Universal type universal phenomenon

PHONETIC all languages have vowels and consonants

MORPHOLOGICAL a)in most languages words are structured into morphemes

b) morphemes function as full and auxiliary elements

LEXICAL a) in all languages vocabulary is a system of semantic fields

b) in all languages there is polysemy, synonymy, antonymy

SYNTACTIC in all languages there is a distribution of SUBJECT- VERB-OBJECT in the sentence

THE NOTION OF “TYPE” IN TYPOLOGY. “TYPE” denotes a generalized form or an aggregate of features typical of a number of languages. For example, in syntactic typology they differentiate several types according to the basic word order typical of a language. Thus, there are SOV, SVO, OVS, OSV, VOS and VSO types. For example, English is the SVO type, Turkic languages are the SOV type, and so on. In morphological typology (traditionally: structural typology) they distinguish 4 types of languages:

1) ISOLATING (AMORPHOUS) example: Chinese

2) AGGLUTINATIVE example: Turkic languages: Tartar, Bashkir, etc.

3) FLECTIVE example: Russian

4) INCORPORATING example: Amerindian languages

Establishing types is not a goal, but a means to find universals and measure the degree of proximity of languages under analysis and qualify the specific structure of each.

METALANGUAGE. To compare languages it is necessary to have an instrument of comparison. This instrument may be represented as follows:

1) any natural language (usually one’s native tongue);

2) a linguistic category, for example gender, voice, person, sex, etc.;

3) a postulate of General Linguistics, for example, polysemy, semantic field, etc.

At mediaeval times Latin was usually used to compare other languages (GRAMMAIRE PORT-ROYAL), but because Latin grammar structure is rather complicated now it is often suggested to take an amorphous language as a metalanguage or turn either to a linguistic category or a postulate.

TAXONOMY OF LINGUISTIC TYPOLOGIES. There are quite a few aspects of typological research according to which it is possible to classify Linguistic Typology. These aspects are as follows: 1) number of languages compared; 2) language material analyzed; 3) aim of research; 4) character of cross-linguistic variation; 5) level of analysis; 6) approach.

For example, according to the number of languages analysed it is possible to distinguish universal typology (all languages of which only 2-3% have been described) and special typology (up to 100) (which of these is more realistic?).

Then, according to the amount of language material analysed it is possible to distinguish whole system (holistic) typology (it includes all language systems) and private typology ( it includes only one language system: phonetic, or morphological, or lexical, or syntactic)

Then, according to the aim of research it is possible to distinguish classificatory typology that classifies languages into type-groups and typology of universals that focuses on establishing properties that qualify all languages without exception.

Then, according to the character of cross-linguistic variation it is possible to distinguish qualitative typology and quantitative typology. The difference is as follows. Some phenomenon exist in both objects of comparison, but in one of these it is more widely used (gender in Russian and English). /e.g./ учитель - учительница, повар – повариха, студент – студентка, секретарь – секретарша; but: actor – actress, waiter – waitress, steward – stewardess.