1.

Language and speech

2. Paradigmatic :: Syntagmatic relations

3. General characteristics of the grammatical structure of language

4. Grammatical opposition

5. Grammatical category

6. Grammatical meaning  

 Language and speech. The distinction between language and speech was made by

Ferdinand de Saussure, the Swiss scholar usually credited with establishing
principles of modern linguistics.Language is a collective body of knowledge, it is
a set of basic elements, but these elements can form a great variety of
combinations. Speech is closely connected with language, as it is the result of
using the language, the result of a definite act of speaking. Speech is
individual, personal while language is common for all individuals.

Language is opposed to speech and accordingly language units are opposed to

speech units. The language unit phoneme is opposed to the speech unit – sound:
phoneme /s/ can sound differently in speech - /s/ and /z/). The sentence is opposed
to the utterance; the text is opposed to the discourse.

Paradigmatic and Syntagmatic relations. A linguistic unit can enter into

relations of two different kinds. The division of the language system into the two
spheres (paradigmatics and syntagmatics) is not the same as its segmentation into
structural levels. The approach is a bit different, the differentiation between
paradigmatic and syntagmatic is based on the dichotomy ‘language ::
speech’. PARADIGMATIC HAS TO DO WITH LANGUAGE, WHILE
SYNTAGMATIC – WITH SPEECH.

The system of language includes the body of material units – sounds, morphemes,

words, word-groups. Along with these it includes the regularities, or ‘rules’ of the
use of these units. Language and speech are inseparable, they form together a
discrete unity. Lingual units are grouped not at random, but according their
‘preferences’. Thus we can trace two different relationships: syntagmatic and
paradigmatic.

Paradigmatic relations comprises all the units that can also occur in the same
environment. PR are relations based on the principles of similarity. They exist
between the units that can substitute one another. For instance, in the word-
group A LOAF OF BREAD the word LOAF is in paradigmatic relations with
the words SLICE, PIECE, ROLL, etc. The article A can enter into PR with the
units the, this, one, same, etc. According to different principles of similarity PR
can be of three types:semantic, formal and functional.

1. Semantic PR are based on the similarity of meaning: a book to read = a

book for reading. He used to practice English every day –
He would practice English every day.

2. Formal PR are based on the similarity of forms. Such relations exist

between the members of a paradigm: man – men; play – played – will play –
is playing.

3. Functional PR are based on the similarity of function. They are established

between the elements that can occur in the same position. For instance, noun
determiners: a, the, this, his, Ann’s, some, each, etc.

PR are associated with the sphere of ‘language’. Paradigmatic relations exist

between elements of the system outside the strings where they co-occur.

In the sphere of phonology such series are built up by the correlations of

phonemes that form binary opposition: voicedness :: devoicedness, length.

In the sphere of vocabulary these series are based on the correlations of

synonymy :: antonymy, word-building dependences

In the domain of grammar we can speak in terms of paradigmatic relations

concerning grammatical numbers, cases, persons, tenses, gradation of modalities,
sets of sentence patterns.

Unlike syntagmatic relations, paradigmatic ones cannot be directly observed in

utterances, that is why they are referred to as relations ‘in absentia’ = in the
absence. The minimal paradigm consists of two form-stages – e.g. singular-plural.
A more complex paradigm can be divided into component paradigmatic series (the
system of finite verb forms.)

Syntagmatic are intermediate linear relations between units in a segmental

sequence. E.g.:

Elephants’ survival depends on profiting from the experience of many lifetimes.

In this sentence syntagmatically connected are the words and word groups

Elephants’ survival …. depends on ….. depends on profiting ….. profiting from ….

the experience ….. the experience of ….. many lifetimes.

Morphemes within the words are also connected syntagmatically – survi-val,

profit-ing, life-times.
There are four main types of notional syntagmas:

Predicative (the combination of subject and predicate) SV

Objective (V+O)

Attributive (N+Attribute)

Adverbial (notional word (V,Adj, Adv) + Adv. modifier)

Since syntagmatic relations are actually observed in utterances, they are described
by the Latin ‘in praesentia’ (= in the presence)

SR are linear relations, that is why they are manifested in speech. They can be of
three different types: coordinate, subordinate and predicative.

1. Coordinate SR exist between the homogeneous linguistic units that are

equal in rank, that is, they are the relations of independence: you and me;
They were tired but happy.

2. Subordinate SR are the relations of dependence when one linguistic unit

depends on the other: teach + er – morphological level; a smart student –
word-group level; predicative and subordinate clauses – sentence level.

3. Predicative SR are the relations of interdependence: primary and

secondary predication.

As mentioned above, SR may be observed in utterances, which is impossible when

we deal with PR. Therefore, PR are identified with ‘language’ while SR are
identified with ‘speech’.

15 THE CHARACTERISTIC FEATURES OF A GRAMMATICAL

CATEGORY 1. Any grammatical category is based on the opposition of at least
two form-classes which are opposed to each other in both form and meaning. In
this opposition one of the members of the opposition is usually the marked
member as it has a certain marker. The marked member is the strong member. The
opposite member is an unmarked one and it is weak. 2. Form-classes within one
and the same grammatical category are mutually excluding. A word-form of one
form-class cannot express the meaning of the opposite form-class. No wordform
can be the form of both form-classes of the same grammatical category
simultaneously. 3. A word-form can be opposed to a number of word-forms within
different grammatical categories. E.g. the word-form WRITES Write (I write) -
person Write (they write) – number Wrote – tense Is writing – aspect Is written –
voice Has written – time correlation / retrospective coordination.
The chief notions of morphology include the grammatical category, the word
and the morpheme. Grammatical category is a system of expressing a generalized
grammatical meaning by means of paradigmatic correlation of grammatical forms
(e. g. the category of number in nouns with the singular and plural forms).
Categorial grammatical meanings are the most general meanings rendered by
language and expressed by systematical correlations of word-forms (e. g. tense,
aspect, voice, mood in the verb system). The paradigmatic correlations of
grammatical forms in a category are exposed by the grammatical oppositions of
various types (e. g. a binary privative opposition found in the category of number;
a gradual opposition — in the degrees of comparison of adjectives, an
equipotential opposition — in the three tense system).
The system showing a word in all its word-forms is called its paradigm (e. g. boy,
boys, boy’s, boys’).
Grammatical category is the central concept. A unity of a grammatical form and a
grammatical meaning is realised through a grammatical category. It is a system of
expressing a generalised grammatical meaning through means of paradigmatic
correlation of grammatical forms (Blokh).
GRAMMATICAL MEANING Grammatical meanings are more general and
abstract than lexical meanings. Words with different lexical meanings can express
the same grammatical meaning. e.g. boy – boys cat – cats box – boxes grammatical
meaning of the category of number sheep – sheep ox – oxen. Grammatical
meaning is the meaning of the whole class of words.
Grammatical meaning is expressed by means of a certain formal sign or signal –
the marker of a grammatical form. Grammatical form unites a whole class of
words so that each word of the class expresses the corresponding grammatical
meaning together with its lexical meaning. Grammatical meaning is generalized,
abstract to some extent meaning that unites large classes of words and is expressed
through a certain form of sign or the absence of the sign.
Modern English has several ways of expressing grammatical meaning, or
several types of word-form derivation.
Synthetic types of word-form derivation imply changes in the body of the word
without any auxiliary words (e. g. work — works — worked).
Analytical types consist in using an auxiliary word, devoid of any lexical
meaning, to express some grammatical category of another word (e. g. work —
have worked).
Modern English as a predominantly analytical language demonstrates
comparatively few grammatical inflections, a sparing use of sound alternations to
denote grammatical forms, a wide use of auxiliaries, prepositions, and word order
to denote grammatical relations.
Sound alternations mean a way of expressing grammatical categories which
consists in changing a sound inside the root (e. g. man — men). Suppletive
formation is a way of building a form of a word from an altogether different stem
(e. g. go — went).
A word-form is a combination of the stem of a word with some inflectional
sign or symbol. A form-class is a set of word-forms having different roots and
stems but similar formbuilding signal or its allomorphs. The meaning of these two
form-classes are mutually excluding. They are opposed to each other in meaning
and in form.
Morphemes are the smallest meaningful units into which a wordform may be
divided (e. g. workers = [work + er] + s). The morpheme is the smallest
meaningful part of a word expressing a generalized, significative meaning.
There are root-morphemes and affixational morphemes; the latter include
derivational affixes (prefixes, suffixes) and inflections. Stem, or base, is the part of
a word which remains unchanged throughout its paradigm.
The most characteristic feature of word structure in Modern English is the
phonetic identity of the stem with the root morpheme. The root-morpheme is
the common part within a word-cluster and the lexical centre of the word. Root-
morphemes make the subject of lexicology.
1.Derivational morphemes are lexically dependent on the root-morphemes, which
they modify. But most of them have the part-of-speech meaning, which makes
them grammatically significant.
2.Inflectional morphemes have no lexical meaning. Inflections (endings) carry only
grammatical meaning (of such categories as person, number, case, tense, aspect,
etc).
3.Allomorphs, or morphs, are all the representations of the given morpheme, in
other words, the morpheme phonetic variants (e. g. please, pleasant, pleasure; or
else, poor, poverty).
4.“Zero-morpheme” is the term used to show that the absence of a morpheme
indicates a certain grammatical meaning (e. g. book — singular number vs. books
— plural number). The problem with zeromorpheme is that this designation
contradicts the general definition of the morpheme as a two-facet linguistic unit
having both form and meaning. Zero-morpheme does not have any sound form. To
avoid 19 this contradiction, some scholars suggest that the term should be changed
and the meaningful absence of a morpheme should be termed “zero-exponent”.