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

Results found: 7

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  SEMANTIC STRUCTURE
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
Slavia Orientalis
|
2006
|
vol. 55
|
issue 3
401-421
EN
The author discusses the syntactic association relationship, earlier introduced by A. F. Priyatkina (sootnositel'naya svyaz') as well as P. V. Chesnokov (oposredovannaya svyaz'). The association relationship (diatax) disturbs to a degree the symmetry of the sentence, i.e. the agreement between its grammatical and semantic structures. The author quotes the results of a psycholinguistic experiment to confirm the psychological reality of the diatax in sentence structure. Further, the author describes the form and the performance of the association relationship in the structure of a simple sentence, examining the regularity of syntactic models and syntactic parallelism, the linear contact of words, the syntactic condensation, the ellipse, the preposition of the verb, the general communicative function of words (usually for comments), the semantic and phonetic similarity of words, their lexical identity, paired prepositions, and others.
EN
At the meta-textual level, a primary role among linguistic signals is played by operators that contain the semantic component 'say'. That component is taken by a number of linguists to be a fundamental unit of 'the language of semantics'. As part of the semantic structure of several meta-textual formulae, it conveys statements about the dialogue or about a component of the dialogue such as its topic. The component 'say', at the meta-textual level, is organically associated with the informational field of replies in the first place. The meta-informational items concerned can be classified as follows: (1) ones that appear explicitly in the surface structure of the utterance, and (2) ones that are hidden, in an implicit manner, in the deep structure of the utterance. The first group comprises, in Hungarian, the following items: mond 'say', megmond 'tell', mondjuk 'let's say', mondom neked / nektek 'I tell you', oszinten mondom neked 'I tell you sincerely', azt mondjak 'they say', ahogy mondani szokas 'as the saying goes', kar arrol beszelni 'it's not worth talking about', kar volt ezt megmondanom 'I regret having said that', igazat mondtam 'I told you the truth', koztünk mondva 'just between ourselves', akartam valamit mondani 'I meant to tell you something', mit is akartam mondani? 'what was I going to say?', etc. The second group contains meta-structures that are less obvious since they are elliptic, they involve parts that are omitted from the full expression. For instance: roviden '[I say it] briefly'; roviden es velosen / roviden es tomoren / roviden es vilagosan '[I tell you] briefly, tersely, and clearly'; egyszeruen 'simply' [= 'I will say it in a simpler or shorter form, I will summarise it]; apropo 'apropos' [= 'I will tell you something that pertains to the foregoing and that just occurred to me']; egyebkent / masfelol / zarojelben / mellekesen 'however / on the other hand / besides / by the way' [= 'I will give you information that is loosely connected to the foregoing']; etc.
Bohemistyka
|
2016
|
vol. 16
|
issue 2
109 - 124
EN
The article analyzes the semantic field around the world human and it’s individual subfields in the urban dialect of Brno and Poznan from germanism’s point of view. The analysis carried out in the context of a comparative reveal differences and common ground between the material and indicate their reasons for referring to the context of the historical-cultural-socially.
Bohemistyka
|
2014
|
vol. 14
|
issue 3
216 - 240
EN
The article analyzes the urban dialects germanisms in Brno and Poznan from the field MAN. Cities don't neighbour to each other and they weren't In contact never before, so semantic structure of germanisms reflects both the differences due to the nature the specifics of each of the urban centers, and common features resulting from the current perception of reality (among Rother things attitudes to anthropocentrism) or common of historical-social-cultural phenomenons, which shared Brno and Poznan.
5
Content available remote

Červenkova teorie lyrického subjektu

75%
EN
This article considers the development of Miroslav Cervenka's ideas on the theory of the lyric subject and communication in lyric verse. He did not lay the foundations of this theory till his dissertation, 'Vyznamova vystavba literarniho dila' (The Semantic Structure of a Work of Literature), in which he defines the lyric subject as one of the semantic complexes within the overall structure of the work. Although Cervenka never completely abandoned this conception, which stems from a structural and semiotic paradigm, he gradually added to it with impulses from other ways of thinking about literary studies. In the article 'Individualni styl a vyznamova vystavba literarniho dila' (Individual Style and the Semantic Structure of a Work of Literature, 1975) he linked the question of subjects in lyric verse to ideas in stylistics and the theory of interpretation. With his theory of subjects in lyric verse, set forth in the articles 'Halasova sebeosloveni' (Halas's forms of self-address, 1985) and 'Sebeosloveni v lyrice' (Self-address in the lyric, 1991), Cervenka moves towards perspectitives of communication. He is concerned with current theory of fiction in the volume 'Fikcnimi svety lyriky' (Fictional Worlds of Lyric Verse, 2003), which, according to this article, was an impulse to methodological considerations about a model of literary history, which would link involvement in interpreting a text with its contextualization from the perspective of literary history.
EN
The paper deals with the certain problems concerning semantic structure of sentence on the basis of the theoretical and methodological postulates and analysis presented in the work Semantic Structure of Slovak Sentence (2012) by Eva Tibenská. The paper describes some open questions concerning the investigation how semantic and syntactic aspects of sentence structure cooperate. The paper concentrates especially on problems arising with the classification of predicates and delimiting the semantic roles of subject and object participants in the sentence structures. A special attention is put on the questions connected with the semantic structures of subject less sentence and the understanding of causative sentences in the language. The paper also analyses the meaning of the structures in which dative participant occurs with regard to its semantic interpretation.
EN
The author speaks about two hierarchies defining the scope of the semantic (and morpho-syntactic) variation of a sentence. The first hierarchy operates in the framework of the constitutive proposition. It is the hierarchy of arguments of the given predicate imposed by the selected exponent of that predicate. It is labelled diathetical hierarchy. Diathesis is understood as a semantic category (with partially grammaticalised exponents) responsible for the selection of the morphosyntactic and/or lexical exponent of the predicate and eo ipso for the hierarchy of its arguments as presented in the sentence. Diathetical hierarchy is correlated with the hierarchy of case relationships. Diathetically unmarked sentence is a sentence with the agens / initiator of the action as a referent of the first, nominative, argument. The second hierarchy operates on the sentence as a whole. It is the hierarchy responsible for the topicalization of the sentence. It is pragmatically motivated and is labelled as communicative hierarchy. Its exponents are the intonational line (variations in pitch) of the utterance (in the written text signalized by the punctuation marks) and/or the linear ordering of the semantic components.
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.