2024 Hardcover Reprint of 1957 Edition. Full facsimile of the original edition. Not reproduced with Optical Recognition Software. American linguist Paul Postal wrote in 1964 that most of the syntactic conceptions prevalent in the United States were versions of the theory of phrase structure grammars in the sense of Chomsky. British linguist John Lyons wrote in 1966 that no work has had a greater influence upon the current linguistic theory than Chomsky's Syntactic Structures. Prominent historian of linguistics R. H. Robins wrote in 1967 that the publication of Chomsky's Syntactic Structures was probably the most radical and important change in direction in descriptive linguistics and in linguistic theory that has taken place in recent years. Another historian of linguistics Frederick Newmeyer considers Syntactic Structures revolutionary for two reasons. Firstly, it showed that a formal yet non-empiricist theory of language was possible and more importantly, it demonstrated this possibility in a practical sense by formally treating a fragment of English grammar. Secondly, it put syntax at the center of the theory of language. Syntax was recognized as the focal point of language production, in which a finite set of rules can produce an infinite number of sentences. As a result, morphology and phonology were relegated in importance. Syntactic Structures also initiated an interdisciplinary dialog between philosophers of language and linguists. American philosopher John Searle wrote that Chomsky's work is one of the most remarkable intellectual achievements of the present era, comparable in scope and coherence to the work of Keynes or Freud. It has done more than simply produce a revolution in linguistics; it has created a new discipline of generative grammar and is having a revolutionary effect on two other subjects, philosophy and psychology. With its formal and logical treatment of language, Syntactic Structures also brought linguistics and the new field of computer science closer together.
Isn't it ironic? Or is it? Never mind, I'm just being sarcastic (or am I?). Irony and sarcasm are two of the most misused, misapplied, and misunderstood words in our conversational lexicon. In this volume in the MIT Press Essential Knowledge series, psycholinguist Roger Kreuz offers an enlightening and concise overview of the life and times of these two terms, mapping their evolution from Greek philosophy and Roman rhetoric to modern literary criticism to emojis.
Kreuz describes eight different ways that irony has been used through the centuries, proceeding from Socratic to dramatic to cosmic irony. He explains that verbal irony--irony as it is traditionally understood--refers to statements that mean something different (frequently the opposite) of what is literally intended, and defines sarcasm as a type of verbal irony. Kreuz outlines the prerequisites for irony and sarcasm (one of which is a shared frame of reference); clarifies what irony is not (coincidence, paradox, satire) and what it can be (among other things, a socially acceptable way to express hostility); recounts ways that people can signal their ironic intentions; and considers the difficulties of online irony. Finally, he wonders if, because irony refers to so many different phenomena, people may gradually stop using the word, with sarcasm taking over its verbal duties.
This volume brings together Pierre Bourdieu's highly original writings on language and on the relations among language, power, and politics. Bourdieu develops a forceful critique of traditional approaches to language, including the linguistic theories of Saussure and Chomsky and the theory of speech-acts elaborated by Austin and others. He argues that language should be viewed not only as a means of communication but also as a medium of power through which individuals pursue their own interests and display their practical competence.
Drawing on the concepts that are part of his distinctive theoretical approach, Bourdieu maintains that linguistic utterances or expressions can be understood as the product of the relation between a linguistic market and a linguistic habitus. When individuals use language in particular ways, they deploy their accumulated linguistic resources and implicitly adapt their words to the demands of the social field or market that is their audience. Hence every linguistic interaction, however personal or insignificant it may seem, bears the traces of the social structure that it both expresses and helps to reproduce. Bourdieu's account sheds fresh light on the ways in which linguistic usage varies according to considerations such as class and gender. It also opens up a new approach to the ways in which language is used in the domain of politics. For politics is, among other things, the arena in which words are deeds and the symbolic character of power is at stake. This volume, by one of the leading social thinkers in the world today, represents a major contribution to the study of language and power. It will be of interest to students throughout the social sciences and humanities, especially in sociology, politics, anthropology, linguistics, and literature.This work provides a brief overview of the basic relationships of meaning and structure of a language. The overview is followed by a more detailed analysis and practical application of the semantic relationships from the lowest level propositions through the highest level units of the text. A significant portion of the work addresses the semantic relations and roles of the communication units.
The theory described in The Semantic Structure of Written Communication is applied in the books in the Semantic Structure Analyses Series. Each book has a systematic presentation, via a standard format and a tightly controlled discourse analysis of the Semantic Structure of the Greek text of the New Testament. The books in the Semantic Structure Analyses Series are designed to be used as a special kind of commentary to help translators find the precise meaning of the Source Language text. The SSA books are especially useful at points where regular New Testament commentaries are in disagreement or do not address themselves to the questions that translators are obliged to answer in the process of their work. In its format, an SSA includes a display of the semantic content and structure of each paragraph and each grouping of paragraphs in the text, in a form somewhat resembling a tree diagram. Also included are notes and comments justifying the analytical and exegetical decisions presented.