The language is bidirectional. Thus, with the help of language we comprehend perceived reality. And at the same time, it is aimed at the inner, spiritual world of man. Consequently, two spheres closely interact in language: material and spiritual. Language recreates the material world in its secondary - ideal manifestation.
One of the main tasks of linguistics is to identify the patterns of the internal structure of language. A deep and consistent study of the internal organization of language began in the 19th century and was formed as an independent theory by the middle of the 20th century thanks to the establishment of a systems approach in science.
The systematic approach in linguistics has received diametrically opposed assessments: complete support and complete denial. The first gave rise to linguistic structuralism, the second - the desire of supporters of the so-called traditional linguistics to defend the priorities of the historical method, which, in their opinion, is incompatible with the systemic one. This intransigence stems mainly from different understandings of what a “system” is.
In philosophy, “system” is “order”, “organization”, “whole”, “aggregate”, “totality”. Further we observe the semantic complication of the concept. It is conceptualized as a “self-developing idea,” an integrity containing many steps. As scientists note, since the second half of the 20th century we can talk about a developed systemic style of thinking.
Currently, systems are classified into: 1) material (consisting of material objects) and ideal (from concepts, ideas, images); 2) simple (consisting of homogeneous elements) - complex (uniting heterogeneous groups or classes of objects); primary (consisting of elements that are significant for the system due to their natural properties) - secondary (elements of which are used specifically to transmit information, for this reason such systems are called semiotic, that is, symbolic; integral (in which the connections between the elements are stronger than the connections of the elements with the environment) - summative (in which the connections between elements are the same as the connections between the elements and the environment); natural - artificial; dynamic - static; open (that is, interacting with the environment) - closed; self-organizing - unorganized; controlled - uncontrollable, etc.
What place does language occupy in this classification of systems? It is impossible to unambiguously classify a language into one of the types due to the multi-qualitative nature of language. It belongs to the category of complex systems, since it combines heterogeneous elements (phonemes, morphemes, words, etc.) The question of the scope of localization (or existence) of language remains debatable. The opinion that it exists in the form of linguistic memory is not unfounded, but, nevertheless, this is not the only condition for its existence. The second condition for its existence is the material embodiment of its ideal side in linguistic complexes.
Since the ideal and material sides are inextricably linked in language, and it is intended to transmit information not by nature, but as a result of the purposeful activities of people to consolidate and express semantic information (that is, ideal systems - concepts, ideas), it should be considered as a secondary semiotic system .
Representatives of structuralism view the language system as closed, rigid and uniquely determined. Comparativists, if they consider language a system, then only a holistic, dynamic, open and self-organizing system. This understanding satisfies both traditional and new directions in the science of language. What is the relationship between the concept of “language system” and such related concepts as “totality”, “whole”, “organization”, “element” and “structure”? Before answering this question, it is necessary to find out how the concepts of “elements” and “units” of a language relate, since the “system” of a language presupposes the presence of minimal, further indivisible components of which it consists.
With the development of the systematic study of language and the desire to understand the internal properties of linguistic phenomena, there is a tendency towards a meaningful distinction between the concepts of “elements” and “units” of language as a part and a whole. As components of language units (their expression plan or content plan), language elements are not independent, since they express only some properties of the language system. Units of language have all the properties of a language system and, as integral formations, are characterized by relative independence (ontological and functional). Units of language form the first system-forming factor.
The concept of “system” in linguistics is closely related to the concept of “structure”. A system is understood as a language as a whole, since it is characterized by an ordered collection of its units, while a structure is the structure of a system. In other words, systematicity is a property of a language, and structure is a property of a language system.
Linguistic units differ both quantitatively, qualitatively, and functionally. Collections of homogeneous language units form subsystems called tiers or levels.
The structure of a language is a set of regular connections and relationships between linguistic units, depending on their nature and determining the qualitative uniqueness of the language system as a whole and the nature of its functioning. The uniqueness of a language structure is determined by the nature of connections and relationships between linguistic units.
A relationship is the result of a comparison of two or more units of language according to some common basis or characteristic. This is an indirect dependence of linguistic units, in which a change in one of them does not lead to a change in the others. The following relationships are fundamental to the linguistic structure: hierarchical, established between heterogeneous units (phonemes and morphemes; morphemes and lexemes, etc.); oppositional, according to which either linguistic units or their characteristics are opposed to each other.
Connections of linguistic units are defined as a special case of their relations, suggesting a direct dependence of linguistic units. In this case, a change in one unit leads to a change in others. The structure of a language acts as a law of connection between these elements and units within a certain system or subsystem of a language, which presupposes the presence, along with dynamism and variability, of such an important property of structure as stability. Thus, stability and variability are two dialectically related and “opposing tendencies of the linguistic structure. In the process of functioning and development of a language system, its structure manifests itself as a form of expression of stability, and function as a form of expression of variability. The structure of language, due to its stability and variability, acts as the second most important system-forming factor.
The third factor in the formation of a language system (subsystem) is the properties of a language unit, namely: the manifestation of its nature, internal content through its relationship to other units. The properties of linguistic units are sometimes considered as functions of the subsystem (level) formed by them. The internal and external properties of linguistic units are highlighted. Internal ones depend on the connections and relationships established between homogeneous units of one subsystem or between units of different subsystems, while external ones depend on the connections and relationships of linguistic units to reality, to the surrounding world, to the thoughts and feelings of a person. These are such properties of linguistic units as the ability to name, designate, indicate, etc. Internal and external properties are called subsystem (or level) functions. What is the structure of a language system? To answer this question, it is necessary to reveal the essence of those connections and relationships thanks to which linguistic units form a system. These connections and relationships are located along two system-forming axes of the language structure: horizontal (reflecting the property of linguistic units to be combined with each other, thereby performing the communicative function of language); vertical (reflecting the connection of linguistic units with the neurophysiological mechanism of the brain as the source of its existence). The vertical axis of the linguistic structure represents paradigmatic relations, and the horizontal axis represents syntagmatic relations, designed to activate two fundamental mechanisms of speech activity: nomination and predication. All types of relationships between linguistic units in a speech chain are called syntagmatic. They implement the communicative function of language. Paradigmatic are the associative-semantic relations of homogeneous units, as a result of which linguistic units are united into classes, groups, categories, that is, into paradigms. This includes variants of the same language unit, synonymous series, antonymic pairs, lexical-semantic groups and semantic fields, etc. Syntagmatics and paradigmatics characterize the internal structure of language as the most important system-forming factors that presuppose and mutually condition each other. By the nature of syntagmatics and paradigmatics, linguistic units are combined into super-paradigms, including homogeneous units of the same degree of complexity. They form levels (tiers) in the language: the level of phonemes, the level of morphemes, the level of lexemes, etc. This multi-level structure of language corresponds to the structure of the brain, which “controls” the mental mechanisms of speech communication.
Typical for the language is complex structure interconnected heterogeneous elements. In order to determine which elements are included in the structure of language, let's look at the following example: two Romans argued who would say (or write) a shorter phrase; one said (wrote): Eo rus - I’m going to the village, and the other answered: I - go. This is the shortest statement (and writing) that can be imagined, but at the same time it is a completely complete statement, constituting an entire replica in a given dialogue and, obviously, possessing everything that is characteristic of any statement.
What are these elements of a statement?
1) i is a speech sound (more precisely, a phoneme), i.e. a sound material sign accessible to perception by the ear, or i is a letter, i.e. a graphic material sign that is perceptible to the eye;
2) i is the root of a word (in general, a morpheme), i.e. an element expressing some concept;
3) i is a word (verb in the imperative mood in the singular) naming a certain phenomenon of reality;
4) I is a sentence, i.e. an element containing a message.
Little i, it turns out, contains what makes up a language in general: 1) sounds - phonetics (or letters - graphics), 2) morphemes (roots, suffixes, endings) - morphology, 3) words - vocabulary and 4) sentences - syntax.
Nothing else exists or can exist in language.
Why was such a strange example needed to clarify the question of the structure of language? To make it clear that the differences in the elements of the structure of language are not quantitative, as it might seem if we took a long sentence, broke it into words, words into morphemes, and morphemes into phonemes. IN in this example this danger has been eliminated:
All levels of the structure of language represent the “same” i, but taken each time in a special quality.
Thus, the difference in the elements of the structure of language is qualitative, which is determined by the different functions of these elements. What are the functions of these elements?
1.Sounds (phonemes) are material signs of language, and not just audible sounds. Sound signs of language have two functions: 1) perceptual - to be an object of perception and 2) significative - to have the ability to distinguish higher, significant elements of language - morphemes, words, sentences: sweat, bot, mot, that, dot, note, lot, pine, pine, pine, etc.
2. Morphemes can express concepts:
a) root - real (table-), (ground-), (window-), etc. and b) non-root ones of two types: meanings of attributes (-ost), (-without-), (re-) and meanings of relations (-y), (-ish), sitting - sitting, (-a), (-y) table, table, etc.; this semasiological function, the function of expressing concepts. They cannot name morphemes, but they have meaning; (red-) expresses only the concept of a certain color, and something can only be named by turning the morpheme into a word: redness, red, blush, etc.
3. Words can name things and phenomena of reality; this is a nominative function, a naming function; there are words that perform this function in their pure form - these are proper names; ordinary, common nouns combine it with a semasiological function, since they express concepts.
4.Sentences serve to communicate; this is the most important thing in verbal communication, since language is a tool of communication; this function is communicative; since sentences consist of words, in their constituent parts they have both a nominative and semasiological function.
The elements of this structure form a unity in the language, which is easy to understand if you pay attention to their connection: each lower level is potentially the next highest, and, conversely, each higher level, at a minimum, consists of one lower one: thus, a sentence can minimally consist of one word (.Dawn. Frost.); a word - from one morpheme (here, here, metro, hurray); morpheme - from one phoneme (Sh-i, zh-a-t).
Within each circle or tier of the linguistic structure (phonetic, morphological, lexical, syntactic) there is its own system, since all elements of a given circle act as members of the system.
A system is a unity of homogeneous and interdependent elements. Systems of individual tiers of the language structure, interacting with each other, form the overall system of a given language.
System- is a set of interconnected and interdependent elements and relationships between them.
Structure- this is the relationship between elements, the way the system is organized.
Any system has a function, is characterized by a certain integrity, has subsystems and is itself part of the system. high level.
Terms system And structure often used as synonyms. This is inaccurate because although they denote interrelated concepts, they do so in different aspects. System denotes the relationship of elements and a single principle of their organization, structure characterizes the internal structure of the system. The concept of a system is associated with the study of objects in the direction from elements to the whole, with the concept of structure - in the direction from the whole to its component parts.
Some scientists give these terms a specific interpretation. Thus, according to A.A. Reformatsky, a system is the unity of homogeneous interdependent elements within one tier, and structure is the unity of heterogeneous elements within the whole [Reformatsky 1996, 32, 37].
The language system is hierarchically organized, it has several tiers:
- - Phonological
- - Morphological
- - Syntactic
- - Lexical
The central place in the language system is occupied by the morphological layer. The units of this tier - morphemes - are elementary, minimal signs of language. Units of phonetics and vocabulary belong to the peripheral tiers, since phonetic units do not have the properties of a sign, and lexical units enter into complex, multi-level relationships. The structure of the lexical tier is more open and less rigid than the structures of other tiers; it is more susceptible to extralinguistic influences.
In the Fortunat school, when studying syntax and phonology, the morphological criterion is decisive.
The concept of system plays an important role in the typology. It explains the relationship between various phenomena of language, emphasizes the expediency of its structure and functioning. Language is not a simple collection of words and sounds, rules and exceptions. The concept of a system allows us to see order in the variety of facts of language.
No less important is the concept of structure. Although the principles of structure are common, the languages of the world differ from each other, and these differences consist in the uniqueness of their structural organization, since the ways of connecting elements can be different. This difference in structure precisely serves to group languages into typological classes.
The systemic nature of language allows us to highlight the core on which the entire linguistic typology is built - the morphological tier of the language.
Theory of the sign.
Language structure. Elements of language structure and their functions. Language as a sign system. Theory of the sign.
What's happened sign?
1) The sign must be material, i.e. must be accessible to sensory perception, like any thing.
2) The sign has no meaning, it is aimed at meaning, that’s why it exists, therefore the sign is a member of the second signaling system.
5) A sign and its content are determined by the place and role of a given sign in a given system, similar to the order of signs.
F.F. Fortunatov wrote: “Language represents ... a set of signs mainly for thought and for expressing thoughts in speech, and in addition, in language there are also signs for expressing feelings.”
The structure of language is the unity of heterogeneous elements within the whole.
The processes of speaking and listening are mirror opposites: what ends the speaking process is the beginning of the listening process. The speaker, having received an impulse from the brain centers, works with the organs of speech, articulates, the result is sounds that reach the listener’s organ of hearing through the air; In the listener, irritations received by the eardrum and other internal organs of the ear are transmitted along the auditory nerves and reach the brain centers in the form of sensations, which are then consciously recognized.
What the speaker produces forms an articulatory complex; what the listener catches and perceives forms an acoustic complex. Identification of what is spoken and what is heard ensures correct perception.
But the act of speech is not limited to perception, although it is impossible without it. The next stage is understanding. For both perception and understanding, it is necessary that the speaker and the listener belong to a community speaking the same language; then there is a new identification of the articulatory-acoustic and semantic sides, forming a unity.
1) Sounds (phonemes) are material signs of language, and not just “audible sounds”. The sound signs of a language have two functions: perceptual– to be an object of perception, and significative- have the ability to distinguish higher - significant elements of language - morphemes, words, sentences.
2) Morpheme is one of the basic units of language, often defined as a minimal sign, i.e. such a unit in which a certain content is assigned to a certain phonetic form and which is not divided into simpler units of the same kind.
Morphemes can express concepts: a) root – real – table-, land- , b) non-root two types - values of characteristics -ost, -without, re-, and the meanings of the relations -y, -ish: sitting, sitting. This semasiological function, function of expressing concepts.
3) Words can name things and phenomena of reality, this nominative function, naming function.
4) Sentences serve to communicate; this is the most important thing in verbal communication, since language is a tool of communication; this is a function communicative.
The elements of this structure form a unity in the language. This is easy to understand if you pay attention to their connection: each lower level is potentially the next highest, and, conversely, each higher level at least consists of one lower one.
In addition to these functions, language can express the speaker’s emotional state, will, and desires. This expressive function.
Another feature that combines some elements of language with gestures is deictic– demonstrative function, this is the function of personal and demonstrative pronouns, as well as some particles ( Here).
Within each circle or tier of the language structure (phonetic, morphological, lexical, syntactic) there is its own system. Language system- this is a set of homogeneous interdependent linguistic elements of any natural language that are in relationships and connections with each other, which forms a certain unity and integrity.
Lecture No. 3
I. The concept of system and structure in linguistics. Systematicity of the language.
Basic levels of language.
II. The main types of relations in language: paradigmatic and syntagmatic.
III. Language as a special kind of sign system.
IV. Historical variability of language. The concepts of synchrony and diachrony in linguistics.
I. The elements of language do not exist in isolation, but in close connection and opposition to each other, i.e. V system , which is the result of language development in the past and the starting point of language development in the future. Language exists as a system and develops as a system.
Scientists have long been aware of the complexity of the language system. W. Humboldt also spoke about the systemic nature of language: There is nothing singular in language; each individual element manifests itself only as a part of the whole.(Humboldt von W. On the differences in the structure of human languages and its influence on the spiritual development of mankind // W. von Humboldt. Selected works on linguistics. M., 1984, pp. 69-70.)
A deep theoretical understanding of the systematic nature of language was carried out by F. de Saussure, according to whom language is a system whose parts can and should be considered in their...interdependence.(F. de Saussure. Works on linguistics // Course of general linguistics. M., 1977, p. 120.)
The ideas of the Russian-Polish linguist I.A. played a major role in the development of the doctrine of the systematic nature of language. Baudouin de Courtenay about the role of relations in language, about the most general types of language units, etc. I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay viewed language as a generalizing construct: ...in language, as in nature in general, everything lives, everything moves, everything changes...(Baudouin de Courtenay I.A. Selected works on general linguistics. T.1. M., 1963, p. 349.)
Each element of language must be considered from the point of view of its role in the language system.
In linguistics, for a long time the terms “system” and “structure” were used as synonyms. However, there is currently a tendency to differentiate between them.
Indeed, in mathematical logic system ( Greek systema"a whole made up of parts" ) Any real or imaginary, complex (i.e., divided into component elements) object is called; structure(lat. structura“structure, arrangement, order”) is one of the properties of a complex object (system): a network of relationships between the elements of the system.
In this case, language should be considered as a unity of system and structure, presupposing and influencing each other, since language is not a mechanical set of independent elements, but a system that has an economical and strict organization.
In modern linguistics, the general system of language is represented as a system of interpenetrating and interacting subsystems or levels. Level (tier) of language– a set of similar linguistic units and categories. Each level has a set of its own units and rules for their functioning.
Traditionally, the following main levels of language are distinguished: phonemic (or phonemic ), morphemic (or morphological ), lexical And syntactic. Each of these levels has its own, qualitatively different units that have different purposes, structure, compatibility and place in the language system. The basic units of language are phoneme , morpheme, word, phrase And offer .
Units of language subsystems differ from each other primarily in the function they perform. Main function phonemes(sound) – meaning distinction ( To from, R from, l from, P from), morphemes– expression of meaning (1. lexical, the bearer of which is root morpheme – forest; 2. grammatical, the carrier of which are service morphemes, for example, endings - forests (-A expresses meaning genitive case singular or nominative case plural); 3. derivational (if the word is derivative), clarifying the meaning of the root, carriers given value– service morphemes, for example, suffixes – forester (Nick--expresses the meaning of a male person)); function words And phrases– naming phenomena of reality, nomination; offers– communication by correlating the content of a statement with reality.
Language levels and their units are not isolated from each other. They are in hierarchical relationships: phonemes are included in the sound shells of morphemes; morphemes - part of a word; words make up phrases and sentences and vice versa. The hierarchical nature of the relations between the subsystems of the language is also manifested in the fact that the function of units of each higher level includes, in a transformed form, the functions of units of lower levels. For example, a morpheme, along with its main function of expressing meaning, distinguishes meanings ( run– affix -th- helps to distinguish the indefinite form of the verb from the past tense form bez-a-l). The word, performing the main function of nomination, simultaneously conveys meanings and distinguishes them. The sentence - the basic communicative unit - has both meaning and names the whole situation.
The multi-tiered language system contributes to savings linguistic means when expressing various concepts. Only a few dozen phonemes serve as material for the construction of morphemes (roots and affixes); Morphemes, combining with each other in different ways, serve as a means for the formation of nominative units of language, i.e. words with all their grammatical forms; words combine with each other to form different types phrases and sentences, etc. The hierarchy of the language system allows language to be a flexible means of expressing the communicative needs of society.
The meaning of each unit of language depends on its place within common system, from those distinctive features that are revealed in its opposition to other units of the same system. For example, grammatical phenomena receive full understanding only as part of certain grammatical systems. Thus, the categories of the nominative case of nouns in Russian, German and English do not coincide, because in Russian this category is included in a six-member system, in German – in a four-member system, in English – in a two-member system. In modern English language The nominative (general) case is opposed only by the category of the possessive case. The scope of the nominative case in English is therefore much wider than in Russian and German.
Thus, all elements of language - phonetic, grammatical, and lexical - receive full meaning only as part of a system, only in connection and correlation with other elements of the same system.
II. Units of the language system are interconnected various types relations that form the structure of language. To describe the relationships into which linguistic units enter into the language system and in the flow of speech, the terms are used "syntagmatic relations" And "paradigmatic relations".
Paradigmatic(Greek paradeigma"example, sample") relationship connect language units of the same level in the system. These relations unite language units into groups, categories, categories, i.e. are established between units of the same class, mutually exclusive of each other in a certain position in speech. Paradigmatic relationships are based on the phonetic level, the system of vowels, the system of consonants, on the morphological level - the system of inflection, on the lexical level - various associations of words based on the principle of proximity or opposition of meanings (synonymous series, antonymic pairs). When using language, paradigmatic relationships allow you to select the desired unit. A paradigmatic description of language units is built either on the basis of their combination as functional representatives of one unit, or on the basis of the variability of this unit and the conditions for choosing one of the options. It's an either-or relationship.
Syntagmatic(Greek syntagma"built, connected together") relationship combine language units in their simultaneous sequence, i.e. are implemented in the speech stream. These relations are established between two units that follow each other in speech and occupy different positions. Words as a set of morphemes, phrases and sentences as a set of words are built on syntagmatic relationships. When using language, syntagmatic relationships allow two or more units of language to be used simultaneously. This is a “both-and” relationship.
The set of elements connected by paradigmatic relationships is called paradigmatics.
The set of elements connected by syntagmatic relationships is called syntagmatics.
Thus, in language there are two main types of relations: primary, syntagmatic, and secondary, paradigmatic.
III. The functioning of language as a means of human communication is ensured iconic character its basic units.
Language- this is a historically developed in one or another human group system material visual-auditory signs, serving as the most important means of communication.
Familiar they call something replacing, “something instead of something.”
Language signs are meaningful, two-sided units, primarily words and morphemes, that replace objects and phenomena of reality in communication.
Linguistic signs are in many ways similar to signs of other sign systems:
1. like all signs, bilateral units of language have a material, sensory-perceptible form - sound or graphic - exhibitor (lat. expono“I put it on display”);
2. all morphemes and words, like non-linguistic signs, have one or another content, i.e. are associated in human consciousness with corresponding objects and phenomena;
3. the connection between the form (exponent) and the content of any sign, including linguistic ones, can be either purely conditional, based on a conscious agreement, or to some extent motivated ( windowsill - located under the window);
4. linguistic signs, like signs artificial systems, denote classes objects and phenomena, and the content of these signs is a generalized reflection of reality ( student - anyone studying at higher education educational institution);
5. Like non-linguistic signs, morphemes and words (language signs) participate in various oppositions.
But sound language differs from all other sign systems in its universal character, because applicable in all possible situations and can replace any other system. The number of contents transmitted by means of language is limitless, since linguistic signs have the ability to be mutually combined and the ability to obtain new meanings. Language is more complex than other sign systems and in its internal structure, a complete message is conveyed by one linguistic sign in rare cases, but usually by a combination of a certain number of signs. In addition, unlike the signs of artificial systems, the meaning of linguistic signs includes an emotional component.
Thus, language is a special kind of sign system.
IV. The development of language is characterized by continuity and traditionality, the absence of sharp shifts because, as a means of human communication, language must communicate not only between people within the same generation, but also between different generations. And although modern languages differ from ancient ones, there were no breaks in their gradual development.
The historical development of a language system over time is called diachrony(Greek dia"through, through" and hronos"time"). This term also denotes a certain approach to language learning, a method of describing it.
IN diachronic studies the continuous development of language is often presented as a transition from one state to another, as a change from one system to another. Because in every period of the existence of a language in its system, at all levels of this system, there are elements that are dying out, being lost, and elements that are emerging, emerging. Gradually, some phenomena in language disappear, while others appear. Studying all these phenomena and processes over time, diachronic or historical linguistics establishes the causes of linguistic phenomena, the time of their occurrence and completion, and the ways of development of these phenomena and processes. The diachronic approach allows us to understand how the phenomena that characterize the modern state of the language took shape.
Since linguistic phenomena do not exist in isolation from each other, but are connected, forming an integral linguistic system, a change in one phenomenon entails a change in other phenomena and the entire system as a whole. Consequently, diachronic linguistics can study both the history of the development of one element of a language and the history of the language system as a whole.
The concept of diachrony in linguistics is directly related to the concept synchrony(Greek syn"together" and hronos“time”) is the state of a language at a certain moment in its development as a system of simultaneously existing interconnected and interdependent elements. The term “synchrony” also refers to the study of a particular time period of a language, removed for the purposes of analysis from the natural historical chain and abstracted. Synchronic linguistics establishes the principles underlying any system taken in any time period, and identifies the constitutive (fundamental) factors of any state of language.
The idea of the importance of distinguishing between synchrony and diachrony was expressed and substantiated by F. de Saussure: It is quite obvious that in the interests of all sciences in general, it would be necessary to more carefully delimit those axes along which the objects within their competence are located. Everywhere one should distinguish... 1) the axis of simultaneity, concerning the relations between coexisting phenomena, where any interference of time is excluded, and 2) the axis of sequence, on which more than one thing can never be considered at once and along which all the phenomena of the first axis with all their changes are located... With the greatest categorical distinction, this distinction is obligatory for the linguist, for language is a system of pure significances, determined by the present state of its constituent elements….(Saussure F. Works on linguistics. // Course of general linguistics. M., 1977, pp. 113-115.)
In the study of language, diachrony and synchrony are not opposed, but complement and enrich each other: scientific knowledge of language in its integrity is possible only with a combination of diachronic and synchronic research methods.
educational:
1. Kodukhov V.I. Introduction to linguistics. M.: Education, 1979. –
2. Maslov Yu.S. Introduction to linguistics. M.: Graduate School, 1998. –
3. Reformatsky A.A. Introduction to linguistics. M.: Aspect Press, 2001. –
additional:
1. Baudouin de Courtenay I.A. Selected works on general linguistics. T.1.
2. Vendina T.I. Introduction to linguistics. M.: Higher School, 2002.
3. Humboldt von W. On the difference in the structure of human languages and its
influence on the spiritual development of humanity // W. von Humboldt.
Selected works on linguistics. M., 1984.
4. Murat V.P. Introduction to linguistics. Guidelines. M.: Publishing house
Moscow Univ., 1981.
5. F. de Saussure. Works on linguistics // Course of general linguistics. M.,
