117. Grammar priest in the Vedic religion.
Ancient Indian grammar of Panini (5th century BC)

In the Vedic (ancient Indian) tradition, grammar served as a means of preserving and orally transmitting sacred texts in Sanskrit. Grammar was built on the linguistic material of the "Vedas" - the main mythological and ritual text of Ancient India, and itself was considered as part of it ("Veda of the Vedas"). At the same time, "the grammarian was one of the priests who controlled the speech part of the ritual, its compliance with the norm, precedent," first word "(Toporov, 1986, 123).

The grammatical service "under the Vedas" became the beginning of a distinctive and strong philosophical and linguistic tradition that still exists in India. Speaking about the peak achievements of the tradition, Panini's famous grammar is usually called the "Octateuch" (5th century BC), but Panini himself mentions about ten predecessors of his work, and researchers note that Panini's work represents only one of a series grammatical trends in ancient India. If at the Yaska school "they taught the correct recitation and interpretation of sacred texts, then Panini describes and, apparently, in many respects himself establishes the norms of the literary language for their introduction into the everyday life of the "earthly gods" - the Brahmins" (Istoriya, 1980, 74). Its grammar belongs to the class of so-called generative(otherwise generative) grammars, i.e. those that teach not analysis, but the synthesis (generation) of speech. Having a list of 43 syllables as a starting material, Panini formulates a system of rules that allow one to build words from syllables, constructs from words, and ultimately form all possible correct statements in Sanskrit. On the whole, Panini's "Octateuch" anticipates the ideas and methods of modern structural-generative grammar.

At the same time, Panini's description of the morphology of Sanskrit, which is the richest in terms of the number of forms, is extremely economical and resembles not so much a verbal coherent text as columns of mathematical (formula) recording of information. Such conciseness, almost encryption of the presentation, apparently, is associated with the esoteric attitudes of Brahminism, including only oral, in special education, the transmission of priestly secrets.

In modern linguistics Panini's "Octateuch" is recognized as one of the most complete and rigorous grammars of Sanskrit, still unsurpassed in quality and integrity of the description of the language. The author of the "Octateuch" was obviously a genius. He owns methodological discoveries, which in modern times, independently of Panini, came to structural linguistics, logic and mathematics.
^

118. Phonetic discoveries of Muslim Arabs in the VIII century.

Religious consciousness gives great importance the external, formal accuracy of the ritual, including the exact reproduction of the word that sounds in the ritual. Many traditions had specially developed rules for the ritual reading of sacred books, as well as guidelines for teaching clergy to read cult and perform prayers and chants.

Muslim Arabs have the science of reading the Qur'an - kira "at- formed in the VIII century. Islam has never allowed translation of the Qur'an in worship. In mosques all over the world (Arabs, Turks, Iran, Africa, India, Central and Southeast Asia, the USA, Canada), the Koran is still, as in the 8th century, read only in the Arabic original, while the canonicity of pronunciation is associated with the success of worship, its pleasing to God. For centuries, children in Muslim schools have memorized the Qur'an.

After the canonization of the Koran (7th century), its language (classical Arabic) became more and more distant from the living folk languages, so ritual pronunciation had to be specially taught. There was a need for a careful description of the sounding speech. By the 8th century Arabic phoneticians achieved outstanding results: they described in detail the work of the tongue, lips, oral cavity and nose in pronouncing each sound; created exhaustive classifications of phonetic changes; systematized variants of sound types (calling them "branches"), in which historians of linguistics see the beginnings of phonology (i.e., a functional description of the sound system, with the allocation of a set of phonemes inherent in the language - sound types involved in distinguishing words and forms).
^

119. Slavic spelling treatises

Just as Christian scriptoria usually lived in monasteries or in the "book yards" of hierarchs, so the authors of the first orthographic works belonged to the clergy.

In general, the book business in Christian Europe was the concern of the church, part of the confessional life of society.

Church people were the authors of two early Slavic writings on writing - the Bulgarian scribe Chernorizet Khrabr, whose name is inscribed in the apology "On Writings" (late 9th century), and the resident of the Resava Monastery Konstantin Kostenechsky, the creator of the "Book of Writings" (c. 1410 ). The author of an essay on spelling, a reformer of writing, was also an outstanding religious leader, mastermind of the Czech Reformation Jan Hus (1371-1415).

In the treatise "Orthographia Bohemica" (1406), Jan Hus proposed additions to the Latin script that made it convenient for the Czechs. To convey Czech hissing and long vowels, he proposed rational system superscripts above certain letters. With the development of printing, this led to the normalization of Czech writing. Later, the phonological ideas and practical solutions of Jan Hus were used in the script of the South Slavs, based on the Latin alphabet, as well as in the script of the Lusatian, Baltic and Estonian languages, in international phonetic transcription.

In the history of different linguistic traditions, treatises on writing appear first or simultaneously with early vocabulary experiments. The oldest manuals on the language opened with the rules of spelling, sometimes also orthoepy, and only in the following sections was there an overview grammatical meanings and forms. There is a certain logic in the history of linguistic knowledge in this: at the beginning there was a comprehension of the external, formal (graphic and sound), and therefore the simpler side of speech. Special attention to the content plan of the language, i.e. to linguistic semantics, appears later.

Typologically representing the first stage in the history of a particular philological tradition, the early phonetic-orthographic writings retain the most archaic and therefore amazing features of linguistic consciousness. This is an area of ​​exotics and a museum, this is their special value for the history of culture. It is in writings on writing that the most striking manifestations of a fideistic attitude to language are found - an unconventional perception of a sign, a fetishization of an alphabetic symbol, a belief in the magic of writing.

In Orthodox literature, these archaic features are most fully represented by Konstantin Kostenechsky (c. 1410) in his "Book of Writings" (see § 23-24 and 100 for details). After Constantine, no one wrote about letters with such religious passion, threatened "erroneous" anathema, and prophesied that apostates would burn with hellfire... (except for the Russian Old Believers and the fanatical stubbornness with which they resisted Nikon's spelling innovations - for example when it was ordered to write, according to Greek models, the name of Christ with two "and: it was Jesus, became Jesus; about the "book reference" of Patriarch Nikon, see § 101). That was n and to faith in the letter. This peak has been passed by culture, however, of course, the very psychological and semiotic phenomenon of faith in the letter is preserved in one or another weakened form. (On the traces and consequences of the cult of writing in contemporary culture see §26-27.)

Of course, the presence of these archaic motives in the old articles on writing does not mean that there was no movement of thought and completely positive achievements and discoveries. Let's name one of them, however, not ordinary, but amazing. In the anonymous article "The Tale of Collecting These Letters" *, known from two lists of the 15th - 17th centuries. and created, judging by the language and some indirect data, in Muscovite Russia, for the first time in Europe, three genealogical groups of Slavic ethnic groups are indicated. There is no terminological designation of groups yet, but there are actually three lists of tribes and peoples that geographically correspond to the eastern, southern and western Slavs. This outstanding discovery remained in the manuscript and was forgotten, and two or three centuries later, what did the obscure scribe XU guess about? c., was rediscovered. The genealogical classification of the Slavic languages, with a distinction between three groups: South, East and West Slavic languages ​​(however, not yet in the current terminology!), in modern times first appears in the middle of the 19th century. - in the programs of the Slavic courses of I.I. Sreznevsky (Kharkov, 1842; St. Petersburg, 1847).

* The article was published according to two lists in the work: Yagich, 1885-1895, 699-700.
^

120. European grammars of the 15th - early 17th centuries.
in their connection with humanism and the Reformation

If in early works on spelling one can find the most archaic features of linguistic consciousness, then with the study of grammar proper * in European culture of the 15th-17th centuries, on the contrary, some new features are associated in relation to language and sign.

** "Actually" grammar is morphology and syntax, i.e. systems of forms and structures that express generalized meanings, without which a sentence cannot be built - for example, the meaning of number, tense, mood, voice, subject, object, feature, statement, negation (or question), certainty (or uncertainty), etc. .in books called Grammar, quite often the actual grammatical sections are preceded by non-grammatical ones - information on phonetics, writing, etc.

Until the 15th century Europe knew only the grammars of Latin and Greek, dating back to the works of ancient grammarians. In the XV-XVI centuries. in different countries the first grammars of new vernacular languages ​​(vernaculae) appear, and with the same spontaneous obligation with which technological discoveries are now spreading.

The chronology of the first grammars of vernacular languages ​​is as follows:

1465	- Grammar of the Italian language of the famous humanist, Leon Batista Alberti, architect and mathematician.
1492	- Spanish (Catalan) grammar by Antonio de Nebrija.
1509	– English grammar John Colet and William Lily.
Late 15th or early 16th century	- Russian (unfortunately, handwritten and unfinished) "The book is said to be Donatus Menshey, but in it he talks about many parts of broadcasting ..." Dmitry Gerasimov*.
1531	- French Jacques Dubois (Sylvius).
1533	- Czech Vaclav Filomat, Benes Optat and Petr Gzel.
1539	- Hungarian Sylvester Janos Erdesi.
1568	- Polish Peter Statorius (Stoensky).
1571	- Czech Yana Blagoslava.
1574	- German Lawrence Albertus.
1584	- Slovenian Adam Bohoric.
1604	- Croatian Bartholomew Kasic.
1643	- "Slovenian Grammar" by John Uzhevich (a handwritten textbook of "simple language" - the literary Ukrainian-Belarusian language), compiled in France, apparently for missionary purposes).

* This name has already been mentioned in connection with the history of the creation of a complete Church Slavonic biblical code ("Gennadievsky Bible" of 1499, see § 94). Dmitry Gerasimov is known as a member of embassies to Sweden, Denmark, Prussia, Vienna, Rome. His name is read in the annals ("Mitya Malaya, Latin interpreter"), in the "History of the Russian State" by Karamzin. Of the Russian young people sent to study abroad (in Livonia), he is the first to be known by name.

At the end of the XVI century. the first printed grammars of the Church Slavonic language appear*: in 1591 in Lvov – a grammar of both Greek and Church Slavonic languages, under the title "Adelfotis. Grammar of the good-verbal Hellenic Slavonic language"**; then "Slovenian Grammar" by Lavrenty Zizania (Vilna, 1596); in 1619 in Evie near Vilna, in the printing house of the Orthodox Brotherhood, the famous grammar of Melety Smotrytsky was printed - "Grammars of the Slavic correct syntagma" (2nd ed. M., 1648; 3rd ed. M., 1721; 4th ed. Rymniki (in Romania), 1755).

* Before printed grammars in Orthodox literature, the article "Eight honors of the word" (i.e. "Eight parts of speech"), compiled according to Greek sources in Serbia no later than the middle of the 10th century, was popular; the article contained the basic grammatical terminology and systematization of the nominal forms of the Church Slavonic language.

** Word Adelfotis(gr. adelfotes- brotherhood) title page Grammar points, speaking in modern terms, to the "institution" in which it was compiled - the Lviv Orthodox Brotherhood, which had its own printing house and school (since 1586).

The prerequisites for the widespread distribution of grammars were associated, firstly, with humanism and the Renaissance; second, and more directly, with the Reformation and the Counter-Reformation.

European grammars of the 15th - early 17th centuries. arise in line with new cultural and cognitive intentions instilled in humanism and the Renaissance. There is a need for in-depth self-knowledge of culture - in understanding the means, methods, "material", "tools" of culture. In the art of the Italian Renaissance, this caused treatises by Piero della Francesca, Alberti, Leonardo da Vinci, Vasari on colors, on the role of the model, on proportion; mathematical calculations of perspective and composition of artistic canvases, in-depth study of artistic anatomy and mechanics. In the field of verbal creativity, the desire to understand the "technique" of culture caused treatises on the language of Dante, Lorenzo Valla, Pietro Bembo; the work of Leonardo da Vinci on a Latin grammar in Italian and on a Latin-Italian dictionary; the first scientific philological community in Europe - the Florentine Academy with a program for cultivating a perfect language. In this series of cultural-cognitive efforts, undertakings, ideas, there are also early grammars of folk languages.

On the other hand, European grammars of the XV-XVII centuries. connected in one way or another with the Reformation. Some grammarians developed and propagated the philological hopes of the Reformation; others opposed her.

Just as the initiative to translate Scripture into the vernacular came from the Protestants (see §95), so the first Slavonic grammars were created by the Protestants. Such is the Czech grammar of the Protestant priests Philomath, Optat and Gzel (Namesht, 1533); the first Polish grammar of the Calvinist, later Socinian Piotr Statorius-Stoensky (Krakow, 1568); best in the 16th century Czech grammar by Jan Blago-slava, head of the Protestant community "Czech Brethren" (manuscript 1571); the first Slovene grammar compiled by one of the leaders of Slovene Protestantism, Adam Bohoric (Wittenberg, 1584).

Grammars, however, were not a specifically Protestant phenomenon. They were also created by Catholics and Orthodox. Grammar could also have a counter-reformation orientation. These are the first printed East Slavic grammars - "Adelfotis", the grammars of Lawrence Zizanius and Meletius Smotrytsky. They were compiled by Orthodox scribes to support the Church Slavonic language. Just as the Gennadievsky Biblical Code of 1499 and the Ostroh Bible printed on its basis of 1581 resisted reform attempts to translate Scripture into vernacular languages, so the grammar of Meletiy Smotrytsky was the largest philological action in defense of the cult supra-ethnic language Slavia Orthodoxa.

At the same time, there are new features in Smotrytsky's position. In his grammar, there is no attitude, common in Orthodox literacy, towards the Church Slavonic language as a sacred and exclusive language*; there are no arguments, usual for Orthodoxy, about the special "grace" of the "Slavonic" language or its superiority over Latin. Meletiy Smotrytsky does not evaluate languages ​​according to the religious principle and de facto recognizes their equality.

* Wed. the apology of the Church Slavonic language as the language of the holy and giving salvation from the Orthodox Ukrainian monk John Vishensky (XV? century): "God almighty<..>better baptizes in the Slovenian language, but rather than in Latin"; to the saints and saints "be saved and sanctify the same holy language Slovenian source" (Vishensky I. Soch. / Preparation of the text, article and commentary by I.P. Eremin. M .; L.: Publishing House of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1955, pp. 192, 194. However, the interpretation of the Church Slavonic language as sacred was not canonical in Orthodoxy.

Smotrytsky's grammar largely removes the opposition of Church Slavonic as a sacred language to folk ("simple language") as a non-sacred, secular language. In the preface to the grammar, written in "simple language", Smotrytsky recommends referring to it when teaching the "Slavonic" language. In the text of the grammar itself, he often explains Church Slavonic forms or phrases with the help of a "simple mov", including translating biblical verses into it. Smotrytsky's attitude to grammar itself was also new: Protestantly sober, far from attributing sacral and theological significance to grammar.

The reformative sound of Smotritsky's grammar was muffled when it was republished in Moscow (1648), "naturally", without the name of the author, who became a Uniate in 1627. All explanations and translations into English have been excluded from the text of the grammar. in native language. Smotrytsky's modest preface in "simple language" was replaced by anonymous (dating back to the writings of Maxim the Greek) Church Slavonic discourses on the sanctity of the "Slovenian" language and the piety of grammar with mention the main Orthodox authorities (Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian, John Chrysostom). In the Moscow edition, the format and font were enlarged, the margins became wider. Combined with lengthy prefaces and afterwords, this greatly increased the bulk of the book. Cinnabar headings and initials appeared in it. All this gave the Moscow grammar of 1648 a solemn and impressive appearance, making it "the official publication of Moscow literacy" (Yagich, 1910, 30).

Thus, in the XVII century. grammar still belonged to the church. Grammars were written by church people, for church schools. Grammarians were based on the language of Scripture and taught to understand this language. Grammars could still be the subject of confessional controversy and bias; still made sense defining grammars like Orthodox, Jesuit or Protestant.

The origins of grammar as a science

• · Modern methods grammars originate in the Indian linguistic tradition (in the works of Panini in the middle of the 1st millennium BC).
• The system of concepts and categories of modern grammar, up to the terminology (names of parts of speech, cases, etc.), goes back to the ancient linguistic tradition (Greeks - Aristotle, Stoics, Alexandrian school; Romans - Varro (116-27 BC) . e.).
• · In the Middle Ages - one of the seven liberal arts. Being both descriptive and normative, it includes the study of the texts of the classics and a certain understanding of the language; the language identified with Latin appears as a potentially eternal form, directly related to the mechanisms of thought.
• · Greco-Roman grammatical theory through Late Latin grammar (Donat, Priscian) was assimilated by European philologists of the Renaissance and the Enlightenment (for example, the first Church Slavonic grammars - 1591, 1596); at the same time, the concepts and categories of Latin grammar were transferred to the grammars of new languages.
• · In the 17th-18th centuries. there is a significant increase in interest in the logical-philosophical foundations of the theory of grammar (the problem of "universal" or "universal" grammar.).
• · The development of typological research and the creation of the first morphological classifications of the world's languages ​​(beginning of the 19th century) gave impetus to the creation of differentiated conceptual systems for describing languages ​​of different systems; systematic work in this direction was started by H. Steinthal and continued by the neogrammarists.
• · The idea of ​​"emancipation" of the grammar of new languages ​​from the Latin-Greek grammatical tradition penetrated into the descriptive grammars of specific languages ​​only at the beginning of the 20th century.
• · The main lines of development of grammar in the 20th century. concerned not so much the methodology of describing specific languages ​​as the problems of grammar theory.

Linguistics originated in ancient times. The emergence of primary knowledge about the structure of the language is associated with the emergence of writing.

Linguistic thought begins to take shape in the Middle East (3 - 1 thousand BC): Egypt, Sumer and Babylonia, the Hittite kingdom, Phoenicia, Ugarit, etc. Here, at the turn of 4 - 3 thousand BC. Egyptian and Sumerian-Akkadian writing arose. These graphic systems initially used ideographic and then verbal-syllabic principles. Among the Western Semites (Byblos, Ugarit, Phoenicia) by the middle of the 2nd millennium BC. formed an alphabetic script. His principles formed the basis of many graphic systems, up to the systems of Indian writing in the East. The Phoenician (Canaanite) alphabet was the prototype of the Greek script, the signs of which were subsequently used in Etruscan, Latin, Coptic, Gothic, Slavic, etc. letter.

Actually theoretical approach to the language in the East is formed and reaches a high degree of development in ancient China, ancient india and the Arab Caliphate.

The Chinese, Indian and later Arabic linguistic traditions influenced to varying degrees the formation of their own traditions in Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Burma, Tibet, Indonesia and Malaysia, Iran, the states of Central Asia, etc. The ideas of European linguistics penetrated these countries relatively late, but at present they have a serious influence on national linguistic schools.

Greco-Roman linguistic tradition as the foremother of European linguistics

In Europe, linguistic knowledge arises in ancient greece, and then continues to be developed in Rome. The problems of language were first discussed from the point of view of philosophy: disputes about the origin of names, the meaning of which is revealed in the dialogue "Cratylus" by Plato (5th-4th centuries BC). Here the initial systems of grammatical concepts were formed, among which the most developed were the system of Aristotle (4th century BC) and the system of the Stoic school (3rd-1st centuries BC).

Grammar itself, as an analogue of modern linguistics, emerged in the Hellenistic period. Its highest achievements were the grammatical works of representatives of the Alexandrian school(from the end of the 4th century BC), especially Dionysius the Thracian (170-90 BC) and Apollonius Diskol (2nd century AD). Grammar was understood as an art. She was responsible for the rules of reading and stress, the classification of consonants and vowels, the structure of the syllable, the definitions of words and sentences, the classification of parts of speech, the categories of names and verbs, nominal and verbal word formation, the features of Greek dialects, and Apollonius Diskol, in addition, methods combining words into sentences. The Alexandrians were supporters of the principle of analogy, i.e. they believed that regularity prevailed in the language, while the supporters of the anomaly principle preferred randomness.

The traditions of the Alexandrian school were continued in Rome.

The Greco-Roman (ancient, Mediterranean) linguistic tradition subsequently became the foundation of European linguistic thought.

Linguistics of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance

European linguistics of the Middle Ages and subsequent periods had to solve the problems of creating writing in native languages. In the West, writing systems were formed through a gradual, mostly spontaneous adaptation of Latin characters to the sound systems of their languages. In the East, in the sphere of influence of Byzantium, original alphabets were invented, which had the Greek letter as their main prototype.

At the end of the 14th - beginning of the 16th centuries. made a significant contribution to the study of grammatical meanings milliners. The grammar of modists, whose central concept was the means of designation, was the first theory of language in the European linguistic tradition.

With the intensification of interest in national languages, the first grammars of many European, as well as a number of non-European languages, began to appear. It became necessary to organize this material, and numerous attempts were made to classify languages ​​on the basis of their typological similarities and alleged family ties.

Linguistics 19th century

In linguistic comparativeism, the leading role from the very beginning belonged to comparative historical linguistics, which created in the first half of the 19th century. its own research method, which provides reliable evidence of the relationship of languages ​​and allows for the reconstruction of the underlying proto-language, as well as to trace the history of languages ​​descending from it. The creators of this method were Rasmus Christian Rask, Franz Bopp, Jakob Grimm, Alexander Khristoforovich Vostokov. Already at the very initial stage, phonetic Grimm law. It recorded regular sound correspondences between Germanic and other Indo-European languages ​​(first consonant shift) and between High German and other Germanic languages ​​(second consonant shift).

The comparative historical method was substantially improved in the middle of the 19th century. in the works of August Schleicher, Georg Kurzius and others, at the end of the 19th century. and at the beginning of the 20th century. in the writings of representatives of the so-called neogrammatism, in the studies of representatives of the Moscow linguistic formal school, created by Philip Fedorovich Fortunatov, in the works of the founders of the method of linguistic geography (Georg Wenker, Ferdinand Wrede, Jules Gillieron, Edmond Edmond) and others.

Science in the 19th century the historical (genetic) approach to language was firmly established.

Numerous hypotheses are currently put forward about the presence of genetic links between certain families of languages ​​(the hypotheses are Altaic, Ural-Altaic, Boreal, Nostratic, etc.).

At the same time, it developed typological linguistics(brothers Friedrich Wilhelm von Schlegel and August von Schlegel, Wilhelm von Humboldt, August Schleicher and others), which rose in the 20th century. to a new level (Edward Sapir - Edward Sapir, Joseph Greenberg - Joseph Greenberg, etc.).

During the medieval period, in understanding the nature of the language, a logical approach was asserted, dating back to ancient thinkers, according to which it seemed that all the languages ​​of the world were arranged according to one universal scheme, coinciding in the semantic plan (plan of content) and diverging, first of all, in their sound. organization (expression plane). This idea was most clearly embodied in "The General and Rational Grammar of Port-Royal / Port-Royal"(1660; Antoine Arnaud - Antoine Arnauld, Claude Lanslo - Claude Lancelot).

Ideologically dominant in linguistics at the end of the 19th century. and the beginning of the 20th century. direction was neogrammatism. The nature of language was explained by the laws of the individual psyche and physiology. A physiological explanation was given to phonetic laws that knew no exceptions; psychology was relied upon in interpreting the mechanism of alignments by analogy. Only the historical approach to language was recognized as scientific. The language was rather understood not as a system, but as a conglomerate. Many of these principles in the late 19th - early 20th centuries. were criticized by a large number of linguists, among whom should be named Ivan Alexandrovich Baudouin de Courtenay and his student Nikolai Vyacheslavovich Krushevsky, Philip Fedorovich Fortunatov and Ferdinand de Saussure (Ferdinand de Saussure).

The development of linguistics in the 20th century. Hugo Schuchhardt, Karl Vossler, Italian neolinguists, Antoine Meillet, and others raised serious objections against the neogrammarists. I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay (1845 -1929), his student in Kazan N.V. Krushevsky (1851-1887), head of the Moscow linguistic school F.F. Fortunatov (1848-1914) and Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913), who had gone through a scientific school with the young grammarians, who taught first in Paris and then at home in Geneva, had the mission to lay theoretical basis of that direction in linguistics of the 20th century, which is known under the name structuralism and which in the 30-60s. turned out to be almost undividedly dominant in world science.

The new research principles were most clearly stated in "Course of General Linguistics" F. de Saussure. The book gained worldwide fame, was translated into many languages, and reprinted many times.

Linguistics of the 20th century in line with structuralist approach Attempts were made to abandon the appeal to other sciences in order to explain the specifics of natural human language and to interpret language as a special phenomenon that has no analogues, exceptional in nature, as a sign system developing and functioning according to its own laws.

Over the past few decades, many laws of the era of linguistic structuralism have been revised.

In modern world linguistics, it is practically the leader European (and now European-American) tradition. It relies primarily on the ancient (Greco-Roman) tradition and the achievements of European linguistic thought of the Middle Ages, the Renaissance and the Enlightenment, but at the same time it took a lot from the Arabic and Indian traditions, significantly expanded its understanding of the structure of the language thanks to latest research in the field of typology of languages ​​and linguistic universology, acquaintance with a variety of languages ​​​​of a very different system.

The latest linguistics is equally interested in both the internal structure of the language and the influence on it of the environment in which the language system functions and develops (man, ethnic group, society).

The latest linguistics seeks to solve both empirical problems (description of individual specific languages ​​of the world), and linguo-philosophical and theoretical problems (explaining the essential properties of human language in general; revealing the general laws of the structure, functioning and development of world languages).

Linguo-philosophical and grammatical thought in ancient Greece

Attempts to comprehend the meaning of words are noted, starting with Homer and Hesiod. Etymology turns out to be the first manifestation of reflection on language in the history of Greek linguo-philosophical thought. Initially, the belief in the presence of an inextricable, natural connection between the word and the object it denotes, rooted in mythological thinking, dominated. The Greeks believed that every object had two names - in the language of the gods and in the language of mortals. In 5th century philosophy BC. statements about a purely conditional connection between an object and its name begin to be put forward.

There was a high interest in the practical aspects of using the language. In the 5th c. BC. the science of oratory is born - rhetoric. The main method of teaching the language during this period was the reading of classical and already obsolete poetic texts with their commentary.

Linguistic studies were characterized by isolation on the material of only the Greek language, which was also characteristic of further stages in the development of ancient linguistic thought.

The main topic of debate among ancient Greek philosophers is the nature of the connection between the word and the object (between the supporters of the principle of naming physei "by nature" and the principle of nomo "by law" or thesei "by establishment").

The most valuable contribution to the development of the philosophy of language and introduced Plato (420-347 BC) into the theory of language. He owns the most interesting for the history of linguistic thought dialogue "Cratyl", in which the central place is occupied by the question of the relationship between a thing and its name. In the dialogue, Plato confronts the positions of Cratylus (a supporter of the correctness of names from nature) and Hermogenes (preaching a contract and an agreement), involving Socrates as a judge (whose mouth Plato himself speaks, expressing many conflicting opinions and not fully accepting any point of view). Plato recognizes not direct, but distant connections between a word and an object, and allows the possibility of using names out of habit and agreement.

He opens the concept of the internal form (motivation) of a word, distinguishing between non-derivative (non-motivated) and derivative (motivated) words. He owns the idea of ​​an association between the individual sounds of a word and the qualities and properties of things (the idea of ​​sound symbolism).

Plato distinguishes between a word and a sentence ("the smallest speech"). The statement is considered as a complex whole that serves as a verbal expression of a judgment. For the first time, two of its components are distinguished - the subject and the predicate (their verbal expressions are onoma and rhema).

The true founder of the ancient linguistic tradition was another prominent thinker of antiquity , Aristotle(387-322 BC). He addresses the problems of language mainly in essays on judgment, types of inferences, and problems of verbal arts. Aristotle defends the conditional connection between a thing and its name, as well as between a word and the representation to which the word corresponds, between sounds and letters. At the same time, he warns of the danger of abuse of words arising from their ambiguity (this includes both homonymy and polysemy). He draws attention to the phenomena of paronymy and homonymy as types of connection between names.

Aristotle was the first to explore the types of connection between meanings within a polysemic word, as well as the polysemy of cases and other grammatical forms. He makes a statement about the correspondence of the meaning of extralinguistic reality.

The sounds of speech are shared by them into vowels, semivowels and voiceless. He adds a number of articulatory features to Platonic acoustic features. A distinction is made between the types of stress (acute and medium / "clothed"). A syllable is defined not as a simple combination of sounds, but as a qualitatively new formation.

Aristotle distinguishes between three "parts of verbal presentation": the sound of speech, the syllable, and words of different categories. He distinguishes four categories of words ( names, verbs, conjunctions and pronouns along with prepositions).

A significant contribution to the formation of the foundations of linguistic theory was made by philosophers Hellenistic period(3-1 centuries BC), especially representatives of the Stoic school (Zeno, Chrysippus, Diogenes of Babylon). Stoics were predominantly philosophers and logicians, but they developed their teachings on the basis of linguistic material (and especially the phenomena of grammatical semantics). In the structure of the sentence and in the classes of words, they were looking for a reflection of the real world. From this followed their recognition of the “natural” connection between a thing and its name and their passion for etymological analysis. The meanings of "secondary" words were explained by connections in the objective world. The Stoics developed the first typology of name transfer in the history of language science (transfer by similarity, contiguity, contrast).

In a speech act, they distinguished between “signifying” (the sound of human speech) and “signified”, otherwise “expressed”, i.e. the semantic side of speech, which lies between sound and thought.

Stoics seriously advanced (in comparison with Plato and Aristotle) ​​in the development of the doctrine of parts of speech (on the order of five or six), in the doctrine of the cases of the name (inclusion of the original / nominative in the number of cases, limiting the concept of case only to the sphere of the name). They created designations for cases, which were subsequently skalked in Latin grammar, and through it in the grammars of many European languages. They developed the doctrine of the tenses of the verb.

Stoics a classification of statements (complete and incomplete) was proposed. The concepts of a verb (rhema) and a predicate predicate (kategorema) were distinguished. The distinction was made between simple and compound sentence. A careful classification of compound sentences has been put forward.

Alexandrian grammar school. The grammar of that time is essentially an analogue of modern descriptive linguistics. In the struggle against the supporters of the principle of anomaly, the Alexandrians actively defend the principle of analogy as the basis of descriptive-classifying and normalizing activity.

The flowering of lexicography is also associated with their activities. Prominent lexicographers of the Hellenistic period were Zenodotus of Ephesus, Aristophanes of Byzantium, Apollodorus of Athens, Pamphilus, Diogenianus.

Alexandrians traced linguistic regularities in classical texts, trying to separate the correct forms from the incorrect ones and putting forward the principle of analogy on this basis (Aristophanes of Byzantium, Aristarchus of Samothrace, especially authoritative in linguistic problems). They develop in detail the paradigms of declension and conjugation.

The first systematic grammar in European science ("Techne grammatike" "Grammatic Art") was created in the Alexandrian school by a student of Aristarchus Dionysius Thracian (170-90 BC). This work defines the subject and tasks of grammar, provides information about the rules of reading and stress, punctuation, classifies consonants and vowels, characterizes syllables, formulates definitions of words and sentences, gives a classification of parts of speech (8 classes, allocated mainly on a morphological basis , taking into account only in some cases syntactic and semantic criteria). The author describes in detail the categories of the name and the verb, provides information about the word formation of names and verbs. He distinguishes between the article and the pronoun, distinguishes the preposition and adverb into independent parts of speech, classifies adverbs in detail, including particles, interjections, verbal adjectives. Most of the concepts are illustrated with examples.

Philosophy of language and linguistics in ancient Rome

Grammar as an independent science arises in Rome in the middle of the 2nd century. BC. in connection with the urgent need for critical publications and commenting on many texts of an artistic, legal, historical, religious nature. A good acquaintance with Greek science, culture, literature, rhetoric and philosophy, knowledge of the Greek language by many Romans, lectures and conversations of the theorist of the Pergamon school, Crates of Malos, had a significant influence on the formation of Roman grammar. A great contribution to its development was made by the outstanding grammarians Aelius Stilon, Aurelius Opillus, Staberius Eros, Anthony Gniphon, Atheus Pretextatus, especially Mark Terentius Varro and Nigidius Figulus.

Discussions about anomalies and analogies (in the spirit of the disputes between Pergamum and Alexandria), about the origin of language, about the “natural” or “conditional” connection of words and objects they denoted, were transferred to Rome from Hellenistic Greece.

A special place in Roman linguistics is occupied by the greatest scientist Mark Terentius Varro (116-27 BC). He owns the treatises “On the Latin Language”, “On Latin Speech”, “On the Similarity of Words”, “On the Usefulness of Speech”, “On the Origin of the Latin Language”, “On the Antiquity of Letters”, a grammatical volume of the nine-volume encyclopedic work “Science”.

Varro relies in his etymological quest on the views of the Stoics (the "natural" connection of the word with the subject). He distinguishes four classes of things and four classes of words to be analyzed. Varro discovers the phenomenon of rotacism. For etymological purposes, he also draws on dialect material.

Declension (declinatio) is understood as the unity of inflection and word formation. Varro is convinced of the necessity and "usefulness" of declension for any language. He distinguishes between natural declension (inflection), based on "general agreement" and the law of analogy, and arbitrary (word formation), where the will of individuals prevails and anomaly reigns.

For the first time, the original form of the name (nominative case) and the original form of the verb (the first person singular of the present tense in the indicative mood of the active voice) are distinguished. There are words inflected (changeable) and indeclinable (invariable). Based on morphological features, four parts of speech are distinguished: names, verbs, participles, adverbs.

AT last century Republic many writers, public and statesmen(Lucius Shares, Gaius Lucilius, Mark Tullius Cicero, Gaius Julius Caesar, Titus Lucretius Car). In the last decades of the Republic and the first decades of the Empire, the literary Latin language (classical Latin) was formed.

The grammarians of this period (Verrius Flaccus, Sextus Pompeius Festus, Quintus Remmius Palemon) are active in studying the language of writers of the preclassical period, compiling the first large dictionaries and large grammars of the Latin language. Programs for the normalization of the Latin language, proposed by Pliny the Elder and Mark Fabius Quintillian, are compiled and discussed. In the second half of the 1st c. AD in linguistics is formed archaic direction(Mark Valery Prob, Terentius Skaurus, Flavius ​​Capr, Cecellius Vindex, Velius Long). In the 2nd century work is underway to comment on the language of works of fiction. There are works on the history of Roman linguistics in the 2nd century. BC. - 2 in. AD (Gaius Suetonius Tranquill, Aulus Gellius).

In the 3rd century there is a general decline in linguistic work. In the 4th c. there is a new rise in linguistic activity. Numerous reference dictionaries appear (Nonius Marcellus, Arusian Messiah), Grammar Probus of the late, Elia Donatus, Flavius ​​Charisius, Diomedes.

At the turn of the 4th and 5th centuries. The treatise of Macrobius "On the differences and similarities of the Greek and Latin verbs" is published. It was the first dedicated work on comparative grammar.

In connection with the collapse of the Roman Empire at the end of the 4th century. the center of linguistic studies moved to Constantinople. Here at the beginning of the 6th c. the most significant Latin grammar of antiquity appeared - "Institutio de arte grammaticae" by Priscian, consisting of 18 books. The author draws on Apollonius Discolus and many Roman grammarians, especially Flavius ​​Capra. He describes in detail the name, verb, participle, preposition, conjunction, adverb and interjection, sets out the problems of syntax (mainly in morphological terms). The name and, together with it, the verb is given a dominant position in the structure of the sentence. Priscian uses research techniques of omission (elimination) and substitution (substitution). There is no stylistic section.

Priscian's grammar summed up the searches and achievements of ancient linguistics. His course was used in the teaching of Latin in Western Europe, along with Donat's textbook, until the 14th century. (i.e. for eight centuries).

The teachings about language that developed in Greece and Rome are two interdependent and at the same time completely independent components of a single Mediterranean linguistic tradition, which formed the initial, ancient stage in the formation of a single European linguistic tradition.

But the history of the European tradition - in connection with the split already in the early Middle Ages of the Christian Church, in connection with the presence of a large number of dissimilarities of a historical, economic, political, cultural, ethnopsychological, sociolinguistic nature between the "Latin" West and the "Greek-Slavic" East - there is a history two relatively independent streams of linguistic thought. One and the same ancient linguistic tradition became the basis of traditions different from each other - Western European and Eastern European.

The first of them (Western European) had the works of Donatus and Priscian as sources, and the Latin language as material for research for many centuries.

Another (Eastern European) tradition drew its ideas mainly from the works of Dionysius Thracian and Apollonius Diskol in their Byzantine interpretation and in translation activities, primarily from Greek into their native languages ​​or into a closely related literary language (as was the case with the southern and Eastern Slavs). Preference was given to Byzantine theological and philosophical authorities.

1660 - "Grammar General and Rational" - without indicating the authors.

Port-Royal - convent, center of advanced thought, n. circle of scientists.

The grammar was written in French, it was very quickly translated into English. Reissued many times. It begins the development of a number of problems in the general theory of language ( the beginning of the birth of general linguistics)

Formulate principles underlying language in general

Rely not on the conclusions of logic and on the Latin language, but on generalization and comparison of several languages

For the first time in history, reliance on empirical material, questions are raised about the ratio universal and specific in languages

The material used is Latin, French, Spanish, It, Greek, German, other Greek, and Heb.

2 parts of grammar:

1. Phonetics and graphics

2. Grammar

The introduction gives a definition of grammar (g is the art of speech).

The most convenient signs are the sounds of the human voice, in order to prolong their existence, to make them visible, letters were invented.

Part 1 - "On letters and signs of writing"

Quite often, letters turn out to be empty characters that do not have sound. – homme

They characterize the syllable, write about the stress, the word itself is what is pronounced and written separately.

On the reform of the spelling of the French language. Champs - campus (lat), chantes - cantus (lat).

According to Lanslo, extra letters are very useful, because. contribute to the establishment of analogy between languages. He suggested marking unpronounceable letters with a dot.

Easy way to learn to read in any language- you need to start with the most frequent letters, simple words.

Part 2 - "Etymology"

form principles of classification of parts of speech. Language is made up of signs that reveal what is going on in the mind.

2 classes of parts of speech:

1) Denoting communication object(name, pronoun, nar, adverb, article, preposition)

2) Signifiers way of thinking(verb, conjunction, interjection)

From the art of speaking made a real science. General language theory is impossible without going beyond one language.

Up to the 14th century linguistics was dominated by traditions coming from antiquity. During the Renaissance, there was a surge of interest in linguistics for the following reasons:

1) National languages ​​are created and developed, numerous normative grammars of modern European languages ​​​​appear - English, German, French, Spanish, Hungarian, Czech, Slavic.

2) As a result of the discovery of America in 1492, the sea route to India, Magellan's round-the-world voyage, the linguistic outlook is expanding, the study of languages ​​on an international scale. Acquaintance of Europe with a huge number of new exotic languages, including Sanskrit.

The discovery of Sanskrit and the acquaintance of European linguists with it caused interest in the problem of the origin of languages, the search for ancient roots and a common source of languages ​​known at that time, since the obvious similarities between Sanskrit and modern European languages ​​\u200b\u200bcould not be accidental. There is a hypothesis that Sanskrit is the parent language of European languages, this hypothesis was not subsequently confirmed, however, historical research in this direction was of great scientific importance, because. they became the prerequisites for the development new revolutionary direction - comparative historical linguistics. Acquaintance with a large number of new languages ​​posed the important task of discovering the causes of their similarities and differences, which is also the beginning of comparative historical linguistics. Revival of interest in ancient culture. The authority of the church is replaced by the authority of the ancient world, the study of Greek and Latin is revived.

The appearance of the first theory belongs to this period. grammar. It became the universal grammar of Arno and Lanslo. It is based on common universal features inherent in all languages, the common nature of all languages, the general properties of words. This grammar represents the beginning of the scientific study of language, since it presents an attempt scientifically comprehend the structure and functioning of natural language in all the diversity of the world's languages, reveal their unity and indicate their specificity. The material for this grammar was the languages ​​that were representatives of the most significant cultures and allow us to distinguish general fundamentals Languages: Greek, Latin, other Hebrew, French, English, German, Spanish, Italian. The Grammar reveals universal categories, which allow you to describe both a single language and all other languages. It also describes main ways of developing thoughts, i.e. the mechanism of the functioning of the language is described, and examples of syntactic constructions in various languages ​​are given.

Lecture 8 Grammar. The main grammatical traditions of the world. Influence of the Greco-Latin tradition. Grammar and logic. Grammar is formal and functional. Grammatical category and grammatical field.

Linguistic thought in the cultures of the ancient and medieval East

Linguistics originated in ancient times in connection with the awakening of a special cognitive interest in the language, which was stimulated by the needs of emerging states and their activities in the areas of management and economy, the creation and dissemination of writing, the need to teach writing and prepare qualified scribes-administrators, as well as solve a number of applied tasks arising from the activities of interpreting sacred texts and performing religious rituals, experiments in the field of poetics, etc.

Linguistic thought begins to take shape in ancient states Middle East(3rd - 1st millennium BC: Egypt, Sumer and Babylonia, the Hittite kingdom, Phoenicia, Ugarit, etc.), where (with significant success in improving writing systems and lexicographic activity) it still does not reach theoretical maturity. Here, at the turn of the 4th - 3rd millennium BC. e. Egyptian and Sumerian-Akkadian letters arose and rather quickly evolved. These graphic systems initially used ideographic (conceptual), and then verbal-syllabic principles. Among the Western Semites (Byblos, Ugarit, Phoenicia) by the middle of the 2nd millennium BC. e. formed an alphabetic script. His principles formed the basis of many graphic systems, up to the systems of Indian writing in the East. The Phoenician (Canaanite) alphabet was the prototype of the Greek letter, the signs of which were subsequently used in the letter of Etruscan, Latin, Coptic, Gothic, Slavic, etc.

The actual theoretical approach to the language in the East is formed and reaches a high degree of development:

First, in ancient China where throughout history its central object is an ideographic sign - a hieroglyph, the main efforts are devoted to compiling
dictionaries of hieroglyphs, the study of their descriptive structure, their semantic interpretation and their sound values, where grammar appears rather late;

Secondly, in ancient India, where at the initial stage, priority attention was paid to sounding speech and, accordingly, to the problems of phonetics, but lexicographic work began early, and by the middle of the 1st millennium BC. e. grammatical works began to appear, among which Panini's "Octateuch" occupies an outstanding place;

Thirdly, during the medieval period in Arab Caliphate, where linguistic research covered a wide range of problems (improving writing, compiling a wide variety of dictionaries, analyzing sound phenomena, meanings and morphological structure of a word, sentence structure).

Chinese, Indian and later Arabic linguistic traditions influenced to varying degrees the formation of their own traditions in Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Burma, Tibet, Indonesia and Malaysia, Iran, the states of Central Asia, etc. The ideas of European linguistics penetrated into these countries relatively late, but at present they have a very serious influence on national linguistic schools, interacting with them.

Greco-Roman linguistic tradition as the progenitor of European linguistics

In Europe, linguistic knowledge originates in ancient Greece, and then it continues to be developed in Rome. Here, the problems of language were first discussed in the mainstream of philosophy: disputes about the origin of names (fyaer "by nature" or boaer "by establishment"), the meaning of which is revealed in the dialogue "Cratyl" Plato(5th-4th centuries BC). Here the initial systems of grammatical concepts were formed, among which the most developed were the system Aristotle(4th century BC) and the school system stoics(3-1 centuries BC).

Grammar itself, as an analogue of modern linguistics, emerged in the Hellenistic period. Its highest achievements were the grammatical works of representatives Alexandrian schools (from the end of the 4th century BC), especially Dionysius the Thracian (170-90 BC) and Apollonius Diskol (2nd century AD). Grammar was understood as an art. She was in charge of reading and stress rules, classification of consonants and vowels, syllable structure, word and sentence definitions, classification of parts of speech, categories ("accidents") of the name and verb, nominal and verb word formation, features of Greek dialects, and Apollonius Diskol in addition, ways to combine words into sentences. The Alexandrians were supporters of the principle of analogy, that is, they believed that regularity dominated the language, while supporters of the principle of anomaly preferred randomness.

The traditions of the Alexandrian school were continued in Rome. Roman scientist Marcus Aurelius Varro(116-27 BC) belong to numerous works that deal with the problems of language. His main theoretical work was the treatise On the Latin Language. Along with grammar, rhetoric, stylistics, and philology were actively developing.

The system of Alexandrian grammar formed the basis of the manual on the Latin language "Ars grammatica" Elius Donata(4th century) and the most significant Latin grammar of antiquity - "Institutio de arte grammaticae" Prisciana(6th century). These manuals were used in Europe until the end of the Middle Ages.

The Greco-Roman (ancient, Mediterranean) linguistic tradition subsequently became the foundation of European linguistic thought, being differently refracted in the linguistics of countries that are part of the Western Christian and Eastern Christian cultural areas.

Linguistics of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance

European linguistics of the Middle Ages and subsequent periods, on the one hand, had to solve the problems of creating writing in native languages ​​from the very beginning.

In Western Europe (in the area of ​​Romania and Germania, and later in the area of ​​Slavia Latina, writing systems were formed through a gradual, mostly spontaneous adaptation of Latin characters to the sound systems of their languages.

In the European East, in the sphere of influence of Byzantium, including in the area of ​​​​Slavia Ortodoxa, original alphabets were invented, which had the Greek script as their main prototype (such are the letters Coptic, Gothic, with a strong influence of other sources, Armenian and Georgian, Slavic in its two varieties - Glagolitic and Cyrillic).

On the other hand, European linguistic thought, relying for many centuries on the canons of Greek (in the East) and to a much greater extent Latin (in the West) grammar, set forth in the fundamental educational manuals of Aelius Donatus and Priscian, developing the linguo-philosophical views of the Church Fathers, using achievements of scholastic logic, the ideas of St. Augustine, Isidore of Seville, Thomas Aquinas, William of Conchi, Jordan of Saxony, Peter of Gelia, Robert Kilwardby, Roger Bacon, Ralph de Beauvais, Peter of Spain and many other scientists, rethinking for themselves the legacy of Aristotle, consistently built new systems of philosophy of language (philosophical grammars) and in line with universalism formed a highly developed, strictly demonstrative grammatical science, opposed to practical grammar (grammar as an art).

The attention of the thinkers of the Middle Ages again and again turned to the problem of the connection between thinking, language and the objective world, to the essence of abstract names. Confrontation in the 9th-12th centuries. realists and nominalists, who interpret nature differently general concepts(universals), and Abelard's attempts to combine realism and nominalism in conceptualism led to a deepening of knowledge about linguistic meaning, about the relationship of reference (subject relatedness) and meaning, word and thing, sentence and thought, proper and occasional meaning of the word.

At the end of the 14th - beginning of the 16th centuries. made a significant contribution to the study of grammatical meanings milliners(France). The grammar of modists, the central concept of which was the means of designation (modi significandi), was first theory of language in the European linguistic tradition. This tradition was continued by the famous Grammarian of Port-Royal - "Grammaire générale et raisonnée de Port-Royal" (1660); its authors are Antoine Arnault and Claude Lanslo.

With the intensification of interest in national languages, the first grammars of many European, as well as a number of non-European languages, began to appear. The period of great geographical discoveries and colonial conquests has provided scientists with a huge amount of empirical material in many hundreds of languages.

It became necessary to organize this material, and numerous attempts were made to classify languages ​​on the basis of their typological similarities and alleged family ties.

To begin with, before talking about theoretical grammars, it is necessary to repeat the basic concepts related to grammar.

Grammatical unit - this is a morpheme, a word, a phrase, a sentence from the point of view of the form (plan of expression) as elements of the system of relations of the language.

Otherwise - if we consider the language as a system of signs and relations between them, then from a rough point of view - a dictionary (of morphemes and words), and the relationship between them - grammar. The lexical side is the meaning of the unit in itself, the grammatical side is how this unit functions in the system of relations.

grammatical meaning is the abstract linguistic content of a grammatical unit that has a regular (standard) expression in the language.

for example: the grammatical meanings of the words big, small are the general categorical meaning of the feature (a sign of the subject) and the private grammatical meanings of gender, number and case. The system of grammatical meanings in a language is built on the basis of relations: paradigmatic (words and word forms) and syntegmatic (words and word forms within phrases and sentences).

Types of grammatical meanings by character:

1. Non-syntactic (referential) meaning belongs to the word (the aspect meaning of verbs).

2. syntactic (relational) meaning expresses the relation of the word form in the phrase and sentence in relation to other words (the meaning of gender, number, case for adjectives).

3. derivational meaning is a special kind of grammatical meaning, a generalized meaning inherent only in motivated words, expressed by word-building means. Derivational meaning has the same properties as grammatical meaning in principle: it is abstract and typical.

Semantic types of derivational meanings:

1. mutational type, when the meaning of a derivative word is derived from the meaning of a derivative, while the parts of speech of the derivative and the producer, while the parts of speech of the derivative and the producing words may not coincide (write - writer).

2. transpositional type, when the meaning of the derived word completely preserves the grammatical semantics of the generating word, although they are translated into another part of speech (threshing, as the meaning of an objectified action).

3. Modification type, when the meaning of the generating word is fully included in the semantic volume of the derivative, while the part of speech is preserved. For example: straw - [straw + singularity].

Grammatical form - this is in a broad sense a material expression of grammatical meaning, and in a narrow sense - this is one of the regular modifications of the word. As an example - any form in declension and conjugation.

Grammatical form and grammatical meaning are two forms of a linguistic sign:

Grammatical categories tend to interpenetrate (for example, the category of a person connects a verb and a pronoun). For languages ​​of the inflectional type, both morphological and syntactic grammatical categories are characteristic.

Morphological categories are expressed by lexico-grammatical classes of words, namely: significant parts of speech (For example: categories of aspect, voice, tense, mood of the verb).

Morphological categories there are:

BUT) inflectional when within the same grammatical category the same word can take on different grammatical meanings (for example: the category of a person in a verb)

B) classification when within the category the word does not change its grammatical meaning (for example: the category of the aspect of the verb)

Syntactic grammatical categories , as a rule, are expressed by syntactic units of the language (categories of sentence members), they can be expressed by units related to other language levels (for example: the grammatical category of syntactic tense and mood).

Leximes, their series and their groups, organized according to this or that principle, form certain grammatical models in the language. Grammar models are derivational and inflectional.

Word-building models:

-ing : rolling, throwing, throwing, withering;

-enenie : sitting, sweating, weaving, apology, image;

- ist : artist, chess player, pianist, karateka, etc.

Inflectional patterns is the declension of names and the conjugation of verbs.

Among the grammatical models in a particular language at a certain time interval, one should distinguish productive and unproductive models.

Productive models not only cover a very large amount of lexical material, but also serve as a model for the formation of new words, as well as to translate linguistic facts that function according to unproductive models to their model. For example: brother – brothers, but earlier the plural form was formed according to a model similar to child – children, but then the productive model prevailed and the former form remained in history; hiccup - hiccup but in the 19th century ichut.

Unproductive models are limited to a few lexical examples and cannot serve as a model for neoplasms:

Furnace - they bake; flow - flow, burn - burn, mother - mothers, daughter - daughters ....

Sing-sang-sung-song.

The frequency of use of certain grammatical forms should not be confused with productivity and unproductivity. Exceptionally frequent words can function in unproductive patterns, and there are many examples of this in different languages. And vice versa, many words, especially terms formed according to productive models, are used quite rarely in the language.

Compare: burn, flow, smack, prick etc. and ignore, engage, register etc.

.

grammatical way is a set of classes of grammatical forms with homogeneous means of expressing grammatical meanings. There are no abstract grammatical methods without taking into account grammatical forms and meanings. Ways of expressing grammatical meanings are divided into two large groups: synthetic and analytical.

At synthetic way the lexical and grammatical meaning of a word is expressed by its form. Synthetic ways of expressing grammatical meanings include affixation , agglutination , inflection and morphemes-operations . At analytical way expressions of grammatical meanings lexical and grammatical meanings are expressed apart . To analytical ways of expressing grammatical meanings include official words and word order . Accordingly, in accordance with the predominance of synthetic or analytical ways of expressing grammatical meanings in a language, languages ​​are conventionally divided into synthetic and analytical .

Synthetic ways .

1. Affixation is the most commonly used method. With him grammatical forms are formed with the help of affixes, materially expressed, or zero, attached to the formative basis: for example, house□– house a , do - do - done.

2. Agglutination . With this way of expressing grammatical meanings, each grammatical meaning is expressed by a separate standard affix, and each affix has its own function. The formative basis remains, as a rule, unchanged. For example: in the Kazakh language, the suffix is ​​- lar– denotes the plural, and the suffix – ha- dative . Then if the child, in Kazakh, - bala, then the children balalar, and for children balalarga, if a girl - kyz, then the girls kyzlar, and girls - kyzlarga. This method is used in languages ​​of the agglutinative type (Turkic, Finno-Ugric, Japanese, etc.)

3. Inflection . With inflection, inflection is carried out through affixes or flexion . The same inflection is capable of conveying several grammatical meanings. Here we also encounter the phenomenon fusion - interpenetration between the formative basis and affixes. This can be considered a tautology, but inflection is characteristic of languages ​​of the inflectional type, which include most Indo-European languages. for example: fly – flying, man – peasant(muzhik + sk + ij = muzhik).

4. Morphemes - operations . When implementing this method of expressing grammatical meanings, grammatical meanings are conveyed by suprasegmental morphemes:

BUT) stress . In this case, grammatical meanings are expressed by shifting the stress. For example, us – pour, cut – incision. This method can in some cases be observed even in languages ​​with fixed stress.

B) alternations (internal flexion). With internal inflection, grammatical meanings are expressed by alternating the root morpheme. The most striking example: English. Sing-sang-sung-song; foot - feet; man-men. In Russian, friend [k] - friend [g] - friends - friendly; naked [l] - goal [l ']; look - look. In French, doux - douce; oeil-yeux.

AT) reduplication (repeats). When implementing this type of morphemes - operations, the grammatical meaning is expressed by the full or partial construction of the root, stem or the whole word. For example: Russian. Barely, slightly, slightly, big-big, thought-thought express an increase in the intensity of an action or sign. Latin. Mordeo (I bite) - momordi (I have bitten). In a number of languages, reduplication is a normative way of forming the plural: Chinese zhen (person) - zhen-zhen (people), Armenian gund (regiment) - gund - gund (many regiments). Reduplication as a grammatical phenomenon is widespread in Polynesian and other Austronesian languages: beat - beat, beat - beat, take - take, lava - lava.

G) suppletivism . When implementing this grammatical method, grammatical methods are formed by completely changing the basis. For example, in Russian: good - better, bad - worse, I - me, etc. In many Indo-European languages, the phenomenon of suppletivism is observed in verbs with the meaning "to be" and "to go".

When implementing analytical method formation of grammatical meanings lexical and grammatical meanings are expressed separately. The analytical method includes function words and way of word order .

With the method of functional words, the grammatical meaning is transmitted; the grammatical meaning is transmitted using a combination of a significant and a functional word. For example, I will read- the meaning of the future tense, would have honored- the value of the conditional mood, more beautiful– the value of the degree of comparison.

The function words are:

BUT) Articles : English a/ the apple(def. \ nedef.)

B) Prepositions : went to my sister, I look at you, familiar with her- clarify case relations.

AT) Postpositions . They are functionally identical to prepositions, but come after the significant word to which they refer. For example, Azeri Yer balalar uchun (Kindergarten) - literally - "a place for children." " Wuchun" - postposition with the meaning " for».

G) Particles : I would like to, where " would"- a particle expressing the category of the conditional mood of the verb.

D) Auxiliary verbs are full-meaning words that have undergone desemantization: I will read.

The word order method, as a way of expressing grammatical meanings, is most productive in languages ​​with a fixed word order, such as French and English. However, this method can also be found in Russian: compare twenty people(exactly) and twenty people(approximately).

A hybrid or mixed way of expressing grammatical meanings allows you to use both analytical and synthetic ways of expressing grammatical meanings in a complex. For example, in Russian the meaning of the prepositional case (if it is not specified) is expressed both synthetically - by case inflection, and analytically - by a preposition: on the land e .

grammar field - this is a set of grammatical units united by a common content and / or formal indicators and reflecting the conceptual, subject or functional similarity of the designated phenomena. Grammatical fields, for example, a voice field, represented in the language by both grammatical (morphologized) units and units that are on the verge paradigmatics and syntagmatics(free and semi-free phrases); syntagmatic fields - phrases and other syntactic units as manifestations of the semantic compatibility of their components, for example, "go" - "legs", "bark" - "dog"; sets of structural models of sentences united by common semantic tasks; for example, in the syntactic field of imperativeness, all models are included, with the help of which an order is expressed. The term "field" is often used undifferentiated along with the terms "group" (lexico-semantic group, thematic group), "paradigm" (lexico-semantic, syntactic paradigm), etc.

Formal and functional grammar.

NS grammar.

Grammar of direct constituents originated in descriptive linguistics. NN grammar is a formal method in which a sentence is considered as a set of non-overlapping elements. The principle of parsing a proposal according to the NS principle is extremely simple. Two adjacent elements are combined into a structure if they are syntactically related. It sounds a little vague in words, but let's look at an example.

https://pandia.ru/text/78/081/images/image002_113.jpg" width="347" height="166 src=">

In fact, the proposal is considered as a linear chain of elements, combined into blocks according to certain rules. This type of parsing works well in cases with direct word order, but if the word order in the language is free, as, for example, in Russian, then such parsing raises difficulties, sometimes insurmountable, since the parsing becomes either meaningless or takes place " intersection” of branches, which contradicts the rules of the National Assembly. In addition, according to the rules of the grammar of the National Assembly, the simplest construction must be formed from two elements located directly next to each other. In a good way, in fact, difficulties can arise even when parsing sentences in English. In addition, such a grammar, in isolation from semantics, is vulnerable both from the point of view of explanatory adequacy and from the point of view of generation, that is, in fact, predictive power. That is, if we evaluate the NN model according to three criteria for evaluating models: explanatory adequacy, descriptive efficiency and predictive power, then the NN model does not seem attractive.

They tried to overcome the shortcomings of the grammar of the National Assembly in the USA with the help of TRANSFORMATIONAL (GENERATIVE, GENERATIVE) GRAMMAR.

GENERATIVE LINGUISTICS- one of the branches of the formal direction in linguistics, which arose under the influence of the ideas of N. Chomsky in the 50s and 60s. 20th century and based on the description of the language in the form of formal models of a certain type. The initial and basic type of formal models for generative linguistics are transformational generative grammars, sometimes abbreviated as transformational grammars or generative grammars. This theory originated in the United States as a reaction to American descriptism (cf. descriptive linguistics) and the method (apparatus) of syntactic analysis of the sentence by its immediate components, but in its meaning it went beyond the limits of the national linguistic school. Generative linguistics has put forward several fundamental oppositions: "competence" - knowledge of the language and "use" - the use of language in speech activity are clearly distinguished. Transformational generative grammar describes, first of all, the competence of the speaker. The structure of this grammar has three main components: syntactic, semantic and phonological, of which the main, central, is syntax, and semantics and phonology perform interpretive functions in relation to syntax. Two levels of syntactic representation are introduced into the transformational generative grammar: deep ( deep structure) and surface ( surface structure); The task of syntactical description is to calculate all deep and surface structures, as well as to establish a strict correspondence between them.

The syntax contains the base and transformation subcomponents. Base - a system of elementary rules, presumably close to various languages, - calculates a limited set of deep structures, prototypes of future proposals. The first rule of the base S=NP+VP decomposes the original symbol of the sentence S into a sequence of components: NP - a noun phrase (which is a subject group) and VP - a verb group. Each of the further decomposable (i.e., non-terminal) symbols corresponds to some base rule that contains this symbol on its left side and indicates on the right side what the possible decomposition of this symbol is. In the right part of the rules, both non-terminal and terminal (finite, further indecomposable) symbols are possible. Terminals include, in particular, symbols of parts of speech: S - Sentence (Sentence), NP - Noun Phrase (Nominal group), VP - Verb Phrase (Verb group), T - The (Article), Attr (A) - Attribute ( Definition), N - Noun (Name), V - Verb (Verb), Aux - Auxiliary (Auxiliary Verb), Part - Participle (Participle), Adv - Adverb (Adverb), presented in the form of a so-called marked-up tree of direct constituents or in in the form of marked bracket notation. So, to generate the sentence "Chomsky created a generative grammar," the rules of the base will build approximately a trace, a structural characteristic:

https://pandia.ru/text/78/081/images/image004_68.jpg" width="435 height=237" height="237">

The transformational subcomponent generates sentence surface structures from the structures obtained as a result of the action of the basic rules. If the Deep Structure consists of a system of nested sentences, then the transformational rules are applied cyclically, starting with the most deeply nested sentences (those that no longer depend on any clauses) and ending with the main clause.

From a formal point of view, thanks to transformations, four types of operations on symbols can be performed: adding, omitting (erasing), rearranging, and replacing symbols. In terms of content, transformations reveal regular correspondences between synonymous sentences of the type: (1a) "Chomsky created the theory of generative grammars" - (1b) "Chomsky created the theory of generative grammars"; (2a) “The theory of generative grammars turned out to be wrong” - (2b) “The theory of generative grammars turned out to be wrong”, etc., as well as between constructions that are similar in structure and meaning, for example: (3) “The theory of generative grammars explains language" - (4a) "Generative grammar theory seeks to explain language" - (4b) "Generative grammar theory does not seek to explain language" - (4c) "Does generative grammar theory seek to explain language?" - (4g)

“The aspiration of the theory of generative grammars to explain the language” - (4e) “The theory of generative grammars, striving to explain the language”, etc. About two dozen fundamentals are known. transformations (processes), as a result of which the main types of syntactic constructions of various languages ​​are obtained. For example, a negative transformation creates a negative sentence of type 4b; interrogative transformation creates sentences like 4b; passivation transformation builds type 1b sentences from the same deep structure as 1a; nominalization transformation transforms a sentence, e.g. 4a, into a type 4d noun phrase; the relativization transformation transforms a sentence of type 4a into relates, a sentence of type 4e; the transformation of the omission of non-referential noun phrases when inserting a sentence of type 3 into the structure underlying the sentence of type 4a omits, by virtue of coreference, the subject of the inserted sentence; lifting transformation from the structures underlying the type 2a sentence builds type 2b sentences by lifting the subject of the inserted sentence into the matrix; the transformation of reflexivization replaces (as part of one sentence) non-referential noun phrases with a reflexive pronoun (for example, “Mom bought herself gloves”), etc.

After the transformational subcomponent, the phonological component “works”, providing a phonetic interpretation of the sentence. At the output of the phonological component, the sentence is transformed into a chain of phonetic symbols (representing the matrix of phonetic features in short).

Formally, in general, the rules of the transformational generative grammar have the form: A => Z / X - Y, i.e., they are substitution rules indicating that the character A is transformed into a string of characters Z when it is surrounded by X on the left and Y on the right. The general structure of this grammar can be represented as a diagram.

Generative linguistics was widely developed both in the USA and abroad in the 60s. 20th century She raised the requirement for the explicitness of a linguistic description given in the form of a calculus; drew attention to unobservable objects of syntax whose existence is determined indirectly; contributed to the development of an apparatus for describing syntax, comparable in detail with the apparatus for describing morphology; introduced into linguistics the technique of description formalization, which facilitates, in particular, the automation of language processes with the help of computers. However, immediately after the publication of Chomsky's Aspects of Syntax Theory (1965), which reflected the stage of the so-called standard theory, opposition currents arose already within the framework of generative linguistics, for example, generative semantics, case grammar. In the 70s. the influence of the ideas of generative linguistics is significantly weakened, many of its weaknesses are revealed, for example, a priori in the selection of initial syntactic units and rules of the basic component; lack of focus on modeling speech activity and, in particular, underestimation of the role of the semantic component and pragmatic factors; weak applicability to the description of languages ​​with different structures. In the 80s. the ideas of generative linguistics continue to be developed by Chomsky and his students (the so-called "Extended Standard Theory", "Revised Extended Standard Theory", etc.). These theories also did not overcome the shortcomings of generative linguistics. However, the terminological apparatus of transformational generative grammar has entered linguistic use and is used by many linguists working outside the framework of generative linguistics (for example, deep structure, surface structure, transformations, and some others).

INTRODUCTION.

The Grammar of Port-Royal is one of the most significant and famous texts of the world's linguo-philological heritage.
This small book, first published in Paris in 1660, served as a turning point in the development of European linguistic thought.
The authors of the grammar are the outstanding logician and philosopher-Jansenist A. Arno and the remarkable grammarian Kl. Lanslow managed in a concise, almost aphoristic form to set out the foundations of a new approach to grammar. This approach is based on the analysis of the language from the standpoint of "mind", its capabilities and basic "operations"
(hence the definition of grammar as "rational"). The rational aspect of the language reflects, according to the authors of Port-Royal, what is common in the structure of all languages
(hence the definition of grammar as "general"). The grammar of Port-Royal laid the foundation for the tradition of "grammatical science" and, following its model, in Europe in the 18th and early 19th centuries. many European and non-European languages ​​have been described. This model was widely introduced into school teaching. As a philosophical and logical-linguistic work, Grammar has not lost its significance even today.
It is of interest to linguists of all profiles, philosophers, logicians, historians of science and culture, philologists.

HISTORICAL PREREQUISITES FOR THE CREATION OF THE "PORT-ROYAL GRAMMAR".

After Thomas of Erfurt, for about two centuries, the theoretical approach to language did not receive significant development. However, it was precisely at this time that a new view of languages ​​was gradually emerging, which ultimately singled out the European linguistic tradition from all the others. There was an idea about the plurality of languages ​​and the possibility of their comparison.

Of course, the fact that there are many languages ​​has always been known, and there have been isolated attempts to compare languages. However, as noted above, each of the linguistic traditions was explicitly or implicitly based on observations of a single language, which was always the language of the corresponding cultural tradition. It was possible to reorient from one language to another, as was the case in Ancient Rome and Japan; closure in learning one language. In medieval Europe, the Greek and Latin versions of the tradition almost did not come into contact with each other. In Western Europe, even in the 13th-14th centuries, when developed writing already existed in a number of languages, Latin was still considered the only worthy object of study. Isolated exceptions, such as Icelandic phonetic treatises, were rare.

The situation began to change in some countries from the 15th century, in others from the 16th century. By this time, in a number of states, the period feudal fragmentation the formation of centralized states. Writing was actively developing in many languages, both business and artistic texts appeared, including works by such prominent authors as Dante, F. Petrarch, J. Chaucer. The further, the more spread the idea that Latin is not the only language of culture.

The national and linguistic situation in late medieval Europe had two features that influenced the development of further ideas about the language. First, Western Europe did not constitute united state, but was a set of states, where in most cases they spoke different languages. Moreover, among these states there was not a single one that could claim dominance (as in the past the Roman Empire and the short-lived empire of Charlemagne). For this reason alone, no language could be perceived as as universal as Latin. French for German or German for French were foreign languages, and not the languages ​​of a dominant state or a higher culture. Even in England, where in the XI-XV centuries. French was the language of the nobility, but then English finally won, which included many French borrowings.

Secondly, all the main languages ​​of Western Europe were genetically related, belonging to two groups of the Indo-European family - Romance and Germanic, and typologically close enough, having, in particular, similar systems of parts of speech and grammatical categories. From this, quite naturally, the idea arose about the fundamental similarity of languages, which have only partial differences from each other. Instead of the idea of ​​Latin as the only language of culture, the idea arose of several languages ​​approximately equal in meaning and similar to each other: French, Spanish, Italian, German, English, etc.

In addition to this main factor, there were two additional ones. Although in the Middle Ages they knew by hearsay about the existence, in addition to Latin, of two more great languages: Ancient Greek and Hebrew, but very few actually knew these languages, and in modern terms, they were almost not included in the database for Western European language science. Now, in the era of humanism, these two languages ​​began to be actively studied, and their features were taken into account, and the rather large typological differences between the Hebrew language and European languages ​​expanded scientists' ideas about what languages ​​are. Another factor was the so-called great geographical discoveries and strengthening trade relations with the countries of the East.
Europeans had to deal with the languages ​​of other peoples, the existence of which they did not suspect. It was necessary to communicate with native speakers of these languages, and the task was to convert them to Christianity. And already in the XVI century. the first missionary grammars of "exotic" languages, including Indian ones, appear. At that time, however, European scientific thought was not yet ready for an adequate understanding of the features of the structure of such languages. Missionary grammars both then and later, up to the 20th century. described these languages ​​exclusively in European terms, and theoretical grammars like Por-
The piano did not take into account or almost did not take into account the material of such languages.

Of much greater importance for the development of the European tradition and its transformation into the science of language were the first grammars of new Western languages. Spanish grammars and Italian appeared from the 15th century, French, English and German - from the 16th century. At first, some of them were written in Latin, but gradually, in such grammars, the languages ​​described simultaneously became the languages ​​in which they were written. These grammars had an educational focus. The task was to form and consolidate the norms of these languages, especially important after the invention in the 15th century. typography. Grammars simultaneously formulated the rules of the language and contained educational material to learn these rules. At the same time, lexicography, which previously constituted a backward part of the European tradition, was actively developed. If earlier glosses prevailed, now, in connection with the task of creating norms for new languages, fairly complete normative dictionaries are being created. In connection with the preparation of such a dictionary for the French language, the French Academy was created in 1634, which exists to this day; it became the center of language normalization in the country.

Previously, a single Western European tradition began to be divided into national branches. At first, until about the end of the 17th century, language studies were most actively developed in the Romance countries. In the XVI century. after a break, the theory of language begins to develop again. The outstanding French scientist Pierre de la Rama (Ramus) (1515-1672, killed in
St. Bartholomew's Night) completed the creation of the conceptual apparatus and terminology of syntax, begun by modists; it is he who owns the system of sentence members that has survived to this day. Theoretical grammar, written in Latin, but already taking into account the material of various languages, was created by F. Sanchez
(Sanctius) (1550-1610) in Spain at the end of the 16th century. He already contains many ideas, later reflected in the grammar of Port-Royal.

In the 17th century the search for the universal properties of the language is being carried out even more actively, especially since the expansion of interstate relations and the difficulties associated with the translation process revived the ideas of creating a “world language” common to all, and in order to create it, it was necessary to identify the properties that real languages ​​have . The development of universal grammars was also influenced by the intellectual climate of the era, in particular, the popularity of the rationalistic philosophy of Rene Descartes (Cartesia) (1596-1650), although the name “Cartesian grammars” known thanks to N. Chomsky in relation to the grammar of Port-Royal and others like it is not entirely accurate. , since many "Cartesian" ideas were present in F. Sanchez and others even before R.
Descartes.

Linguistics of the 17th century Basically, it went in the field of theory in two ways: deductive (construction of artificial languages) and inductive, associated with an attempt to identify the general properties of really existing languages. Not the first, but the most famous and popular example of the inductive approach was the so-called Port Royal Grammar, first published in 1660 without the names of its authors Antoine Arnaud (1612-1694) and Claude Lanslo (1615-1695).

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PORT-ROYAL GRAMMAR.

The "Grammar of Port-Royal" entered the history of science under a title not belonging to the authors ("Grammar General and Rational" - the beginning of a very long original title). The convent of Por-Rho in those years was the center of advanced thought, it was connected with it by a circle of scientists, which included the authors of the grammar. The book was the result of the commonwealth of two specialists of different professions. A. Arno was a logician and philosopher, co-author of a well-known book on logic, and K. Lanslo was one of the first professional linguists in France, a teacher of languages ​​and an author of grammars; in particular, he was the first in France to teach Latin as a foreign language, with explanations in French. This combination made it possible to explain the high theoreticalness for that time with a fairly good knowledge of the material of several languages.

The authors of the grammar considered insufficient a purely descriptive approach to the language and sought to create an explanatory grammar, it said that the impetus for writing it was "the path of reasonable explanations of many phenomena, either common to all languages, or inherent only in some of them."
In general, the explanatory approach prevails over the descriptive and normative approach in the book. However, a number of sections devoted to the French language contain normative rules. By 1660, the norms of the French language were in general terms formed, but many details were still unpolished. However, the significance of Port-Royal Grammar is primarily not in precepts, but in the explanation of previously described phenomena of language.

The authors of the grammar proceeded from the existence of a common logical basis for languages, from which specific languages ​​deviate to some extent. In itself, such an idea was in the 17th century. not new and went back to modists. This idea for A. Arno and K. Lanslo was so convincing that it did not require special proof. For example, the grammar speaks of "natural word order" without evidence of the existence of such an order, and without even describing it (although it is enough that "natural" for them, as well as for modists, was the order "subject - predicate - object").

The authors of the Port-Royal Grammar differed from the modists not so much in the very idea of ​​the basis of languages, but in the understanding of what this basis represents. Among modists, in modern terms, the correspondence between surface and deep structures turned out to be one-to-one, or at least very close to it. They tried to attribute a philosophical meaning to every phenomenon recorded in Priscian's grammar. In this grammar, this is no longer, primarily due to the expansion of the empirical base. If the modists proceeded from one Latin, then here in almost every chapter two languages ​​are considered: Latin and French, Spanish, Italian, Ancient Greek and Hebrew are also quite often mentioned, and occasionally we are talking and about the "northern", that is, Germanic, and about the "eastern" languages; what is meant in the latter case is not entirely clear. From a modern point of view, the number of languages ​​is small, but compared to the previous time, this was a major step forward.

Orientation to the Latin standard has not yet been completely overcome in grammar, which is especially noticeable in the section on cases and prepositions. Although it is said that “of all languages, only Greek and Latin have cases of names in the full sense of the word,” the Latin case system is taken as the standard, it is she who is recognized as “logical”. In ancient Greek, where there is one case less than Latin, it is proposed to assume that the missing ablative "is also in Greek names, although it always coincides with the dative." For the French language, the expression of certain “deep” cases is seen in the use of prepositions or the omission of the article. More difficult case make up adjectives for A. Arno and K. Lanslo. In Latin grammars, it was customary to consider nouns and adjectives as one part of speech - a name, but for French and other new languages
In Europe, these two classes had to be distinguished, a compromise approach was adopted in grammar: one part of speech is distinguished - the name - with two subclasses. Such an interpretation is also projected onto semantics:
"clear" meanings separating nouns and adjectives, and
"vague" meanings common to them: the words red and redness have in common
"vague" meaning and different - "clear". The introduction of “clear” meanings indicates a departure from the Latin standard, the introduction of “vague” ones indicates its partial preservation (however, there is another interpretation, according to which the separation of two types of meanings has a deep philosophical meaning).
However, in a number of other points, the authors of the grammar decisively depart from the Latin standard in favor of the French one. This is especially evident in connection with the article: “There were no articles at all in Latin. It was the absence of the article that led to the assertion ... that this particle was useless, although, I think, it would be very useful in order to make speech clearer and avoid numerous ambiguities. And further: “Everyday life does not always agree with the mind. Therefore, in Greek, the article is often used with proper names, even with the names of people ... In Italians, this use has become common ... We never put the article before proper names denoting people. So, it turns out that among “we”, the French, in this case, “everyday life is consistent with reason”, while other peoples do not. The authors come from the French language and speak of names with a preposition corresponding to "optional" adverbs in Latin, in some other cases.

Reference structures corresponding to "mind" are in most cases constructed on the basis of either Latin or French. But in principle, any languages ​​up to “Eastern” can play this role, as it is said where the rationality of the coincidence of the form of the third person with the stem of the verb is recognized. The authors, apparently, proceed from some a priori and not directly formulated ideas about "logicality" and
"rationality", but in each case they take some real structures of one of the languages ​​known to them (sometimes, as with adjectives, from a contamination of the structures of two languages)

However, there are cases when A. Arno and K. Lanslo digress from the peculiarities of specific languages ​​and approach semantic analysis. Here, the most important are the sections devoted to relatively peripheral issues: relative pronouns, adverbs, ellipsis, etc. One of the most famous places in the book is a fragment of the section on relative pronouns, where the phrase is analyzed: Dieu invisible a crui le monde visible “The invisible god created visible world". Regarding him, A. Arno and K.
Lanslo writes: “Three judgments contained in this sentence pass through my mind. For I affirm: 1) that God is invisible; 2) that he created the world, 3) that the world is visible. Of these three sentences, the second is the main and main, while the first and third are subordinate ... included in the main as its constituent parts; the first sentence being part of the subject, and the last part of the attribute of that sentence. So, similar subordinate clauses are present only in our minds, but are not expressed in words, as in the proposed example. But often we express these sentences in speech. That's what the relative pronoun is for.

If we ignore the terms archaic for our era like "judgment", such a statement seems very modern. The authors of the Port-Royal Grammar clearly distinguish here the formal and semantic structure, which the modists did not actually distinguish, but even many linguists of the 19th and 20th centuries did not always clearly distinguish. Starting from an explanation of the superficial phenomena of the French language (in this section of grammar, only one language is discussed), he proceeds to describe their semantics, which have no direct formal correspondences. Back in the 17th century. they came to the same conclusions as many modern linguists. However, as already mentioned, more often in grammar
"logical", but in fact semantic structure corresponds to some surface structure of a particular language.

In some other places of the book, there is talk of synonymy of linguistic expressions, of which one is recognized as more consistent with logic (although it is not always clear whether it is a complete correspondence), and the other can be used instead for the "desire of people to shorten speech" or "for the elegance of speech ". More often in these cases, the phenomena of the French language are taken as the standard. However, the synonymy of some original and non-original expressions was discussed long before the 17th century: one can point to the phenomenon of ellipsis, which has been considered this way since antiquity.

Of course, A. Arno and K. Lanslo did not have a clear idea of ​​where their “rational basis of grammar” of all languages ​​comes from. But it is impossible to the authors of the XVII century. make the same demands as for linguists of the 20th century. The very idea of ​​establishing common properties human languages, based on their fundamental equality (even if in reality such properties turn out to be strongly romanized), was an important milestone in the development of linguistic ideas.

CONCLUSION.

The fate of the Port-Royal Grammar was very difficult. At first, she became very popular and was considered exemplary in France until late XVIII- start
XIX century., She was known outside of France. Authors of subsequent
"logical" and "rational" grammarians imitated her. However, after the formation of a new, comparative-historical scientific paradigm, precisely because of its fame, it began to be perceived as an example of “thinking, a priori, childish”, in the words of I. A. Baudouin de Courtenay, a trend in linguistics that squeezes language into logical schemes; often she was also credited with what she was directed against: strict adherence to the Latin standard. The situation did not change in the first half of the 20th century. Among its critics were many prominent scientists: I. A. Baudouin de Courtenay, L.
Bloomfield, C. Hockett and others, who often judged her second hand. By this time, the empirical base of general linguistics had greatly expanded, and
The Grammar of Port-Royal came to be seen as too obviously confusing the universal properties of the language with the features of the Romance languages.

A new interest in the book arose in the 60s. 20th century In many ways, N. Chomsky played a role here, declaring its authors to be his predecessors. His opponents rightly point out that he greatly modernized the ideas of grammar and considered it outside the historical context, however, there is indeed much in the book, primarily the idea of ​​​​common to all languages.
"structures of thought", turned out to be consonant with Chomskyian linguistics. However, the revival of interest in Port-Royal Grammar cannot be reduced only to the authority of N. Chomsky. In the mid 60s. its analysis and commenting were independently taken up by several specialists at once, and N.
Chomsky was just one of them. The "rehabilitation" of the book was connected with the general trends in the world development of linguistics. One of her commentators,
R. Lakoff, rightly called the Port-Royal Grammar "an old grammar that had a bad reputation among linguists for a long time, but has recently restored the prestige that it had in its time."

Let us note one more feature of Port-Royal Grammar, which also influenced its further reputation. Like the linguistic writings of the previous time, it was purely synchronic, the "Rational basis" of all languages ​​is considered as something unchanging, and the factor historical development just not included in the concept. Latin and French are considered in the book as two different languages, and not as an ancestor and a descendant language (however, the origin of French from Latin was not as obvious then as it is now).

It should be noted that the deductive approach to language, mentioned above and reflected in attempts to construct an artificial “ideal language”, has long been popular. Many of the greatest thinkers of the 17th century showed interest in it: F. Bacon, R. Descartes, I. Newton, etc. However, when the idea of ​​creating a world language faded into the background (which happened already with early XVIII c.), all the projects mentioned were forgotten. In particular, the project I.
Newton, which remained in the manuscript, was first published in the original only in 1957. The fate of all this kind of research turned out to be much worse than the fate of the Grammar of Por-
Piano"

LIST OF USED LITERATURE.

1. Alpatov V. M. “Port-Royal Grammar” and modern linguistics (To the publication of Russian editions) // Questions of Linguistics, 1992, No. 2, p. 57-68.
2. Grammar general and rational Port-Royal.-M.: Progress, 1990.