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

Results found: 4

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  prefixes
help Sort By:

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

Vzťah Prefixácie, Vidu a Valencie

100%
Walková M.
Jazykovedný Casopis
|
2015
|
vol. 65
|
issue 2
123-137
EN
Literature has pointed out to the existence of two kinds of aspectual prefixes in Slavic languages - external or superlexical and internal or lexical - which differ in the ability to mark telicity and alter argument structure. The study discusses the two kinds of prefixes in Slovak on the basis of scalarity underlying telicity. External prefixes are nonscalar, they express an event is bounded in time but not inherently delimited. They are ±telic and they do not alter argument structure. In contrast, internal prefixes are scalar, because they refer to a scale that measures the event. They are +telic because they denote a boundary on the scale. They can alter argument structure because the event participant measured by a scale must be obligatorily realized as subject or direct object. There are three cases of argument structure alternation: 1. an optionally transitive verb becomes an obligatorily transitive prefixed verb, 2. an intransitive verb becomes an obligatorily transitive prefixed verb with unselected direct object, 3. an intransitive verb becomes an obligatorily reflexive prefixed verb with unselected reflexive marker sa, which I consider a kind of direct object.
2
Content available remote

Distribuce předpon v českém sylabotónickém trocheji

63%
Plecháč P., Hlaváčová J., Merthová K., Kolár R.
Slovo a slovesnost: časopis pro otázky teorie a kultury jazyka (Slovo a slovesnost: A journal for the theory of language and language cultivation)
|
2017
|
vol. 78
|
issue 4
322-332
EN
The article deals with the use of prefixes in the Czech accentual syllabic trochee. We test a hypothesis raised by Miroslav Červenka, Květa Sgallová, and Petr Kaiser which states that some authors in the 19th century used prefixes to moderate rhythmical irregularities. In our analysis – based on automatic prefix recognition in a large body of poetic texts from the Corpus of Czech Verse – we observe a clear tendency in the work of some authors to employ prefixes in such contexts with a frequency significantly higher than would be expected merely by chance. Furthermore, we observe this technique to be very common in the first half of the 19th century, but to gradually disappear in later works.
3

Beats-and-Binding phonology explorations into /s/ voicing in English

51%
Haładewicz-Grzelak M.
Beyond Philology: An International Journal of Linguistics, Literary Studies and English Language Teaching
|
2014
|
issue 11
25-66
EN
Is /s/ voicing an active (natural) process in contemporary English phonology? Is there a possibility to trace a common denominator to all the disjoint contexts of English /s/ voicing? In standard Natural Phonology fricative voicing is assumed to be an example of a morpho-nological rule – that is, a dead process which lost its phonetic conditioning (cf. Donegan and Stampe 2009). The hypothesis which I will propose in this paper is that the apparent medley status of /s/ voicing in English can be partially explained within Beats-and-Binding phonology as a group of natural preferences which, however, can be blocked by morphological information in a set of contexts. To address this issue I shall present a survey of how the problem of fricative voicing in English has been handled in a selection of strands of phonological theory (e.g. Prins 1977; Kim 2001; Chomsky and Halle 1968; Westbury and Keating 1986). Then I make a proposal to address the issue from a different perspective: a B&B formalization and an explanation of some of the voicing contexts, by proposing an extension to the B&B paradigm, namely, the notion of a stress concentrator, which is proposed here as a property of tonic binding in Prototypical Stress-timed Languages. The discussion also uses insights from Zabrocki’s (1980 [1960]) structural phonetics.
FR
La prononciation du /s/ est-elle un processus actif (naturel) dans la phonologie anglaise contemporaine? Est-il possible de tracer un dénominateur commun pour tous les contextes disjoints de la prononciation anglaise du /s/? Dans la phonologie naturelle standard, la prononciation des fricatifs est considérée comme un exemple d’une règle morphonologique – c’est-à-dire d’un processus mort qui a perdu sa détermination phonétique (cf. Donegan et Stampe 2009). L’hypothèse que je propose dans cet article est que le statut apparemment mixte du voisement du /s/ en anglais peut être partiellement expliqué par la phonologie Beats-and-Binding (phono-logie des battements et des liaisons) comme un groupe des préférences naturelles qui peuvent cependant être bloquées par l’information morphologique dans certains contextes. Pour aborder cette question, je vais présenter une étude des manières dont le problème du voisement des fricatives en anglais fut traité dans une sélection des théories phonologiques (par exemple: Prins, 1977; Kim, 2001; Chomsky et Halle 1968; Westbury et Keating 1986). Ensuite, je propose d’aborder la question de perspective différente, c’est-à-dire du point de vue de la formalisation B&B et de l’explication de quelques contextes de prononciation, en proposant une extension du paradigme B&B, notamment de la notion du concentrateur d’accentuation, qui est postulé ici comme propre à la liaison tonique dans les langues dont le rythme est fonction des syllabes accentuées. Dans la discussion j’utilise également les idées de la phonétique structurelle de Zabrocki (1980 [1960]).
4
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

A Plenitude of Prefixes: Delineating the Boundaries of Neo-, Retro-, Faux- and Post-Victorian Literature

51%
Sulmicki M.
Zagadnienia Rodzajów Literackich
|
2015
|
vol. 58/115 z. 1
9-26
EN
The category of contemporary fiction looking back to nineteenth-century British history is adorned with various prefixes, among them neo-Victorian, retro-Victorian, faux-Victorian and post-Victorian. The problem of naming is a common one when attempts are made to describe and define a new phenomenon. After about a decade of debate, the prefix ‛neo’ is the one chosen most often. Nevertheless, it is quite often used interchangeably with the others. Evidently then the boundaries between these terms are at best blurry. In fact they are often treated as synonyms, even though the scope of the concepts to which they are applied often differs. It seems, however, that all these terms could be put to good use if their individual definitions were specified and agreed upon. I would therefore like to postulate a disambiguation of the four terms mentioned above.
PL
Kategoria współczesnej fikcji, cofając się do XIX-wiecznej historii brytyjskiej bogata jest w różne przedrostki, wśród nich neo-wiktoriański, retro-wiktoriański, faux-i post-wiktoriański. Problem terminologii jest podstawowym, gdy próbuje się opisać i zdefiniować nowe zjawisko. Po około dziesięcioletniej debacie, przedrostek "neo" zdaje się być wybieranym najczęściej. Niemniej jednak, jest on często stosowany wymiennie z innymi. Widoczne jest zatem, że granice pomiędzy tymi warunkami są w najlepszym razie rozmyte. W rzeczywistości częstokroć traktuje się je jako synonimy, chociaż zakres problemowy, do którego są stosowane zazwyczaj jest zróżnicowany. Wydaje się jednak, że wszystkie te terminy mogą być odpowiednio wykorzystane, jeśli ich poszczególne definicje zostaną określone i uzgodnione. W tym artykule proponuję ujednoznacznienie czterech wymienionych powyżej kategorii
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.