Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  preskriptivismus
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

Analýza článků Františka Čermáka věnovaných jazykové kultuře

100%
Chromý J.
Slovo a slovesnost: časopis pro otázky teorie a kultury jazyka (Slovo a slovesnost: A journal for the theory of language and language cultivation)
|
2009
|
vol. 70
|
issue 2
128-138
EN
This article is concerned with texts by František Čermák devoted to issues of Czech language cultivation. Four major topics are analyzed: standard vs. common Czech, written vs. spoken Czech, prescriptivism and the native language of Czechs. Various problems in the analyzed texts result from an unclear methodological background. Many concepts are used without argumentation: Čermák fails to substantiate their suitability for his language description. We can find uncorroborated generalizations which can be interpreted as Čermák’s communicative strategy. Many statements are rather impressionistic and are not based on relevant language observations. With regard to these findings, the author of this paper argues that a deep-reaching dialogue should be held, which may help to clarify the indeterminate situation in Czech linguistics concerning issues of language cultivation.
2
Content available remote

Spisovnost a její zdroje

100%
Cvrček V.
Slovo a slovesnost: časopis pro otázky teorie a kultury jazyka (Slovo a slovesnost: A journal for the theory of language and language cultivation)
|
2006
|
vol. 67
|
issue 1
46-60
EN
Although “literary language”, i.e. standard language or spisovná čestina, was the central notion of the Prague Linguistic Circle’s Theory of the Cultivation of Language, it has never been defined. This article deals with the problem of definition of “literariness”, a concept which forms the base for the codification criterion of “correspondence with the literary norm”. Several attempts to define it or to provide criteria for “literariness” were made, but, as I explain, none of them were successful in reproducing the codified set of language means. These attempts can be divided into two groups: nominalistic and realistic. The former suggests that literariness (i.e. being a part of literary/standard language) is “a mere label”, a characteristic that is acquired by being codified, the latter supposes that language means are standard or nonstandard (or something in between) depending on their usage. The nominalistic approach appears to be inadequate, as it provides no opportunity for language development. Realistic criteria, however, are either methodologically dubious or highly controversial among Czech linguists.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.