Category of negation paradigm in diachrony
Keywords:
category negation, diachrony, expressing negation, lexico-grammatical paradigm, morphological level, syntactic levelAbstract
The negation in logic and linguistics, negation as a grammatical category on the morphological and syntactic levels are substantiated in the article. It is concluded that in broad semantic terms negation can be expressed in morphologic and syntactic ways in natural language. On the morphological level, negative affixes paradigm and separate parts of speech are taken into consideration, while on the syntactic level the whole negative sentence that includes one or more than one negator is observed. Negation is expressed using affixes that have explicative and implicative components in their meaning. Authentic affixes preserve the semantic meaning of the words they etymologically derive from, giving the word they join to, a special shade of negation. The main source of enrichment of the negative affixes paradigm and their new meaning are affixes borrowed from other languages. The study of the category of negation on different levels in diachronic aspects can help to observe the development of particular parts of speech, which can express negation, and serve as a base for further studies of negation in the different discourses and communicative situations.
Downloads
References
Arakin, V. D. (1985). The history of the English Language, textbook.
Ayres, R. U. (1996). Limits to the growth paradigm. Ecological Economics, 19(2), 117-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-8009(96)00064-X
Bero, T. (2021). “Perfect” asymmetry: Variation in Judeo-Spanish as a window into the diachrony of perfect auxiliaries. Lingua, 258, 103086. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2021.103086
Bland, S. K. (1996). Intermediate grammar: from form to meaning and use.[Hauptband]. Oxford University Press.
Butt, M., & Lahiri, A. (2013). Diachronic pertinacity of light verbs. Lingua, 135, 7-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2012.11.006
Dickey, S. M., & Janda, L. A. (2015). Slavic aspectual prefixes and numeral classifiers: Two kinds of lexico-grammatical unitizers. Lingua, 168, 57-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2015.09.005
Gabidullina, A., Sokolova, A., Kolesnichenko, E., Zharikova, M., & Shlapakov, O. (2021). Metonymy in scientific linguistic discourse. Linguistics and Culture Review, 5(S4), 71-83. https://doi.org/10.21744/lingcure.v5nS4.1556
Grodzinsky, Y. (1984). The syntactic characterization of agrammatism. Cognition, 16(2), 99-120. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(84)90001-5
Helmbrecht, J. (2015). A typology of non-prototypical uses of personal pronouns: Synchrony and diachrony. Journal of pragmatics, 88, 176-189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.10.004
Hoang, J. (2019). Translation technique term and semantics. Applied Translation, 13(1), 16–25. Retrieved from https://appliedtranslation.nyc/index.php/journal/article/view/145
Issa, S. H. M., Bajiri, M. E., Alyamani, K. A. Z., & Abhishek B. P. (2021). Lexical semantic activation in bilinguals: evidence through blocked naming task. Linguistics and Culture Review, 5(S1), 860-866. https://doi.org/10.21744/lingcure.v5nS1.1470
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1971). Comprehension of negation with quantification. Journal of verbal learning and verbal behavior, 10(3), 244-253. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(71)80051-8
Karatsareas, P. (2014). On the diachrony of gender in Asia Minor Greek: The development of semantic agreement in Pontic. Language Sciences, 43, 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2013.10.005
Kedova, L. (1988). On the issue of the polynegation of the Old English language. Journal of Kharkiv University, ?322, p.p. 37–40.
Leontieva, S. (1974). Negative affixes in modern English. High School. Moscow: p. 5–24.
Levin, S. R. (1958). Negative contraction: an Old and Middle English dialect criterion. The Journal of English and Germanic Philology, 57(3), 492-501.
Mykhailenko, V. V. (1997). Negation as a communicative indicator in diachrony. Economic Scientific Journal of Yuriy Fedkovych Chernivtsi National University, ?12 (3), ?. 15–22.
Mykhailenko, V. V. (2000). Semantics and paradigmatics of the negation operator. Economic Scientific Journal of Yuriy Fedkovych Chernivtsi National University, ?72, P. 48–51.
Netra, I. M. (2016). Lexical representations of prototypes of semantic primitives in balinese tradition and their meaning configuration in english. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Culture, 2(2), 38-49. Retrieved from https://sloap.org/journals/index.php/ijllc/article/view/88
Palasis, K. (2015). Subject clitics and preverbal negation in European French: Variation, acquisition, diatopy and diachrony. Lingua, 161, 125-143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2014.11.012
Paradis, C., & Willners, C. (2006). Antonymy and negation—The boundedness hypothesis. Journal of pragmatics, 38(7), 1051-1080. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.11.009
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., Svartvik, J. A. (1982). University Grammar of English. Moscow: Higher School Publishing House, 390 p.
Rolf, B. (1982). A History of the English Language. Leipzig: Enzyclopedie.
Setiawan, I. (2017). Relation of Sasak and Samawa Language: Diachronic study in the language kinship of an ethnic group in Indonesia. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Culture, 3(5), 83-90. Retrieved from https://sloap.org/journals/index.php/ijllc/article/view/226
Soloviova, O., Bloshchynskyi, I., Tsviak, L., Voitiuk, O., & Mysechko, O. (2021). Compatibility of Semantics of Suffixes with Gender Assignment in Old English. International Journal of English Language and Literature Studies, 10(3), 224-235.
Trutyak, ?. (2004). Diachrony of the paradigm of negative affixes of the English language. Economic Scientific Journal of Yuriy Fedkovych Chernivtsi National University, ?188-189, P. 276–283.
Widana, I.K., Dewi, G.A.O.C., Suryasa, W. (2020). Ergonomics approach to improve student concentration on learning process of professional ethics. Journal of Advanced Research in Dynamical and Control Systems, 12(7), 429-445.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2021 Linguistics and Culture Review
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
