英语论文网

ool were quite happy to introduce grammatical considerations to their phonological analyses. To Firth’s notion of meaning we must examine the linguistic ideas of his colleague Bronislaw Malinosky (1884-1942), professor of anthropology at the London School of Economics from 1927 onwards. For Malinowsky, to think of language, as a “means of transfusing ideas from the head of the speaker to that of the listener” was a misleading myth (1935, p.9): to speak, particularly in a primitive culture, is not to tell but to do. His main ideas: 1) language is not a self-contained system, it is dependent on the society itself in which language is used on two ways: a. Language evolves in the accordance in the computer: coin new words to the specific demands; b. Language is used in context. 2) Language serves as great variety of context situation. Firth accepted Malinaosky’s view of language, and indeed the two men probably each influenced the other in evolving what are ultimately very similar views; as a result, Firth uses the word meaning in rather bizarre ways. The meaning of an utterances is what it does, but of course varies aspects of utterances do very different kinds of thing. Malinaosky clarifies his idea of meaning by appealing a notion of “context of situation”(Malinaosky 1923, p.306). To quote Lyon’s exposition of Firth’s view (1966, p.290), “meaning” or “function in context”, is to be interpreted as acceptability or appropriateness in that context: an utterance or part of an utterance is “meaningful” if, and only if, it can be used appropriately in some actual context“. Firth’s view on meaning seem, in fact to have very little to offer. Another development in linguistics, which is also closely related to Firth, is prosodic analysis. The prosody means 1) the relationship of each phoneme to its phonemic context; 2) the relationship each lexical item to the others in the sentence; 3) morphological relations of each word; 3) sentence type; 4) relationship of sentence to its context situation. The prosodic phonology has no phoneme but character. The segments will remain to be phonematic unit after the structural prosodic unit being analyzed and taken off. The supersegamental features in intonation, pitch, stress; palatalization, nasalization and lip rounding divided into prosodic component unit. For phonematic unit, it has fewer phonological features, maybe just the feature of voicing. The prosody operates the different kinds of it over stretch of structures e.g. tooth features in lip-rounding, aspiration. Different tones will cause the change of its meaning. Prosody’s link in grammatical category: e.g. rows [rouz] inflexible, plural form of a noun, present singular third person of a verb; but rose [rouz] just the grammatical meaning. So the word “tooth” [tu:θ] is expressed as wC1VC2 in phonematic. “W” represents lip rounding, etc. There are also polysystemicness principal and monosystemicness principal. For example the complementary contribution of / p/ in [ph] pot and [p] in stop, spot; / m. n / mice, nice; rum, run, rung. In so far as scholars trained within the London School have contributed to our understanding of semantics, as John Lyons in particular has done, they have achieved this by going beyond the framework of ideas shared by other members of the school. The application of these principles to syntax has been carried out by successors of Firth, notably Michael Halliday (b. 1925), once professor of General Linguistics at Univer