In a separate language, as a rule, one type of stress is presented - tonic or dynamic. However, there are still languages ​​in which 2 types of stress occur at once (Danish). The Swedish language 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 combination 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, stress change, 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, separate 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 the word (Chinese, Vietnamese, Khmer, Thai).

Incorporating/polysynthetic, i.e. languages ​​in which the word is "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 fusional word is characterized by the fact that auxiliary 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 a study whose objects are the subject-object structures of the sentence.

Typological similarities and differences in syntax different languages to a certain extent already revealed in morphological typology. However, in terms of morphology one cannot understand main subject syntactic typology - similarities and differences of languages ​​in the sentence structure. On this basis, the typology reveals the syntactic types of 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 the action and its object (Indo-European, Turkic, Mongolian languages)

Ergative, i.e. languages ​​in which the structure of the sentence is focused on the maximum distinction between 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 ​​(the 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: ranks of animals, plants, long, narrow, short items. Each class corresponds to certain sentence constructions. (languages ​​of Central Africa)

Neutral, i.e. languages ​​that (due to insufficient knowledge) can be characterized by the absence of those features that distinguish other systems (the languages ​​of West Africa).

(2) In word order:

Languages ​​with free word arrangement (Slavic languages)

Fixed word arrangement languages ​​(Japanese, Korean)

(3) According to the mutual arrangement of members in subordinate constructions:

Centripetal/Ascending (Cheese → Dutch). (Caucasian, Dravidian, Ural-Altaic languages)

Centrifugal/descending (Dutch ← cheese). (Semitic, Australonesian languages)

Moderate centripetal (Greek, Latin, English)

Moderate centrifugal (Italian, Spanish, Celtic)

(4) According to the method of syntactic expansion of the phrase:

The natural expansion of a phrase - the order of words or phrases reflects the order in which the components of thought appear in the mind of the speaker, or even the chronology of events or the hierarchy of objects.

Syntactic expansion of a phrase - the order of words is directed by the models and schemes for the implementation of thought developed in the language.

SOCIOLINGUISTIC TYPOLOGY OF LANGUAGES.

The fate of languages social history and perspectives are profoundly different. And there is no social equality between languages. In the sociolinguistic "questionnaire" of languages, it is advisable to take into account the following features:

1. The communicative rank of the language, corresponding to the volume and variety of communication in a particular language. The volume of communication is distributed among the languages ​​of the world extremely unevenly. A significant part of the volume of communication on largest languages of the world is 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 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 the legal status of a state or official language in several countries (Portuguese, Spanish)

State (national) languages ​​- languages ​​​​that have the legal status of the state or official language and actually perform the functions of the main language in one country (Thai, Georgian)

Regional languages ​​- languages ​​of interethnic communication, as a rule, written, but not having the status of an official or state language(Breton, Catalan)

Local languages ​​are, as a rule, unwritten languages ​​used in oral informal communication only within ethnic groups in multi-ethnic 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 ​​\u200b\u200bare written. The presence of writing expands the communicative possibilities of the language. However, in modern world it is the multifunctionality of the language that ensures the viability of its writing.

3. the degree of normalization of the language, the presence and nature of codification. The sociolinguistic parameter "language standardization" is associated with an assessment of the integrity of the language. Different ethnic languages ​​can differ significantly from each other in the extent to which their constituent language formations (dialects, Koine, etc.) are close to each other. In other words, to what extent the national language is uniform, internally homogeneous and consolidated. Aspects of standardization:

Does the language have a supra-dialect formation that dialect speakers use in inter-dialect communication. If there is no supra-dialect form of communication, then the national language standard has not yet been formed.

The relationship of this supradialectal means of communication and dialects. How more people speak a literary language, the closer the literary language is to dialects, the stronger the degree of 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 polyethnic languages.

4. type of standardized (literary) language, its relationship with non-standardized forms of language existence (dialects, vernacular, etc.).

5. legal status of the language (state, official, constitutional, titular, state official language, language autonomous republic, the language of the indigenous nationality, the language of the nationality; official, working, authentic, documentary, semi-documentary, etc.) and its actual position in the conditions of multilingualism

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 cult languages, new confessional languages ​​are not considered sacred.

7. educational and pedagogical status of the language. AT educational institutions languages ​​perform 3 main functions:

The language is used as an aid in teaching some other language.

The language is taught

Language is subject

Genealogical classification 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 studies (19th century). It develops as a result of studying languages ​​with the help of a comparative-historical method. Being historical and genetic in character, G. k. Ya., in contrast to the plurality 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 a single race. To prove the genetic relationship of languages, the existence of systemic tendencies in the language development is used. Wherein specific criteria is the presence of systematic correlations - regular sound correspondences in the original material (in the dictionary, grammatical elements) of languages. However, the lack of identification of the latter between the compared languages ​​does not yet allow us to assert the absence of kinship between them, since it may be too distant for any systematic correlations to be found 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 emergence of a 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 smaller groups that unite genetically more closely. bound friend with other languages; the origin of many of them belongs to a very late time: cf. as part of Indo-European languages Slavic, Germanic, Italic (which gave rise to the Romance languages), Celtic, Indo-Iranian, and other groups. Modern G. to. I. does not provide grounds for supporting the concept, popular in the old linguistics, of the monogenesis of the languages ​​of the world.

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. Africa sees only four big families languages: Semitic-Hamitic, or Afro-Asiatic (common in the adjacent territory of Asia), Nilo-Saharan, Congo-Kordofan, Khoisan. The least satisfactorily developed genealogical classification of the autochthonous languages ​​of America (not yet confirmed, in particular, the opinion of E. Sapir on the distribution of the languages ​​of North America between six language families) 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 are found purely hypothetical construction: 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 well-known language families, so-called. find their place. mixed languages: cf. Indo-European affiliation of almost all Creole languages. At the same time, they are also known individual languages, not detecting genetic links 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, a classification based on similarities and differences in linguistic structure, as opposed to genealogical classification of languages. As long as linguistic typology set as its goal the creation of a typological classification of languages, all typological classifications were almost exclusively morphological, since morphology long time was the most developed area of ​​linguistics. However M. to. I. was not originally thought to be related exclusively to morphological level language, and got its name due to the fact that the focus of its creators was the formal aspect of the language.

Basic concepts M. to. I. - morpheme and word; the main criteria: the nature of the morphemes combined in the word (lexical - grammatical), the way they are combined (pre- or postposition of grammatical morphemes, which is directly related to syntax; agglutination - fusion, which refers to the field of morphonology); the relationship between the morpheme and the word (isolation, when the morpheme = the word, analytic / synthetism of word formation and inflection), associated with syntax. M. to. I. seeks to characterize not specific languages, in which several morphological types are always represented, but the main structural phenomena and trends in languages. M. to. 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 for M. c. language to a greater or lesser extent (for example, language can be "almost amorphous" or "in the highest degree agglutinative"), and created a flexible classification scale, bringing M.'s data closer to the real state specific languages. Since the beginning of the 20th century, i.e., since the linguistic knowledge about the structure of the language as a whole and about the features of languages ​​has significantly expanded various types and language families, the creation of a common typological classification is neither the main nor the most urgent task of typology. It became obvious that the classification, free from the shortcomings of the traditional M. to. I. (vagueness of basic concepts, non-delimitation of different types of classification criteria, undeveloped ideas about necessary and sufficient criteria, inconsistency with specific language structures) and also including phonological, syntactic, semantic characteristics of the structure of the language, currently cannot be created yet. However, there are some directions in typology that fruitfully use M.'s data to. I. Thus, the American linguist J. Greenberg introduces a number of new criteria and the principle of quantifying the properties of a language into Sapir's classification.

The Czech linguist V. Skalichka and other representatives of the so-called characterological typology explore intrastructural patterns, according to which some typological features are combined in one language, i.e., they develop a characteristic 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 with respect to some reference language, structured in accordance with the general principles of M. to I., interpreted accordingly.