美国结构主义语言学

美国结构主义语言学

AmericanStructuralism美国结构主义语言学作者姓名刘培龙专业英语指导教师姓名郑众专业技术职务副教授\nContentsAbstract1Abstract2Introduction3Chapter1BackgroundoftheAmericanStructuralism…………………………4Chapter2TheDevelopmentofAmericanStructuralism52.1Boas-SapirPeriod(1911-1932)52.2TheBloomfieldianPeriod(1933-1950)6Chapter3FeaturesofAmericanStructuralism73」SynchronicandDiachronic73-2DescriptiveandPrescriptive8Chapter4AdvantagesofAmericanstructuralism9Conclusion11Bibliography12Acknowledgements13\nAbstractAmericanstructuralismisanintellectualmovementthatdevelopedinFranceinthe1950sand1960s,inwhichhumancultureisanalyzedsemantically.Itwasdividedintothreeperiods:Boas-Sapirperiod,theBloomfieldianPeriod,thePost-BloomfieldianPeriod.TheAmericanStructuralismdoeshaveitsownfeatures,whichcanbesummedupascomparisonoftwopairsofconcepts:"synchronicvs.Diachronic^,"DescriptiveVSPrescriptive^.AmericanStructuralismisagreatlandmarkinthelinguisticshistory,andcomparingwithitspredecessor-thetraditionalgrammar,ithasmanyadvantages.Keywords:AmericanStructuralism;semantically;periods;feature;advantages;摘要\n美国结构主义语言学是一场于1950年代和1960年代在法国兴起的运动，这项运动对人类文化进行了语义分析。它可以分为三个时期:Boas-Sapir期间,Bloomfieldian期间,Post-Bloomfieldian时期。美国结构主义有其白身的特点,这可归结为两对概念的比较：“共吋和历吋的”、“描述性与规定”。美国结构主义语言学开创了语言学中的里程碑，同时，与在它之前的传统语法相比，其自身也有着许多优势。关键词：美国结构主义语言学；语义分析；时期；特点；优势；\nIntroductionStructuralismisanintellectualmovementthatdevelopedinFranceinthe1950sand1960s,inwhichhumancultureisanalyzedsemantically.StructuralismoriginatedinthelinguisticsofFerdinanddeSaussureandthePragueandMoscowschools.Itappearedinacademiainthesecondhalfofthe20thcenturyandgrewtobecomeoneofthemostpopularapproachesinacademicfieldsconcernedwiththeanalysisoflanguage,culture,andsociety.Asanintellectualmovement,structuralismcametotakeexistentialism^pedestalin1960sFrance.\nAmericanStructuralism,whichisalsocalledAmericandescriptivelinguistic,isabranchofsynchroniclinguisticsthatemergedintheUnitedStatesatthebeginningofthetwentiethcentury.AnditwastheAmericananthropologists,whofoundthat"theindigenouslanguagesoftheAmericanIndianweredyingoutrapidlyandtheyfelttheurgentneedtorecordtheselanguages^AstheNativeAmericanIndianlanguageswereof“vastdiversity^and"therewerenowrittenrecordsoftheselanguages”，sothetraditionalgrammar,whichfocuseson"prescribingtherulesgovernedlanguage^provedtobeinfeasibletodealwiththeNativeAmericanIndianlanguages.To"recordanddescribetheseexoticlanguages^withouthavinganypresuppositionsaboutthenatureoflanguageingeneralseemedmoresuitableon"descriptiveprocedures95occurred.TherearethreemajorperiodsofAmericanstructuralisminhistory:1.1Boas-SapirPeriod(1911-1932)Boas(1858-1942),borninGermany,anthropologist,PioneeroftheAmericanStructuralismHandbookofAmericanIndianLanguagesin191T'descriptivelinguistics^:pavedwayforfutureAmericandescriptivelinguistics.Intheprefaceofhisbook,heemphasizedthatduringtheprocessofdescribinglanguage,thelinguistsshouldtryto"discover,foreachlanguageunderstudy,itsownparticulargrammaticalstructure^and"todevelopdescriptivecategoriesappropriatetoif?butnotimposetherulesofotherlanguagesortraditionalgrammaronit.EdwardSapir(1884-1939),aswellasBoas,wasananthropologicallinguistandtheprecursorofthisschoolHismainideasweresummedupinhisfamousworkLanguage:AnIntroductiontotheStudyofSpeechandtheSpare-WhorfHypothesiswhichwasdevelopedbyhisstudent,B.L.Whorf(1897941).Asaneminentanthropologist,Sapirpaid\nmoreattentionontherelationbetweenlanguageandthoughtandcultureashesaidintheprefaceoftheLanguage:AnIntroductiontotheStudyofSpeech:“Thislittlebookaimstogiveacertainperspectiveonthesubjectoflanguageratherthantoassemblefactsaboutit.Ithaslittletosayoftheultimatepsychologicalbasisofspeechandgivesonlyenoughoftheactualdescriptiveorhistoricalfactsofparticularlanguagestoillustrateprinciples.ItsmainpurposeistoshowwhatIconceivelanguagetobe,whatisitsvariabilityinplaceandtime,andwhatareitsrelationstootherfundamentalhumaninterests一theproblemofthought,thenatureofthehistoricalprocess,race,culture,art”.\nBenjaminLeeWhorf(1897-1941)borninAmerica.Sapir^sstudent,eminentanthropologistwhodevelopedSapir5sviewsasSapir-Whorfhypothesis.Sapir-WhorfHypothesisItconsistsoftwoparts，，linguisticdeterminismandrelativism^,states,“thewaypeopleviewtheworldisdeterminedwhollyorpartlybythestructureoftheirnativelanguage^.Whorf,whosucceededSapir^supposition,proposedthat“allhigherlevelsofthinkingaredependentonlanguage.Orputitmorebluntly,languagedeterminesthought,i.e.thenotionoflinguisticdeterminism,becauselanguagesdifferinmanyways：Andhealsobelievedthat"speakersofdifferentlanguagesperceiveandexperiencetheworlddifferently,i.e.relativetotheirlinguisticbackground,hencethenotionoflinguisticrelativism^1.1TheBloomfleldianPeriod(1933-1950)LeonardBloomfield(1887-1949),anAmericanphilologistandlinguist,isconsideredtobetheNewtoninAmericanLinguisticsastheAmericanlinguistBlochoncesaidthat:“It'snottoomuchtosaythateverysignificantrefinementofanalyticmethodproduced...hascomeasadirectresultoftheimpetusgiventolinguisticresearchbyBloomfield^sbook.Iftodayourmethodsindescriptiveanalysisareinsomewaysbetterthanhis,ifweseemoreclearlythanhedidhimselfcertainaspectsofthestructurethathefirstrevealedtous,itisbecausewestanduponhisshoulders"Bloomfieldissuchagreatfigurethattheperiodbetween1933to1950iscalledBloomfleldianEra.Andifssaidthatit'sin1933whenhislanguagewaspublishedthattheAmericanStructuralismreacheditsprimedevelopment,formingitsowntheoryandmethodoflanguagestudy.ForBloomfield,"linguisticisabranchofpsychology,andspecificallyofthepositivisticbrandofpsychologyknownasbehaviorism；It9sfromthepointof"behaviorism^thatheholdslanguageis“achainofstimulus-response^behaviorandbelievesthatthelinguisticdescriptionshouldbasedontheobservationoflanguage.\nTheAmericanStructuralismdoeshaveitsownfeatures,whichcanbesummedupascomparisonofthreepairsofconcepts:"synchronicvs.Diachronic^,"DescriptiveVSPrescriptive^and"StructuralismVSTraditionalGrammar^.3.1SynchronicandDiachronic”Adiachronicapproachisonethatanalyzestheevolutionofsomethingovertime,allowingonetoassesshowthatsomethingchangesthroughouthistory.Youwouldusethisapproachtoanalyzetheeffectsofvariablechangeonsomething,thusallowingyoutopostulateWHYacertainstatewasborneofapriorstateorWHYacertainstateprogressedtosomefuturestate.Anexample:youcoulduseadiachronicapproachtodeterminewhytheUSAgovernmenthascometodevelopasystemofpoliticalpartiesdespitethefactthatthefoundersmistrustedpoliticalpartiesanddidnotcreatethem.Asynchronicapproachanalyzesaparticularsomethingatagiven,fixedpointintime.Itdoesnotattempttomakedeductionsabouttheprogressionofeventsthatcontributedtothecurrentstate,butonlyanalyzesthestructureofthatstate,asitis.Example:onemightuseasynchronicapproachtodescribethestateofpoliticalpartiesintheUSAatsomespecifictime,analyzingtheirstructureandfunctionsonlyastheyrelatetothespecificstatethattheywereinatthattime.3.2DescriptiveandPrescriptiveLinguisticstakesadescriptiveapproachtolanguage:ittriestoexplainthingsastheyactuallyare,notaswewishthemtobe.Whenwestudylanguagedescriptively,wetrytofindtheunconsciousrulesthatpeoplefollowwhentheysaythingslikesentence.Theschoolbookapproachtolanguageistypicallyprescriptive.Ittriestotell\nyouhowyouspeakandwrite.Noticethatthereisaplaceforbothdescriptionandprescriptioninlanguagestudy.Forexample,whenadultslearnaforeignlanguage,theytypicallywantsomeonetotellthemhowtospeak,inotherwordstoprescribeaparticularsetofrulestofollow,andexpectateacherorbooktosetforththoserules.Buthowdoteachersknowwhatrulestoprescribe?Atsomepointintime,someonehadtodescribethelanguageandinferthoserules.Prescription,inotherwords,canonlyoccurafterthelanguagehasbeendescribed,andgoodprescriptiondependsonadequatedescription.Weobviouslydonftwanttobeteachingpeoplethewrongthingsaboutlanguage.\nChapter4StructuralismandTraditionalGrammar"TraditionalGrammar11termisappliedtosummarizetherangeofmethodsfoundinthepre-linguisticeraofgrammaticalstudy.Thewholeapproachofthismethodemphasizesoncorrectness,linguisticpurism,literaryexcellence,thepriorityofthewrittenmodeoflanguageandtheuseofLatinmodels.TheverybeginningofthetwentiethcenturywastypicallymarkedbyanewapproachtogrammarassuggestedbylinguistssuchasFerdinanddeSaussureandAmericanlinguistlikeFrantzBoas,BloomfieldandEdwardSapir.Theirapproachiscalledstructuralismwhoseaimwastoarouseareactionagainsttheapproachofthetraditionalgrammarians.TraditionalgrammariansconsideredLatinastheirmodelbecauseEnglishisapartoftheIndo-Europeanfamilyoflanguages,andtowhichLatinandGreekalsobelong.Itdidhavesimilargrammaticalelements.Traditionalgrammarhassomelimitationsasitoccurswithsomestaticverbsthatdonotoccurinaprogressiveform,forinstanceMIknow”orintheimperativemoodlike"Know!”TraditionalgrammarsometimesfailstoaccountforcertainthingslikeambiguoussentencesjustlikeHWhilethinkingaboutthequeentheHondahitthefence"\nConclusionAfterChomsky'sTransformational-GenerativeGrammartheoryroseinthelate1950s;theAmericanStructuralism,whichisfamousforitsfocusondescribingthelanguage,graduallylostitsleadingroleandtosomeextendhasbeenforgotten.ButAmericanstructuralismisagreatlandmarkinthelinguisticshistory,comparingwithitspredecessor-thetraditionalgrammar.\nBibliographylljHuZhuanglin,Linguistics.ACourseBook[M],2001,(23,24,123,423,424,425,426,427,429,433).[2]Romanine,Suzanne,1994、LanguageinSociety.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.[3]RobertD.ValinJR,RandyJ.Lapolla,2002,Syntaxstructure,meaningandfunction,PekingUniversityPress(3).[4JSapir,1921,Language:AnIntroductiontotheStudyofSpeech(1).[5JPresentationsfromhHD：//eol・husLedu・cn/cfanwen/Presentations・htm[6]Difficultfromhllp://www.mo(jlinguislics・Com/Mo(]eiTi%20Linguislics\nAcknowledgementsFinally,Ifinishedthethesis.Itisreallyahardprocess.Itriedseveralwaystocollectmaterials,forwhichIshouldthanksmyteacherWangHaryan,whoteachesmehowtousethesearchenginetocollectrelatedmaterials.HonesUy,theverypersonwhoIshouldshowmysincerethanksisMr.Zheng,ourdeeplyrespectedlinguisticteacher.Withouthishumorousexplanation,IdonotthinkIwouldhavebeeninterestedinthiscourse.Foranotherpart,Iwouldliketoextendmyheart-feltthankstomyclassmates;theygivemesomuchhelp.