MM INSTITUTION

PGEG PART 1 - PAPER 2

5 YEARS SOLUTION – FINAL EXAM ANSWER + ASSIGNMENT ANSWER

FINAL EXAM 2017 SOLUTION

SECTION – A
Answer any two of the following : 18 × 2 = 36

a) Discuss the theories about the origin of language.

ANS: Theories of the origin of language are first discussed from a linguistic point of view in secular writing. Evolution had
less effect on linguistics than on other social sciences, yet history shows that secondary effects were felt. No true link has
ever been found with animal communication. The work of Noam Chomsky brought linguists back to uniquely human origins
for language, but the question is so complex that little headway can be made without investigation of mental factors. This
survey concludes that the creative, miraculous element must be invoked, and the Bible itself gives hints of important
features in the understanding of linguistic processes. In discussing linguistic origins, people with some biblical background
will often confuse language and languages. In such a discussion, thoughts often settle first on the Tower of Babel. However,
the Bible indicates that there were two distinct miraculous events: the original creation of Adam as a talking and
understanding being; and the subsequent division of humanity into language groups as a judgment on the rebellion of the
descendants of Noah. This article is concerned with the former.
The expression language origins refers to theories pertaining to the emergence and development of language in
human societies.Over the centuries, many theories have been put forward—and almost all of them have been challenged,
discounted, and ridiculed. In 1866, the Linguistic Society of Paris banned any discussion of the topic: "The Society will accept
no communication concerning either the origin of language or the creation of a universal language." Contemporary linguist
Robbins Burling says that "anyone who has read widely in the literature on language origins cannot escape a sneaking
sympathy with the Paris linguists. Reams of nonsense have been written about the subject‘.
In recent decades, however, scholars from such diverse fields as genetics, anthropology, and cognitive science
have been engaged, as Christine Kenneally says, in "a cross-discipline, multidimensional treasure hunt" to find out how
language began. It is, she says, "the hardest problem in science today".
First, the question of pre-programming for language, as against a learning process, is not strictly relevant to the question of
the creation of a linguistic ability. However, the Lockean assumption of a ‗clean slate‘ before learning went to extremes with
behaviourists like B.F. Skinner, who dominated language learning in mid-century. The arrival of the linguist Chomsky on the
scene restored a balance, in that it favoured a pre-programming prior to learning.
This pre-programming represented the universal human linguistic gift, quite distinct from whether someone is
a ‗good linguist‘, meaning that they are good at learning foreign languages. All humans have a ‗linguistic gift‘, given, I
believe, at creation, but only some can operate in more than one specific language easily. Our English language is deficient
in that we cannot in argument terminology distinguish between these two uses of the term ‗linguistic gift‘. In this article I
deal with the ability to speak a ‗mothertongue‘, which is all I am referring to, and not to the additional gift of being what
popular jargon calls a ‗linguist‘.
 It was Noam Chomsky who restored interest in human universal ability to speak coherently, and he restored the
balance by criticising the ‗empty slate‘ stance of Skinner and others, saying that this was insufficient to account for all the
facts. It is significant that Chomsky, though an agnostic, still regarded human language as ‗miraculous‘, distinguishing
humans from animals. To that extent he departed from some evolutionist assumptions. Naturally, a human exposed to a
specific language would not speak coherently, so there must be an environmental catalyst. It is not true that feral children
have no programmed ability to understand any future language to which they would become exposed, as will be seen by
reference to evidence later in this article. It may be, of course, that if a feral child managed to reach adulthood without ever
contacting a language environment, such an ability might have atrophied by the time of post-puberty, as hypothesised by
some of the Chomsky school.
But my chief aim in this article is to exult in the wonder of the signs of God‖s creative gift, as witnessed in the human mind.
Most secular writers have avoided the question during most of the twentieth century. This attitude can be
traced to the changed interests of linguists consequent on the seminal work of Ferdinand de Saussure, especially the
proposition that ‗states of language‘ are far more significant to linguists than the history of language. His terms were
1

‗synchronic‘ (non-historical) as opposed to ‗diachronic‘ (historical) studies.

The modern scholars mentioned above agree in rejecting the well-known scenario according to which language
originated as a system of monosyllabic grunt-like sounds that had the (referential) function of pointing at things. Instead,
they propose a scenario according to which referential meaning was slowly grafted upon nearly autonomous melodious
sound."
Strange labels were given to nineteenth century attempts to formulate some credible basis for language arising
from primitive communication in social contexts. Some such were:
the ‗bow-wow‘ theory, suggesting that ejaculatory noises began to acquire specific meanings, much in the way that dogs
may radiate pleasure, aggression, etc. through different barking styles;
the ‗ding-dong‘ theory, with calls for help, as in today‖s world of sirens, triggering off messages with specific content; and
the ‗yo-heave-ho‘ theory, suggesting that combined labour encouraged comments and directions to emerge.
Still others have exhaustively examined child language in the hope of finding a progression which might in some
recapitulatory framework mirror the first human attempts at communication. 13,14
But this theory has the same drawbacks as
those of Haeckel‖s embryonic recapitulation theories, except perhaps that we can trace no deliberate forgery in its
presentation.
Returning to the physical, we see that practically all the known functions of language are in evidence right from
the creation. We can therefore say with confidence that God created language and that language is a perfect gift, powerful
but therefore dangerous in a sinful world. Yet the wonder of the gift remains, and I am continually amazed as I ponder the
remarkable way in which such an apparently unrelated set of events as we have in our bodies becomes a vehicle for
complex and, if we allow the Holy Spirit to teach us, uplifting thoughts.

b) How are English consonant and vowel sounds described ? Give examples of three different types each of consonant and
vowel sounds

ANS: A vowel is a sound produced with a comparatively open configuration of the vocal tract. In everyday language, a vowel
is a letter (sound) of the English alphabet that is not a consonant.A vowel is most often identified as a letter that is not a
consonant. More specifically, a vowel is a sound that when paired with a consonant makes a syllable.
A vowel is any sound that a letter makes that is not a consonant sound.
There are five English vowels:
A, E, I, O, U.
Sometimes, Y can also function as a vowel, but it is not considered a vowel in and of itself.
Examples in Words:
cat
‗a‘ is a vowel in this word
street
‗e‘ and ‗e‘ are vowels in this word
late
‗a‘ and ‗e‘ are vowels in this word
Vowels and consonants are two different sounds. A consonant is most often identified as a letter that is not a vowel. English
consonants are: B, C, D, F, G, H, J, K, L, M, N, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y (sometimes), Z. Consonants and vowels do not make
syllables on their own. A vowel paired with a consonant makes a syllable.
Example of consonants in words:
bin
‗b‘ and ‗n‘ are the consonants in this word
stool
‗s,‘ ‗t,‘ and ‗l‘ are the consonants in this word
chair
‗c,‘ ‗h,‘ and ‗r‘ are the consonants in this word
A syllable is a unit of sound that creates meaning in language. Vowels alone do not make syllables. Instead, they pair with
consonants to create what we know as syllables.

 A vowel is a speech sound made with your mouth fairly open, the nucleus of a spoken syllable.
 A consonant is a sound made with your mouth fairly closed.
When we talk, consonants break up the stream of vowels (functioning as syllable onsets and codas), so that we don‖t sound
like we‖ve just been to the dentist for four fillings and the anaesthetic hasn‖t worn off yet.Consonants require more precise
articulation than vowels, which is why children find them harder to learn, and often end up in speech therapy after having
become so cross at not being understood that they‖ve started hitting people.Only a few children with severe speech sound
difficulties (often called dyspraxia or apraxia) sometimes need therapy to help them produce vowel sounds correctly.Most
syllables contain a vowel, though vowel-like consonants can occasionally be syllables. And to complicate matters, many
English vowels are technically two or three vowels shmooshed together.
All vowel sounds are voiced, unless you‖re whispering or speaking Japanese, Quebecois, or a North American indigenous
language like Comanche or Cheyenne.
Vowels are sounds produced with the mouth fairly open, and differ by mouth shape, for example ‗ee‘ is a high front vowel
and ‗o‘ as in ‗got‘ is a low back vowel.
Some vowels, like the ‗a‘ in ‗cat‘ and the ‗i‘ in ‗big‘, are said with the mouth in the same position from start to finish
(monophthongs).
Some vowels, like the ‗ay‘ in ‗paper‘ and the ‗I‘ in ‗hi‘, move from one mouth position to another (diphthongs).
There‖s also one vowel in English, the ‗you‘ in ‗human‘, which is actually a combination of a consonant and a vowel (‗y‘ +
‗ooh‘). But knowing this doesn‖t help us spell it, there isn‖t usually any need to notice the little ‗y‘ sound, which in some
dialects is omitted (think of how the word ‗news‘ is pronounced in US English).
In the English I speak, in which the consonant ‗r‘ is only pronounced before a vowel, a few vowels like the ‗ire‘ in ‗fire‘
and the ‗our‘ in ‗sour‘ contain three mouth positions (triphthongs). When teaching spelling it‖s best to treat these as two
sounds (i’e + r, ou + r).
Smart children often notice that diphthongs are actually two sounds. This sort of excellent listening should give rise to much
rejoicing and praise, after which they can be told that spelling gets mighty confusing if we slice these sounds so finely (e.g.
the ‗ay‘ sound in paper contains two sounds, but represented by only one letter), so we usually treat diphthongs as single
sounds.
The only time I remember having to actively slice a diphthong in half for a learner was in order to explain the spellings of
the homophones ‗gaol‘ and ‗jail‘. We Aussies learn a lot about gaols in history class and from the family genealogy nut,
though we‖ve never found out why Great-great-great grandfather William Yates, a 20-year-old York chimney sweep, was
transported to Tasmania for life on a ship called the Phoenix in 1820. If your family genealogy nut is in York and
can find out, my family genealogy nut would be most appreciative.

c) Distinguish between inflexional process and derivational process of word formation.

ANS: We can make a further distinction within the set of bound morphemes in English. One type of bound morphemes
consists of derivational morphemes that are used to create new words or to ‗make words of a different grammatical class
from the stem‘.
Derivational morphology is the study of the formation of new words that differ either in syntactic category or
in meaning from their bases. Thus, a derivational morpheme is an affix we add to a word in order to create a new word or a
new form of a word. Moreover, a derivational morpheme can either change the meaning or the grammatical category of the
word. For example,
Change in Meaning
Leaf → Leaflet
Pure →Impure
Change in Grammatical Category
Help (verb) → Helper (noun)
Logic (noun) → Logical (adjective)
As seen from the above examples, derivational morphemes change either the meaning or the category of the original words,
forming new words. These words are, thus, found under new entries in dictionaries
The second type of bound morphemes consists of inflectional morphemes that are used to show some aspects of
the grammatical function of a word. We use inflectional morphemes to indicate if a word is singular or plural, whether it is
past tense or not, and whether it is a comparative or possessive form.
Inflectional morphology is the study of the processes that distinguish the forms of words in certain grammatical categories.
This includes processes such as affixation and vowel change, which create inflectional morphemes.
An inflectional morpheme is a suffix that‖s added to a word to assign a particular grammatical property to
that word, such as its number, mood, tense, or possession. However, an inflectional morphology can never change the
grammatical category of a word. You can add an inflectional morphology to a verb, noun, adjective, or an adverb. For
example, adding a ―-s‖ to the verb plural verb ―run‖ can make this verb singular. Similarly, adding ―-ed‖ to the verb dance
creates the past tense of the verb (danced).
Some more examples are as follows:
Cat à Cats
Teach à Teaches
Clean à Cleaned
Prettyà Prettier
As evident from the above examples, inflectional morphemes usually produce different forms of the same word, instead of
different words. In addition, inflection does not generally change the basic meaning of a word as they only add specifications
to a word or emphasize certain aspects of its meaning. Thus, words under inflectional morphology are not found as separate
entries in dictionaries.
Inflectional morphology is the study of the modification of words to fit into different grammatical contexts whereas
derivational morphology is the study of the formation of new words that differ either in syntactic category or in meaning
from their bases. Therefore, this is the principle difference between inflectional and derivational morphology. Moreover, in
usage, the difference between inflectional and derivational morphology is that the inflectional morphemes are affixes that
merely serve as grammatical markers and indicate some grammatical information about a word whereas derivational
morphemes are affixes that are capable of either changing the meaning or the grammatical category of the word.
There are some differences between inflectional and derivational morphemes.
First, inflectional morphemes never change the grammatical category (part of speech) of a word. For example, tall and taller
are both adjectives. The inflectional morpheme -er (comparative marker) simply produces a different version of the adjective
tall.
However, derivational morphemes often change the part of speech of a word. Thus, the verb read becomes the noun reader
when we add the derivational morpheme -er. It is simply that read is a verb, but reader is a noun. However, some
derivational morphemes do not change the grammatical category of a word.
For example, such derivational prefixes as re- and un- in English generally do not change the category of the
word to which they are attached.
Thus, both happy and unhappy are adjectives, and both fill and refill are verbs, for example. The derivational suffixes -hood
and -dom, as in neighborhood and kingdom, are also the typical examples of derivational morphemes that do not change the
grammatical category of a word to which they are attached.
Second, when a derivational suffix and an inflectional suffix are added to the same word, they always appear in a
certain relative order within the word. That is, inflectional suffixes follow derivational suffixes. Thus, the derivational (-er) is
added to read, then the inflectional (-s) is attached to produce readers.
Similarly, in organize– organizes the inflectional -s comes after the derivational -ize. When an inflectional suffix is
added to a verb, as with organizes, then we cannot add any further derivational
suffixes. It is impossible to have a form like organizesable, with inflectional -s after derivational -able because inflectional
morphemes occur outside derivational morphemes and attach to the base or stem.
A third point worth emphasizing is that certain derivational morphemes serve to create new base forms or new
stems to which we can attach other derivational or inflectional affixes. For example, we use the derivational -attic to create
adjectives from nouns, as in words like systematic and problematic.
In morphology, there is a functional distinction between inflection and derivation. Inflection denotes the set
of morphological processes that spell out the set of word forms of a lexeme. The choice of the correct form of a lexeme is
often dependent on syntactic context. Derivation denotes the set of morphological processes for the creation of new lexemes.
The formal correlate of that distinction is that derivational processes apply to stems, whereas inflectional processes turn
stems into word forms. Hence, in complex words, inflectional morphemes are peripheral to derivational morphemes. Another
formal difference between inflection and derivation is that in inflection, the relation between grammatical properties and
their formal expression may be quite complicated, without a one-to-one correspondence between meaning and form. In
contrast, in derivation there tends be a one-to-one relationship between meaning and form. Inflection and derivation may
also differ as to their mental representation; derivation leads to new entries in the mental lexicon of the language user,
whereas inflection may not always do so: regular inflectional forms may be created on line, whereas derived words are
usually retrieved from lexical memory.
As already mentioned in previous sections, affixes are bound morphemes. However, affixes can be further categorized into
two kinds: inflectional and derivational.
Although the distinction between derivation and inflection is widely accepted within the field of morphology, it still remains
one of the most controversial issues in morphological theory.
For now, however, it may suffice to first delineate the most striking differences between these two word building processes:
Inflectional affixes produce a new word from of an existing lexeme a word i.e. they do not create a new entry in one's
mental lexicon. For example, the noun "students" can be produced by adding the plural -s, a inflectional suffix, to the base
"student". The plural -s indicates that more than one student is concerned, but it does neither change the grammatical
category of the word nor does it produce a new lexeme. Additionally to number, inflectional affixes give grammatical
information in terms of tense, case and gender.
Derivational affixes, in contrast, are capable of creating a new lexeme from a base. Therefore, they can provide a more
complex change. On the one hand, a derivational morpheme can change the grammatical category of the word. A
derivational suffix like "-ly"can transform an adjective into an adverb, the suffix "-ment" is often used to produce a noun. On
the other hand, we can change the meaning of a word without changing its category. If we add the derivational prefix "un-
" to the adjective "happy", we receive the adjective "unhappy". The word remains an adjective while the meaning changes
completely.
There are several factors which indicate whether an affix is derivational or inflectional. For one, it is essential to keep in
mind that any prefixes in the English language are derivational. In her book on Morphology from 1988, Laurie Bauer
summarizes the factors which can help you to differentiate between inflectional and derivational affixes:
"(a) If an affix changes the part of speech of the base, it is derivational. Affixes which do not change the part of speech of
the base are usually (though not invariably) inflectional. So formis a noun, formal is an adjective; -al has changed the part of
speech; it is thus a derviational affix. Formal is an adjective, formalise is a verb; -ise has changed the part of speech; it is a
derviational suffix. Formalise is a verb, formalises is still a verb; -'s' has not changed the part of speech; -'s' is likely to be an
inflection affix. Note, however, that while all prefixes in English are derivational, very few of them change the part of speech
of the base.

 Its only for- What is derivational affix ? Classify and describe the different types of derivational affixes.

d) Distinguish between surface structure and deep structure according to Chomsky's 1965 theory
ANS: One of the most important concepts proposed by Chomsky is the concept of surface and deep structure. The Generativist
paradigm claims that the concept of structural analysis proposed by Structuralism paradigm is too swallow, it only reaches
the level of surface structure. Surface structure can be defined as the syntactic form they take as actual sentences. In the
other words, it is forms of sentences resulted from modification/ transformation. Consider these sentences:
You close the door.
The door is closed by you.
Close the door!
The first sentence is active, second is passive, and the last is imparative. However, if you take a look those
closely, you will find that those three are very closely related, even identical. They seem to be identical, since they have the
same undelying abstract representation that is called deep structure. It is defined as an abstract level of structural
organization in which all the elements determining structural interpretation are represented. If you want to analyze the
relation of those three sentences, the first you have to know about the deep structure of them, since deep structure is the
input of transformation rules. We cannot apply transformation rules if you don‖t have deep structure. transformation rules
are sets of rules which will change or move constitiuents in the structures derive from the phrase structure rules.
The terms "surface layer" and "deep layer" refer to different levels that information goes through in the
language production system. For example, imagine that you see a dog chasing a mailman. When you encode this information,
you create a representation that includes three pieces of information: a dog, a mailman, and the action chasing. This
information exists in the mind of the speaker as a "deep" structure. If you want to express this information linguistically,
you can, for example, produce a sentence like "The dog is chasing the mailman." This is the "surface" layer: it consists of
the words and sounds produced by a speaker (or writer) and perceived by a listener (or reader). You can also produce a
sentence like "The mailman is being chased by a dog" to describe the same event -- here, the order in which you mention
the two characters (the "surface" layer) is different from the first sentence, but both sentences are derived from the same
"deep" representation. Linguists propose that you can perform movement operations to transform the information encoded
in the "deep" layer into the "surface" layer, and refer to these movement operations as linguistic rules. Linguistic rules are
part of the grammar of a language and must be learned by speakers in order to produce grammatically correct sentences.
Noam Chomsky‟s ‗underlying‘ structures represent a two level deep-structure and surface-structure, but his grammar
complexity is more. According to his two-level structures, its model has several, the bottom of which is ‗initial element‘
ambiguously and followed by the ‗base component‘, which is consisted of two kinds rewriting rules: ‗phrase structure
rules,‘ which are often to all languages, and ‗lexical rules,‘ which also derive from universal categories.
Specifically, that means that the phrase structure rules generate the deep structure of a sentence, which contains
all the syntactic and semantic information determining its meaning. Finally, transformational rules modify the deep
structure, resulting in the surface structures, which explain that all the sentences in a given language causing movement
embedded in his theory which stated as the above on which is from the base to the deep structure via phrase structure
rules and is from the deep structure to the surface via transformational rules. By the way, as Chomsky mentioned in his
essay in 1965, the phrase structure rules portray the internalized an unconscious workings of the human mind with the deep
structure determining meaning underlying sentences and sound to the surface structure.
However, the assumption of Chomsky‟ ‗underlying‘ structures raised enormous philosophic objects. Because they didn‟t
find his evidence all that convincing; and because Chomsky‟s ‗empirical‘ evidence of language structure about how humans
apply language in a social situation is not based upon living language, but on sentences found in an ideal state which means
that linguistic theory is concerned with an ideal speaker-listener in a completely homogeneous speech-community, who
knows its language perfectly and is unaffected by such grammatically irrelevant conditions a memory limitations,
distractions, shifts of attention and interest ,and errors’. Reading between the lines, loaded with suppositions, which have
shown doubt about during the past two decades, one of which is Michel Foucault, that there are two distinctions which refer
to philosophical differences regarding assumptions about ‗human nature‘ involved and a generation gap regarding how the
‗creative speaking subject‘ is perceived. Edwin Gentzler said that Chomsky has only idealized the speaking subject and was
awarded it with particular abilities concerning its creative ability to use language. But Chomsky didn‟t intervere, through
process of idealization, certain usages involving ‗correct‘ formulations, which is very crucial to Foucault‟s understanding of
the speaking subject and its underlying ‗nature‘.
Despite of this, After Babel issued by George Steiner (1975) implicated that it was important to deal
extensively with Chomsky‟s theory and its relevance to understanding translation because of Chomsky‟s humanistic and on
account of his deep-structure vs. surface-structure model. Therefore, Eugene Nida and Wolfram Wilss claimed unwillingly
that one is just based upon a model similar to Chomsky‟s deep-structure vs. surface-structure, has perhaps simplified
Chomsky‟s work and misappropriated it for his purposes and the other, the leading German translation scientist, has
probably unwillingly adopted more from Chomsky that he is willing to admit, but all of them are absolutely applied a
Chomskian model for their theories.
Turning back to the depth of Chomsky‟s deep-structure, which intends the ‗depth‘ of the formal properties, and
whether the base structure and phrase structure are common property, which sounds formal universal common to all
THEORY AND PRACTICE IN LANGUAGE STUDIES. Chomsky added that particular deep-structure of a sentence in any given
language doesn‟t go much deeper than these formal properties and which are not specific to any particular language
(Chomsky, 1965). And further, the deep-structure, by Chomsky, isn‟t universal, so the form of a particular language doesn‟t
indispensably equal the form of another. Because the existence of deep-seated formal universals’ implies that all languages
are cut to the same pattern, but doesn‟t imply that there is any point by point correspondence between particular
languages. It does not, for example, imply that there must be some reasonable procedure for translating between languages.
As for generative rules assumed by Chomsky, with a formal device probably existing behind all, lie at the heart
of man‖s language facility. Edwin Gentzler (2004) in his Contemporary Translation Theories, argued that Chomsky didn‟t
jump to conclusions, based upon correlations between two languages and not assume that a grammar particular to one
language would work systematically for another, which means that surface structures needn‟t be like their underlying deep
structures
It can be concluded that deep structure then is a pure representation of thematic relations. Anything which is interpreted as
the subject or object of a given predicate will be in the subject or object position of that predicate at Deep structure no
matter where it is found at Surface structure.
SECTION – B
Answer any three of the following questions : 12 × 3 = 36
2.a) Explain the nature of English diphthongs and lateral consonants.
ANS: The word "diphthong" comes from the Greek and means "two voices" or "two sounds." In phonetics, a diphthong is
a vowel in which there is a noticeable sound change within the same syllable. (A single or simple vowel is known as a
monophthong.) The process of moving from one vowel sound to another is called gliding, which is why another name for a
diphthong is a gliding vowel but they are also known as compound vowels, complex vowels, or moving vowels. The sound
change that turns a single vowel into a diphthong is called diphthongization. Diphthongs are sometimes referred to as "long
vowels" but this is misleading. While vowel sounds do change in a diphthong, they do not necessarily take more time to say
than a monophthong.
Diphthongs in American English
How many diphthongs are there in the English language? It depends on which expert you ask. Some sources cite eight,
others as many as 10. Even syllables containing a single vowel can contain a diphthong. The rule of thumb is: If the sound
moves, it‖s a diphthong; if it's static, it‖s a monophthong. Each of the following diphthongs is represented by its phonetic
symbol.
/aɪ/ This diphthong creates sounds similar to "eye" and most often occurs with letter combinations that include /i/, /igh/,
and /y. Examples: crime, like, lime
/eɪ/ This diphthong creates sounds similar to ‗great‘ and is most often used with letter combinations that include /ey/,
/ay/, /ai/ and /a/. Examples: break, rain, weight
/əʊ/ This diphthong creates sounds similar to ‗boat‘ and most often occurs with letter combinations that include /ow/, /oa/
and /o/. Examples: slow, moan, though
/aʊ/ This diphthong creates sounds similar to ‗ow!‘ and most often occurs with letter combinations that include /ou/ and
/ow/. Examples: brown, hound, now
/eə/ This diphthong creates sounds similar to ‗air‘ and most often occurs with letter combinations that include /ai/, /a/,
and /ea/. Examples: lair, stair, bear
/ɪə/ This diphthong creates sounds similar to ‗ear‘ and most often occurs with letter combinations that include /ee/, /ie/
and /ea/. Examples: beer, near, pier
/ɔɪ/ This creates sounds similar to ‗boy‘ and most often occurs with letter combinations that include /oy/ and /oi/.
Examples: oil, toy, coil
/ʊə/This diphthong creates sounds similar to ‗sure‘ and most occurs with letter combinations that include /oo/, /ou/, /u/,
and /ue/. Examples: lure, pure, fur
Diphthongs in Dialects
 One of the most interesting ways in which diphthongs relate to spoken language is in how they‖ve evolved into
regional accents and dialects from their languages of origin. In the borough Brooklyn, for example, when someone says, ‗Let
the dog out,‘ the word dog contains a distinctive ‗aw‘ sound so that ‗the dog‘ becomes a ‗dawg.‘
Lateral (also called lateral approximant), a type of consonant sound, which is produced by allowing the air to
escape around the sides of the tongue rather than over the middle of the tongue. The lateral sound is frictionless. It is in
many respects vowel-like and could be considered as a continuant. It is to some extent similar to /r/j/.

Classification
There is only one lateral consonant in English: /l/. Like other consonants the lateral sound is customarily described on the
following three bases:

1. Manner of Articulation: The manner of articulation refers to how the articulators approach to each other to create a
closure. It also determines the type and degree of hindrance the airflow meets on its way out affected by the closure. The
closure takes different manners for different sounds. For instance, during the articulation of the lateral sound the following
sequence of events occurs:
The tip of the tongue makes a firm contact with the upper alveolar ridge to form a complete closure in the middle of the
mouth.
The soft palate is raised to completely block the nasal passage .
The sides of the tongue are lowered to let the air escape along the sides of the tongue without any friction.
2. Place/Point of Articulation: The place of articulator refers to the place or point where the speech organs create a closure
by either coming close or near contact. This is the place where the sound is produced. For lateral sound the place of
articulation is alveolar, which means it is articulated with the tip the tongue at the alveolar ridge.

3. Voicing/Phonation: Voicing refers to whether or not the vocal folds are vibrating. If the vocal folds vibrate during the
articulation then a voiced sound is produced. Contrariwise, if the vocal folds do not vibrate then a voiceless sound is
produced. Some phoneticians use the terms Lenis and Fortis to describe the voiced and voiceless sounds respectively. During
the production of /l/ the vocal folds vibrate. It is thus a voiced sound.

From the above discussion we can identify /l/ as a voiced alveolar lateral. However, In English the pronunciation of this
sound differs from person to person. But the usage of wrong /l/ won‖t necessarily change the intended word. Therefore, In
English /l/ occurs in two pronunciation variations, that is, /l/ consists of two allophonic variants:

(i) Clear [ l ]: It is also known as light [ l ].

b) Discuss with examples the concept of IC analysis.
ANS: Also called IC Analysis, in linguistics, a system of grammatical analysis that divides sentences into successive layers, or
constituents, until, in the final layer, each constituent consists of only a word or meaningful part of a word. (A constituent is
any word or construction that enters into some larger construction.) In the sentence ‗The old man ran away,‘ the first
division into immediate constituents would be between ‗the old man‘ and ‗ran away.‘ The immediate constituents of ‗the
old man‘ are ‗the‘ and ‗old man.‘ At the next level ‗old man‘ is divided into ‗old‘ and ‗man. In grammatical study we are
concerned with morphemes and their arrangements but not save in an ancillary way with the phonemic shapes which
represent morphemes. Consequently in the present sections we shall usually cite examples in their traditional orthography
provided the language in question had one and that it involves only the Latin alphabet. Caddice Greek and Chinese examples
are given in well established transliterations or rom anixastions. Genuine phonemic notation will be unused only when
advisable for some special redone or for languages like monomania ethic have no traditional orthography.
Immediate constituent analysis is a form of linguistic review that breaks down longer phrases or sentences into their
constituent parts, usually into single words. This kind of analysis is sometimes abbreviated as IC analysis, and gets used
extensively by a wide range of language experts. This kind of exploration of language has applications for both societal or
traditional linguistics, and natural language processing in technology fields.
For those who use this kind of analysis to examine text or speech, immediate constituent analysis often requires separating
parts of a sentence or phrase into groups of words with semantically synergy or related meaning. For example, the sentence,
‗the car is fast,‘ could be broken down into two groups of words: ‗the car‘ and ‗is fast.‘ In this case, the first group
contains an article applied to a noun, and the second group contains a verb followed by a defining adjective.
Many kinds of immediate constituent analysis include multi-step processing. For the example above, the two groups of words
could be split up further into individual words. Reviewers might consider how the article ‗the‘ applies to the word ‗car,‘ for
instance, in specifying one particular car, and how the adjective ‗fast‘ describes the verb ‗is,‘ in this case, in a simple,
rather than a comparative or superlative sense.
Presumptions about the grammatical status of the elements: Although IC analysis is supposed to precede any attempt to
identify and classify the ICs as subjects, objects, noun phrase, it is based on the tacit assumptions about the grammatical
status of the elements. Example: "want to go" can be cut in two ways, i.e. want/ to go and want to/go. If we compare it
with 'want food' then clearly the first analysis would be 'want to/go'. But the answer given was in favour of 'want/to go'
because the possibility of 'to go' is easy where obviously 'to go' is a constituent. Here such identification is clearly
grammatical because we are tacitly accepting an analysis which allows us to consider 'to go' as some kind of nominal
element and favoring the comparison with 'want food', so that 'to go' is an expansion of 'food' because it is of the same
grammatical type. B. Discontinuity: Sometimes IC analysis cannot divide a construction into two because elements that
belong together are separated in the sequence(i.e. discontinuous). In example 'Is John coming?' 'is' is nearer to coming than
to John. Again 'in' such a lovely house' 'such' is nearer to lovely house' than to 'a'. 1. Is John coming 2. such a lovely house.
Limitations of IC Analysis
ANS: IC Analysis cannot account for constructional homonymy eg the phrase ―hunting dogs‖.Ambigity may be lexical,
constructional or derivational. Lexical ambiguity arises from the same word having more than one meaning eg the word
―bank‖. Constructional ambiguity is due to difference in layering eg the phrase ―old men and women‖.Derivational ambiguity
arises from the same constituents functioning differently eg the phrase ―the love of God‖.
The problem of discontinuous ICs: A construction often cannot be cut into two continuous ICs because elements that
belong together are separated in the sequence. This phenomenon is known as discontinuity eg the construction ―Is he
coming?‖
The problem of embedding: IC Analysis cannot account for sentences involving embedding eg the construction ―The
boy who won the prize is my cousin‖.
The problem of conjoining: IC Analysis cannot handle conjoining eg the construction ―I will go and meet him‖.
Immediate constituent analysis has its limitations: It is not constituent analysis has its limitations. It is not possible to
analyze like such structures, as they do not form proper grammatical groups. For example, hence is a sentence: She is taller
than her sister. In this sentence, the sequence –er than is not covered by IC analysis.
IC analysis is not below the words: In IC analysis it is tacitly assumed that there will be no division into pieces.
Smaller than words (morphemes) until all the words have been divided.
Unbalanced Bracketing: IC analysis does not refer to our grammatical knowledge. So it does not take us very far and
without the help of labeled bracketing we cannot point out the source of ambiguity in many sentences. The labeled
bracketing can be used to differentiate the two possibilities in an example that is often against IC analysis. Flying planes can
be dangerous. Here, in one case ―flying‖ is the head of the noun phrase while on the other hand is ―planes‖.
Most modern textbooks of linguistics attach great importance to that is called immediate constituent analysis. The term
immediate constituent analysis was introduced by Bloomfield as follows any English speaking person who concerns himself
with this matter is sure to tell us that the immediate constituents of poor john ran away there the two forms poor john and
ran away that each of these is in turn a complex form that the immediate constituents of ran away are ran and away and
that the constituents of poor john are poor.

a) Briefly analyse the development of the English language from the Anglo-Saxon to the Modern period.
ANS: The history of English is conventionally, if perhaps too neatly, divided into three periods usually called Old English (or
Anglo-Saxon), Middle English, and Modern English. The earliest period begins with the migration of certain Germanic tribes
from the continent to Britain in the fifth century A.D., though no records of their language survive from before the seventh
century, and it continues until the end of the eleventh century or a bit later. By that time Latin, Old Norse (the language of
the Viking invaders), and especially the Anglo-Norman French of the dominant class after the Norman Conquest in 1066 had
begun to have a substantial impact on the lexicon, and the well-developed inflectional system that typifies the grammar of
Old English had begun to break down.
The period of Modern English extends from the sixteenth century to our own day. The early part of this period saw the
completion of a revolution in the phonology of English that had begun in late Middle English and that effectively
redistributed the occurrence of the vowel phonemes to something approximating their present pattern.
(Mandeville‖s English would have sounded even less familiar to us than it looks.)
Other important early developments include the stabilizing effect on spelling of the printing press and the beginning of the
direct influence of Latin and, to a lesser extent, Greek on the lexicon. Later, as English came into contact with other cultures
around the world and distinctive dialects of English developed in the many areas which Britain had colonized, numerous
other languages made small but interesting contributions to our word-stock.
The historical aspect of English really encompasses more than the three stages of development just under
consideration. English has what might be called a prehistory as well. As we have seen, our language did not simply spring
into existence; it was brought from the Continent by Germanic tribes who had no form of writing and hence left no records.
Philologists know that they must have spoken a dialect of a language that can be called West Germanic and that other
dialects of this unknown language must have included the ancestors of such languages as German, Dutch, Low German, and
Frisian. They know this because of certain systematic similarities which these languages share with each other but do not
share with, say, Danish. However, they have had somehow to reconstruct what that language was like in its lexicon,
phonology, grammar, and semantics as best they can through sophisticated techniques of comparison developed chiefly
during the last century.
Similarly, because ancient and modern languages like Old Norse and Gothic or Icelandic and Norwegian have points in
common with Old English and Old High German or Dutch and English that they do not share with French or Russian, it is
clear that there was an earlier unrecorded language that can be called simply Germanic and that must be reconstructed in
the same way. Still earlier, Germanic was just a dialect (the ancestors of Greek, Latin, and Sanskrit were three other such
dialects) of a language conventionally designated Indo-European, and thus English is just one relatively young member of an
ancient family of languages whose descendants cover a fair portion of the globe.
While Anglo-Saxon is an ancestor of modern English, it is also a distinct language. It stands in much the same
relationship to modern English as Latin does to the Romance languages. The English language developed from the West
Germanic dialects spoken by the Angles, Saxons, and other Teutonic tribes who participated in the invasion and occupation
of England in the fifth and sixth centuries. As a language, Anglo-Saxon, or Old English, was very different from modern
English. The language flourished in England until the Norman conquest, when French became for a time the language of the
court and of literature. English was thus left to everyday use and changed rapidly in the direction of the modern language.
For example, a reader today can pick up the works of Chaucer, the greatest writer in Middle English, and understand him
with a minimum of annotation; however, the same accessibility vanishes when one turns to such Anglo-Saxon works as "The
Seafarer" or "Beowulf." One must find a translation or learn the language.

c) Write short notes on any three of the following : 4 × 3

i) Pidgin
ANS: The history of pidgin begins in the early 19th century in the South China city of Guangzhou. Chinese merchants
interacting with English speakers on the docks in this port adopted and modified the word business in a way that, by
century's end, had become pidgin. The word itself then became the descriptor of the unique communication used by people
who speak different languages. Pidgins generally consist of small vocabularies (Chinese Pidgin English has only 700 words),
but some have grown to become a group's native language. Examples include Sea Island Creole (spoken in South Carolina's Sea
Islands), Haitian Creole, and Louisiana Creole. The word pidgin also gave us one particular meaning of pigeon—the one
defined as "an object of special concern" or "accepted business or interest," as in "Tennis is not my pigeon."
In linguistics, a pidgin (pronounced PIDG-in) is a simplified form of speech formed out of one or more
existing languages and used as a lingua franca by people who have no other language in common. Also known as a pidgin
language or an auxiliary language.
Pidgin, originally, a language that typically developed out of sporadic and limited contacts between Europeans and non-
Europeans in locations other than Europe from the 16th through the early 19th century and often in association with
activities such as trade, plantation agriculture, and mining. Typical pidgins function as lingua francas, or means for
intergroup communication, but not as vernaculars, which are usually defined as language varieties used for ordinary
interactions that occur outside a business context. Pidgins have no native speakers, as the populations that use them during
occasional trade contacts maintain their own vernaculars for intragroup communication.
The communicative functions and circumstances of pidgin development account for the variable degree of normalization
within their often reduced systems. Among other things, they often lack inflections on verbs and nouns, true articles and
other function words (such as conjunctions), and complex sentences. They have thus been characterized from time to time as
‗broken‘ languages and even as ‗chaotic,‘ or apparently without communal conventions. Nevertheless, several pidgins have
survived for generations, a characteristic that indicates a fairly stable system.
Some of the pidgins that have survived for several generations are also spoken as vernaculars by some of their
users, including Nigerian Pidgin, Cameroon Pidgin, Tok Pisin (Papua New Guinea), and Bislama (Vanuatu), all of which are
based on a predominantly English vocabulary. Such vernaculars have developed systems as complex as those of
related creoles and are called expanded pidgins. However, some linguists who assume that creoles are erstwhile pidgins that
were nativized and expanded by children tend to lump both kinds of vernaculars as creoles. A more plausible explanation for
the distinction is the fact that in their histories pidgins have not been associated with populations that consider themselves
to be ethnically Creole.

Free Notes পাওযার জন্য আমাদের সাইট ভিভজট করুন্ mminstitution.com

 ii) Class variation of Spoken English:
ANS: The term linguistic variation (or simply variation) refers to regional, social, or contextual differences in the ways that a
particular language is used. English is the most widely-spoken language in the world, having the distinct status of being the
official language of multiple countries. While the English language is uniform with major variations in spelling present
between American English and British English, the dialect or accent is usually the factor that enables one to distinguish the
various types of English out there. Like most languages, there are varieties of English too, however, the difference is not as
prominent as you may see in other languages.
BRITISH ENGLISH
British English is the English language as spoken and written in the United Kingdom or, more broadly, throughout the British
Isles. Slight regional variations exist in formal, written English in the United Kingdom.
English is a West Germanic language that originated from the Anglo-Frisian dialects brought to Britain by Germanic settlers
from various parts of what is now northwest Germany and the northern Netherlands. The resident population at this time
was generally speaking Common Brittonic—the insular variety of continental Celtic, which was influenced by the Roman
occupation. This group of languages (Welsh, Cornish, Cumbric) cohabited alongside English into the modern period, but due
to their remoteness from the Germanic languages, influence on English was notably limited.
AMERICAN ENGLISH
American English sometimes called United States English or U.S. English, is the set of varieties of the English language native
to the United States and widely adopted in Canada. English is the most widely spoken language in the United States and is
the common language used by the federal government, considered the de facto language of the country because of its
widespread use. English has been given official status by 32 of the 50 state governments. If it happens that you lack writing
skills to complete your English 101 essay we recommend visiting WriteMyEssays.info.
AUSTRALIAN ENGLISH
Australian English is a major variety of the English language, used throughout Australia. Although English has no official
status in the constitution, Australian English is the country‖s national and de facto official language as it is the first language
of the majority of the population.
Australian English began to diverge from British English after the founding of the Colony of New South Wales in 1788 and
was recognized as being different from British English by 1820. It arose from the intermingling of early settlers from a great
variety of mutually intelligible dialectal regions of the British Isles and quickly developed into a distinct variety of English.
CANADIAN ENGLISH
Canadian English is the set of varieties of English native to Canada. According to the 2011 census, English was the first
language of approximately 19 million Canadians (57% of the population) the remainder of the population were native
speakers of Canadian French (22%) or other languages (allophones, 21%).
The term ‗Canadian English‘ is first attested in a speech by the Reverend A. Constable Geikie in an address to the Canadian
Institute in 1857. Canadian English is the product of five waves of immigration and settlement over a period of more than
two centuries. The first large wave of permanent English-speaking settlement in Canada, and linguistically the most
important, was the influx of loyalists fleeing the American Revolution, chiefly from the Mid-Atlantic States – as such, New
York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Washington, D.C., Virginia, and West Virginia. Canadian English is
believed by some scholars to have derived from northern American English.
INDIAN ENGLISH
English public instruction began in India in the 1830s during the rule of the East India Company (India was then, and is
today, one of the most linguistically diverse regions of the world). In 1835, English replaced Persian as the official language
of the Company. Lord Macaulay played a major role in introducing English and western concepts to education in India. He
supported the replacement of Persian by English as the official language, the use of English as the medium of instruction in
all schools, and the training of English-speaking Indians as teachers.
The view of this language among many Indians has gone from associating it with colonialism to associating it with economic
progress, and English continues to be an official language of India, albeit with an Indian twist, popularly known as Indian
English.

III) Dialect mixing in English

ANS: Dialect, a variety of a language that signals where a person comes from. The notion is usually interpreted
geographically (regional dialect), but it also has some application in relation to a person‖s social background (class dialect) or
occupation (occupational dialect). The word dialect comes from the Ancient Greek dialektos ‗discourse, language, dialect,‘
which is derived from dialegesthai ‗to discourse, talk.‘ A dialect is chiefly distinguished from other dialects of the same
language by features of linguistic structure—i.e., grammar (specifically morphology and syntax) and vocabulary.
In morphology (word formation), various dialects in the Atlantic states have clim, clum, clome, or cloome instead of climbed,
and, in syntax (sentence structure), there are ‗sick to his stomach,‘ ‗sick at his stomach,‘ ‗sick in,‘ ‗sick on,‘ and ‗sick
with.‘ On the level of vocabulary, examples of dialectal differences include American English subway, contrasting with British
English underground; and corn, which means ‗maize‘ in the United States, Canada, and Australia, ‗wheat‘ in England, and
‗oats‘ in Scotland. Nevertheless, while dialects of the same language differ, they still possess a common core of features.
Although some linguists include phonological features (such as vowels, consonants, and intonation) among the dimensions of
dialect, the standard practice is to treat such features as aspects of accent. In the sound system of American English, for
example, some speakers pronounce greasy with an ‗s‘ sound, while others pronounce it with a ‗z‘ sound. Accent differences
of this kind are extremely important as regional and class indicators in every language. Their role is well recognized in Great
Britain, for example, where the prestige accent, called Received Pronunciation, is used as an educated standard and
differences in regional accent, both rural and urban, are frequent. There is far less accent variation in Canada, Australia, and
large parts of the United States.
Frequently, the label dialect, or dialectal, is attached to substandard speech, language usage that deviates from the accepted
norm—e.g., the speech of many of the heroes of Mark Twain‖s novels. On the other hand, the standard language can also be
regarded as one of the dialects of a given language, though one that has attracted special prestige. In a historical sense, the
term dialect is sometimes applied to a language considered as one of a group deriving from a common ancestor.
Thus, English, Swedish, and German are sometimes treated as Germanic dialects.
There is often considerable difficulty in deciding whether two linguistic varieties are dialects of the same language or two
separate but closely related languages; this is especially true in parts of the world where speech communities have been little
studied. In these cases especially, decisions regarding dialects versus languages must be to some extent
arbitrary.
Normally, dialects of the same language are considered to be mutually intelligible, while different languages are not.
Intelligibility between dialects is, however, almost never absolutely complete. On the other hand, speakers of closely related
languages can still communicate to a certain extent when each uses his own mother tongue. Thus, the criterion of
intelligibility is quite relative. In more-developed societies the distinction between dialects and related languages is easier to
make because of the existence of standard languages.
Sometimes sociopolitical factors play a role in drawing the distinction between dialect and language. Linguistic varieties that
are considered dialects in one set of historical circumstances may be considered languages in another. Before the ethnic
conflicts in the Balkans in the 1990s, Serbo-Croatian was viewed by its speakers as a single language consisting of several
dialects, spoken in Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Croatia; afterward, local communities began to talk of Croatian and
Serbian as distinct languages.
Among the synonyms for dialect, the word idiom refers to any kind of dialect, or even language, whereas patois, a term
from French, denotes rural or provincial dialects, often with a deprecatory connotation. A similar term is vernacular, which
refers to the common, everyday speech of the ordinary people of a region. An idiolect is the dialect of an individual person
at one time. This term implies an awareness that no two persons speak in exactly the same way and that each person‖s
dialect is constantly undergoing change—e.g., by the introduction of newly acquired words. Most recent investigations
emphasize the versatility of each person‖s speech habits according to levels or styles of language usage.
Iv) Weak forms of English words.
ANS: Weak forms are syllable sounds that become unstressed in connected speech and are often then pronounced as a schwa
.Example:
What do you want to do this evening?
In the above sentence the first 'do' is a weak form and the second is stressed.
In the classroom
Structural words, such as prepositions, conjunctions, auxiliaries and articles are often pronounced in their weak form, since
they do not carry the main content, and are therefore not normally stressed. Learners can find them difficult to hear and
this interferes with understanding. Counting the number of words in a sentence, or sentence dictations can help raise
awareness of weak forms.
It is very common to use strong form and weak form when speaking in English because English is a stress-time language. It
means you stress on content words such as nouns and principal verbs, while structure words such as helping verbs,
conjunctions, prepositions’ are not stressed. Using proper strong form and weak form can help us to speak English more
fluently.
For example, take a look at these sentences:
She can play violin.
Mary is from Chicago.
Here are these two sentences with stressed words in bold.
She can play violin.
Mary is from Chicago.
In this case the words ―can― and ―is from― are weak form. The weak form change the vowel to ‗ə‘ sound.
can in strong form
can in weak form
from in strong form
from in weak form
Below are some function words that we can remember:
auxiliar verbs am, are, be, been, can, could, do, does, has, had, shall, should, was, were, would,
prepositions at, for, from, of, to,
pronouns he, her, him, his, me, she, them, us, we, you,
conjunctions for, and, but, or, than, that,
particles to,
articles a, the, an,
A lot of function words have weak forms. As a rule, the weak form turns the vowel to be muted. For example, take a look at
these sentences:
– when stands before the consonants
Ex: I dislike the man

– mention the difference

Ex: His girl friend is very beautiful, but is not enough intelligent.

– as a relative pronoun.
Ex: I think that we should improve quality of services a lot.

– as a helping verb
Ex: Does she work as a teacher?

d) Describe the English fricatives with examples.

ANS: Fricative, in phonetics, a consonant sound, such as English f or v, produced by bringing the mouth into position to
block the passage of the airstream, but not making complete closure, so that air moving through the mouth generates
audible friction.
Fricatives (also sometimes called ‗spirants‘) can be produced with the same positions of the vocal organs as stops; bilabial,
labiodentals, dental, alveolar, palatal, velar, and uvular consonants. In addition to the f and v sounds, examples of fricatives in
English are s as in ‗sitter,‘ z as in ‗zebra,‘ and the two th sounds as in ‗think‘ and ‗this.‘
Fricative consonants are made by squeezing air between a small gap as it leaves the body. In English pronunciation,
there are 9 fricative phonemes: /f,v,θ,ð,s,z,ʃ,ʒ,h/ made in 5 positions of the mouth:
The fricative sounds /v,ð,z,ʒ/ are voiced, they are pronounced with vibration in the vocal cords, whilst the sounds /f,θ,s,ʃ,h/
are voiceless; produced only with air.
Fricative Sound Spellings
Common spellings for each fricative sound are underlined below:
/f/: far
/v/: save, of
/θ/: think
/ð/: those
/s/: sir, race
/z/: zoo, rise
/ʃ/: sharp, chef, pressure, sugar, motion
/ʒ/: beige, Asia, pleasure
/h/: ahead
e) Discuss the concept of Register with examples.
In linguistics, the register is defined as the way a speaker uses language differently in different circumstances. Think about
the words you choose, your tone of voice, even your body language. You probably behave very differently chatting with a
friend than you would at a formal dinner party or during a job interview. These variations in formality, also called stylistic
variation, are known as registers in linguistics. They are determined by such factors as social occasion, context, purpose,
and audience.
Language registers refer to the level of formality of speaking or writing a language. Learn about the definition and examples
of language registers, and explore the categories of registers used in works, such as literature, poetry, and drama.

Registers are marked by a variety of specialized vocabulary and turns of phrases, colloquialisms and the use of jargon, and a
difference in intonation and pace; in "The Study of Language," linguist George Yule describes the function of jargon as
helping " to create and maintain connections among those who see themselves as 'insiders' in some way and to exclude
'outsiders.'"
Registers are used in all forms of communication, including written, spoken, and signed. Depending on grammar, syntax, and
tone, the register may be extremely rigid or very intimate. You don't even need to use an actual word to communicate
effectively. A huff of exasperation during a debate or a grin while signing "hello" speaks volumes.
Imagine that you're going to be introduced to a very important person who you have never met. Maybe it is the Queen of
England. When you meet her, would you say: 'Hey, dude! What's up?' Probably not. You would say something
more formal such as 'It is an honor to meet you, Your Highness.' On the other hand, you wouldn't call your best friend 'His
Royal Highness.' Instead you would be fine using the informal address, 'dude.'
In every situation you encounter, you use speech appropriate to the person to whom you are speaking and his or her
context. The language you use when talking to your friends is not the same language you would use when meeting someone
as important as the Queen. This difference in language formality is called register.
Types of Linguistic Register
Some linguists say there are just two types of register: formal and informal. This isn't incorrect, but it is an
oversimplification. Instead, most who study language say there are five distinct registers.
Frozen: This form is sometimes called the static register because it refers to historic language or communication that is
intended to remain unchanged, like a constitution or prayer. Examples: The Bible, the United States Constitution, the
Bhagavad Gita, "Romeo and Juliet."
Formal: Less rigid but still constrained, the formal register is used in professional, academic, or legal settings where
communication is expected to be respectful, uninterrupted, and restrained. Slang is never used, and contractions are rare.
Examples: a TED talk, a business presentation, the Encyclopaedia Brittanica, "Gray's Anatomy," by Henry Gray.
Consultative: People use this register often in conversation when they're speaking with someone who has specialized
knowledge or who is offering advice. Tone is often respectful (use of courtesy titles) but may be more casual if the
relationship is longstanding or friendly (a family doctor.) Slang is sometimes used, people may pause or interrupt one
another. Examples: the local TV news broadcast, an annual physical, a service provider like a plumber.
Casual: This is the register people use when they're with friends, close acquaintances and co-workers, and family. It's
probably the one you think of when you consider how you talk with other people, often in a group setting. Use of slang,
contractions, and vernacular grammar is all common, and people may also use expletives or off-color language in some
settings. Examples: a birthday party, a backyard barbecue.
Intimate: Linguists say this register is reserved for special occasions, usually between only two people and often in private.
Intimate language may be something as simple as an inside joke between two college friends or a word whispered in a
lover's ear.

SECTION – C
11. Locate and annotate any four of the following : 7 × 4 = 28
a) Write a note on the global character of the English language.
ANS: There is no official definition of "global" or "world" language, but it essentially refers to a language that is learned
and spoken internationally, and is characterized not only by the number of its native and second language speakers, but also
by its geographical distribution, and its use in international organizations and in diplomatic relations. A global language acts
as a ‗lingua franca‘, a common language that enables people from diverse backgrounds and ethnicities to communicate on a
more or less equitable basis.
Historically, the essential factor for the establishment of a global language is that it is spoken by those who wield
power. Latin was the lingua franca of its time, although it was only ever a minority language within the Roman Empire as a
whole. Crucially, though, it was the language of the powerful leaders and administrators and of the Roman military - and,
later, of the ecclesiastical power of the Roman Catholic Church - and this is what drove its rise to (arguably) global language
status. Thus, language can be said to have no independent existence of its own, and a particular language only dominates
when its speakers dominate (and, by extension, fails when the people who speak it fail).
The influence of any language is a combination of three main things: the number of countries using it as their first
language or mother-tongue, the number of countries adopting it as their official language, and the number of countries
teaching it as their foreign language of choice in schools. The intrinsic structural qualities of a language, the size of its
vocabulary, the quality of its literature throughout history, and its association with great cultures or religions, are all
important factors in the popularity of any language. But, at base, history shows us that a language becomes a global
language mainly due to the political power of its native speakers, and the economic power with which it is able to maintain
and expand its position.
English belongs to the Indo-European family of languages and is therefore related to most other languages spoken
in Europe and western Asia from Iceland to India. The parent tongue, called Proto-Indo-European, was spoken about 5,000 years
ago by nomads believed to have roamed the southeast European plains. Germanic, one of the language groups descended
from this ancestral speech, is usually divided by scholars into three regional groups: East (Burgundian, Vandal, and Gothic, all
extinct), North (Icelandic, Faroese, Norwegian, Swedish, and Danish), and West (German, Dutch [and Flemish], Frisian, and
English). Though closely related to English, German remains far more conservative than English in its retention of a fairly
elaborate system of inflections. Frisian, spoken by the inhabitants of the Dutch province of Friesland and the islands off the
west coast of Schleswig, is the language most nearly related to Modern English. Icelandic, which has changed little over the
last thousand years, is the living language most nearly resembling Old English in grammatical structure.
Modern English is analytic (i.e., relatively uninflected), whereas Proto-Indo-European, the ancestral tongue of most of the
modern European languages (e.g., German, French, Russian, Greek), was synthetic, or inflected. During the course of
thousands of years, English words have been slowly simplified from the inflected variable forms found
in Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, Russian, and German, toward invariable forms, as in Chinese and Vietnamese. The German and
Chinese words for the noun man are exemplary. German has five forms: Mann, Mannes, Manne, Männer, Männern. Chinese
has one form: ren. English stands in between, with four forms: man, man‖s, men, men‖s. In English, only nouns, pronouns (as
in he, him, his), adjectives (as in big, bigger, biggest), and verbs are inflected. English is the only European language to
employ uninflected adjectives; e.g., the tall man, the tall woman, compared to Spanish el hombre alto and la mujer alta. As for
verbs, if the Modern English word ride is compared with the corresponding words in Old English and Modern German, it will
be found that English now has only 5 forms (ride, rides, rode, riding, ridden), whereas Old English ridan had 13, and Modern
German reiten has 16.
In addition to the simplicity of inflections, English has two other basic characteristics: flexibility of function and openness of
vocabulary.
Openness of vocabulary implies both free admission of words from other languages and the ready creation of compounds and
derivatives. English adopts (without change) or adapts (with slight change) any word really needed to name some new object
or to denote some new process. Words from more than 350 languages have entered English in this way. Like French,
Spanish, and Russian, English frequently forms scientific terms from Classical Greek word elements. Although a Germanic
language in its sounds and grammar, the bulk of English vocabulary is in fact Romance or Classical in origin.

b) Write a note on uses of English in India.

ANS: English is one of the most important Global language. Most of the international transactions of recent times were
concluded in English. The language has contributed significantly in bringing people and their culture closer.
The benefits of learning English can be seen in the economic, social and political life of the people of the country.
India has undertaken the gigantic task of rapidly developing its economy, and becoming a powerful country. To fulfil this,
people must have up-to-date knowledge of the different branches of science. Without expert technicians, mechanics and
engineers much progress is not possible.
We need them in increasing numbers. In fact, in Medical Science countries like China & Japan are 3-4 years behind
India. The very reason for this is that these countries are giving very low importance to English language learning. Besides
this, a growing nation has also to guard her against various internal dangers.
Under such conditions, the selection of language to be studied by the youth of the country becomes very significant. English
is the store-house of scientific knowledge. Hence, its study is of great importance for a developing country like India.
India's foreign policy is the focus of attention of all the countries of the world. The whole of the world expects to
quench its thirst for peace with this policy. India wants to be friendly with all countries. She has to explain and convince
others that her point of views is correct. This cannot be done without an effective medium for the exchange of ideas.
English provides us with such a medium. This is the language which enjoys the status of an International language. In the
U.N.O., the discussions are carried on in this language. In fact, the majority of the countries of the world conduct their
business in this tongue. If India wants to play her role in international matters effectively, her people must study
English language.
India is a country in which people living in different parts having their own languages. The regional languages are
quite different from one another. Every few kilometers language changes in India. The leaders and the administrators of the
country cannot remain in contact with all these regions without a common language. It is not possible for everyone to know
ten or fourteen languages. We do not have any common language at present, except
English. During the English rule, all tried to learn this language. We can feel at home in any corner of the country, if we
know this language. English is the language best suited for maintaining internal unity. If we want to crush the provincial,
communal and separatist tendencies of our people, we must continue to study it. English is the most important means of
national integration with terrorism raising its, ugly head in different parts of the country. We must study English.

Major technological and scientific advancements have been written in English language. This is the age of science. The
world is changing at a terrific speed. This is all due to the scientific and technological progress which the other countries
have made. If we want to keep pace with these fast moving countries, scientific and technological research must be made in
our own land. We can advance only through knowledge of these subjects. Ultimately, we have to depend upon English. To
produce first rate scientists and technicians, English must be taught to our people as good and useful books on these
subjects are available in this language only.

For proper mental development it is essential that we study the best literature. If we want to shed the feeling of false
superiority and to broaden our minds, we must be ever-ready to take the best from others. Now, the literatures ofother
counties and of our own different languages can be easily obtained in English. In our own languages, modern up-to-date
literature is not available. This makes it essential that our young men continue to learn English. Moreover, many a young
men go to foreign countries for advanced studies. They need good knowledge of English. Its importance for such
scholars is indeed very great.
Even after the completion of their studies, the students of engineering need to have sufficient proficiency in English
for getting involved in the process of Job seeking. The vacancies for the jobs are often found announced in English. For
understanding the announcements also, they need to possess the capability to perceive what information the vacancy
announcements
contain. After being able to understand what thelegible for the vacant post. Furthermore,
they have to apply for the post lying vacant in the concerned company. As they prepare themselves for applying for the job,
they need to write a very impressive letter of job application. At this moment also, the quality and standard of their English
language that they have used in their letter of job applications matters much.
After the submission of the letter of Job applications also, they are required to attend both written examination and
interview or group discussion. The qualities of their their performance in in both the examinations are often gauged on the
basis of the quality of English proficiency.
English must be studied as an important foreign language. It must also continue to be the medium of instruction, at
least in science and technology, and in other subjects also in higher classes but India represents unity in diversity & respect
all languages.
c) Distinguish between morph, morpheme and allomorph.
ANS: Morphology is the study of words and their structure. Morpheme is the smallest meaningful morphological unit in a
language. Allomorph is a variant form of a morpheme. The main difference between morpheme and allomorph is
that morpheme is concerned with the meaning and structure of a word whereas allomorph is concerned with the sound.
A morpheme is a minimal unit of meaning in a language. It can be defined as the smallest, meaningful, morphological
unit in a language that cannot be further divided or analyzed. In linguistics, morphemes are classified into two categories.
They are free morpheme and bound morpheme. A free morpheme is a word, that is, a free morpheme is a meaningful unit.
Some examples of free morphemes include hat, believe, cheap, talk, red, new, cow, deliver, legal, etc.
Note that all free morphemes are words, but not all words are morphemes.
Bound morphemes are the units that cannot stand alone. On their own, they have no meaning. It always has to be added to
other morphemes to give a meaning. The underlined parts in the following words are bound morphemes.
Hats
Disbelieve
Cheaply
Talked
Reddish
Bound Morphemes can be further divided into two categories called derivational and inflectional morphemes. Derivational
morpheme is a morpheme that is added to the (the base form) of the word to derive a new word.
Example 1:
Danger ⇒ Dangerous
Beauty ⇒ Beautiful
Example 2:
Visible ⇒ invisible
Believe ⇒ Disbelieve
Derivational morphemes often change the word class of a word. (as in example 1)
Even if the word class remains unchanged, the meaning of the word will undergo a significant difference. (as in example 2)
In contrast, inflectional morphemes do not cause a change in the meaning or word class, they merely serve as grammatical
markers. They indicate some grammatical information about a word.
Danced –Past Tense
Vans – Plural
Raining – Progressive
Allomorph is a variant form of a morpheme. It can be simply described as a unit of meaning that varies in sound without
changing its meaning. Allomorph is an alternative pronunciation of a morpheme in a particular context.
For instance, the plural morpheme in English, generally written as {s} has 3 allomorphs.
/s/ as in cats
/z/ as in dogs
/ɪz/ as in boxes
The past form morphemes also have three allomorphs.
/d/ as in slammed
/t/as in slipped
/ɪd/ as in stilted
A morph is a phonological string (of phonemes) that cannot be broken down into smaller constituents that have a
lexicogrammatical function. In some sense it corresponds to a word-form. An allomorph is a morph that has a unique set of
grammatical or lexical features. All allomorphs with the same set of features forms a morpheme. A morpheme, then, is a set
of allomorphs that have the same set of features.
The following box illustrates:
morphs s, en

allomorphs s s, en s
morpheme {[-Past,-Pers, -Pl]} {[+Pl]} {[+Poss]}

The morph 's' is linked to three distinct allomorphs, each containing a different set of features as indicated in the morpheme
class: if it is adjoined to a noun, then it marks the plural; if it is adjoined to a verb, then it marks the third person singular
of the verb; if it is adjoined to a noun phrase, then it it marks possession.
One way to represent a morpheme is by listing its features ([+Past]). Many linguists try to represent it by listing its chief
allomorph if there are more than one allomorph ('s'). This is somewhat ambiguous in that "s" could stand for three
morphemes, and is not a desirable way list a morpheme.
Each morpheme may have a different set of allomorphs. For example, "-en" is a second allomorph that marks plural in
nouns (irregular, in only three known nouns: ox/ox+en, child/childr+en, brother/brether+en). The morph "-en" is linked to
the allomorph "-en", which occurs in complementary distribution with "-s". When the possessive is adjoined to a noun
phrase, there is only one phonological form, /s/, but it is written either as " 's " or " s'". The inflectional pattern of English
pronouns is too complex to go into here. "-en" is a distinct morph from "s".

e) Write short notes on any two of the following : STRONG FORM:

ANS: The concept of strong form efficiency was pioneered by Princeton economics professor Burton G. Malkiel in his book
published in 1973 entitled "A Random Walk Down Wall Street." The book championed two forms of the random walk theory.
The semi-strong form explains that public information will not help an investor to select undervalued securities because it is
reflected in the current market prices. Therefore, it is impossible to earn long-term abnormal returns. The strong form states
that no information, public or inside information, will benefit an investor because even inside information is reflected in the
current stock price.
Grammatical words are words that help us construct the sentence but they don't mean anything: articles, prepositions,
conjunctions, auxiliary verbs, etc.
These words have stress, and so they are called ‗Strong Form‘. This version sounds unnatural and, believe it or not, more
difficult to understand for a native speaker.
In certain contexts the strong forms of the weak forms words are used.
The strong forms is used when a weak form word occurs at the end of a sentence. Where are you from? Many weak form
words never occur at the end of a sentence e.g. the, your, etc. some words particularly certain pronouns occur in their weak
forms in final position.
A strong form is used when a weak form word is contrasted with another word e.g. The letter‖s from him, not to him. Same
is the case in co-ordinated use of prepositions e.g. I travel to and from London a lot.
A strong form is used when a weak form word in given stress for the purpose of emphasis,e.g. You must give him more
money.
A strong form is used when a weak form word is ―quoted‖ or ―cited‖, e.g. You shouldn‖t put ―and‖ at the end of a sentence.
Another point to remember is that when a weak form word whose spelling begins with ―h‖ e.g. ―her‖, ―have‖. Occurs at the
beginning of a sentence, the pronunciation is with initial ―h‖ even thought this is usually omitted in other contexts.
 Diphthong, = ALREADY GIVEN

Alliteration,
In alliteration, consonant sounds in two or more neighboring words or syllables are repeated. The repeated sounds are
usually the first, or initial, sounds—as in "seven sisters"—but repetition of sounds in non-initial stressed, or accented,
syllables is also common: "appear and report." Alliteration is a common feature in poetry, but it is also found in songs and
raps and speeches and other kinds of writing, as well as in frequently used phrases, such as "pretty as a picture" and "dead
as a doornail."
Alliteration can in its simplest form reinforce one or two consonant sounds, as in this line from William Shakespeare's
"Sonnet XII":
When I do count the clock that tells the time
A more complex pattern of alliteration can be created when consonants both at the beginning of words and at the beginning
of stressed syllables within words are repeated, as in the following line from Percy Bysshe Shelley's "Stanzas Written in
Dejection Near Naples":
The City's voice itself is soft like Solitude's
As a poetic device, alliteration is often discussed with assonance, the repetition of stressed vowel sounds within two or more
words with different end consonants, as in "stony" and "holy"; and consonance, the repetition of end or medial consonants,
as in "stroke" and "luck."
Examples of alliteration in a Sentence
As far as sound repetition goes, I don't have any principles. I try to stay away from heavy alliteration and other pyrotechnics
because I think they detract from the sense of the poem and blur the imagery.— Maxine Kumin, "A
Questionnaire," 1977, in To Make a Prairie, 1979More specifically, how are actual events deformed by the application to them
of metaphor, rhetorical comparison, prose rhythm, assonance, alliteration, allusion, and sentence structures and connectives
implying clear causality?— Paul Fussel, The Great War and Modern Memory, 1975

Metonymy
metonymy, (from Greek metōnymia, ‗change of name,‘ or ‗misnomer‘), figure of speech in which the name of an object
or concept is replaced with a word closely related to or suggested by the original, as ‗crown‘ to mean ‗king‘ (‗The power of
the crown was mortally weakened‘) or an author for his works (‗I‖m studying Shakespeare‘). A familiar Shakespearean
example is Mark Antony‖s speech in Julius Caesar in which he asks of his audience: ‗Lend me your ears.‘
Metonymy is closely related to synecdoche, the naming of a part for the whole or a whole for the part, and is a common
poetic device. Metonymy has the effect of creating concrete and vivid images in place of generalities, as in the substitution of
a specific ‗grave‘ for the abstraction ‗death.‘ Metonymy is standard journalistic and headline practice as in the use of ‗city
hall‘ to mean ‗municipal government‘ and of the ‗White House‘ to mean the ‗president of the United States.‘
Examples of Metonymy in Everyday Language and Literature
People use figurative language every day whether they realize it or not. Common examples of metonymy include in language
include:
1. Referring to the President of the United States or their administration as ‗the White House‘ or ‗the Oval Office‘
2. Referring to the American technology industry as ‗Silicon Valley‘
3. Referring to the American advertising industry as ‗Madison Avenue‘
4. Referring to the American film industry or celebrity culture as ‗Hollywood‘
5. Referring to the New York Stock Exchange as ‗Wall Street‘
6. Referring to a member of the British royal family as ‗the Crown‘
Many famous quotes from literature contain metonymy examples, too. In William Shakespeare‖s Julius Caesar, Antony
commands attention at Julius Caesar‖s funeral by saying: ‗Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears.‘ Here, Antony is
using the word ‗ears‘ to refer to people‖s attention.

স্বল্পমূদযয ফুয নন্াটস নকন্ার জন্য Contact করদে পাদরন্ - Call � or What's
App 8479091027