Jumat, 21 Mei 2010

linteo hjelmslev


Hjelmslev was a Danish linguist whose ideas formed the basis of the Copenhagen school of linguistic Born into an academic family, Hjelmslev studied comparative linguistics in copenhagen, Prague and Paris (with a.o. Antoine Meillet and Joseph Vendreynes
Relationship between Hjelmslev and De Saussure
He developed a new theory on language coining the word Glossematik (in English, glossematics) the word was partially derived from the Greek "glossa" which means "tongue" or "language") and mathe (“study”)
Glossematics resemble the work De Saussure that language is a form ,not a substance.
Hjelmslev conclude that in language study entails an investigation of linguistic relation independent of phonetics or semantics.

The basic concept of any language in the conventional sense:

According to the prolegomena to a theory of language:
1. A language consist of a content and a expression.
2. A language consist of a succession or a text and a system.
3. Content and expression are bound up with each other through commutation.
4. There are certain definite relations within the succession and within the system
5. There is no one-to-one correspondence between content and expression.

• Prolegomena is prefatory remarks or observation.
• His most well-known book, Omkring sprogteoriens grundlæggelse, or in English translation, Prolegomena to a Theory of Language, first published in 1943, critiques the then-prevailing methodologies in linguistics as being descriptive and not systematising. He proposed a linguistic theory intended to form the basis of a more rational linguistics and a contribution to general epistemology. Like Ferdinand De Saussere(1857-1913), he accepted language as a system of sign, from the point of view of language use.

• Prolegomena divided to following section. There are:
1.The study of language and the theory of language
• Language is studied as the relation of human characteristic.
• According to Hjelmslev make a prolegomena as an attempt to formulate and find a premises from linguistic to establish the method and to indicate its path.

2.Linguistic theory and Humanism
 the object of linguistic is language. As another science, language must have a constancy.
 Humanist may object human activities cannot be studied in the same generalized.
 Hjelmslev has his own view that it would seem to be generally valid thesis that for everyone process, there is a corresponding system.

3. Linguistic theory and Empirism
• Hjelmslev distinguished glossematic from other linguistic theories on the basis of his “empirical principle”: the description shall be free of contradiction, exhaustive and as simple as possible.
• The name of the principle could be changed, of course, but the requirements are basic to glossematic.

4. Linguistic theory and Induction
• The source of difficulties in previous linguistic theories has been inductive investigation. It cannot ensure a self-consistent and simple description.
• Hjemslev suggested that we start with the data, which impose the opposite direction on the investigator. This method may be termed deduction, even though the use of the term disturbs epistemologists.

5. Linguistic Theory and Reality
• De Saussure had remarked in passing that “ the point of view creates the object .“
• He decided that the term “theory” can be used in more than one way. Hjelmslev pointed out, there are no axioms or postulates, since those required are not peculiar to linguistics but are the sort necessary to any science
6.The Aim of Linguistic Theory
• As hjelmslev understood it, the aim of linguistic theory is to provide a procedural method by means of which object of a premised nature can be described self-consistently and exhaustively.

7. Perspectives of linguistic theory
Hjelmslev required that linguistic investigation begin with a circumstance of the scope of linguistic study. In this approach he relied on the method of Decartes four rules: 1. to accept nothing is true 2. to divided each difficulty I should

8. The System of Definitions
In Hjelmslev’s approach to linguistics definitions play central role, as the method sketched above suggest. Each definition is to be clearly connected with the others that premise it. Operational definitions will also be admitted at various stages of the analysis.

9. Principle of the Analysis
The principle of the analysis is not to vary from one text to the next, an Hjelmslev recalled de Saussure’s saying that “language is a form, not a subtance”, in order to stress the invariable nature of the procedure. This is a movement from class to component until further analyis is no longer possible and is based on this particular conception of what linguistic “form” is.

10. Form of the Analysis
Hierarchies are classes of classes, and there are two main sorts: processes and system. The analysis of these two hierarchies, and the results of the analysis, require distinc terminologies. The analysis of the process is termed a partition. The analysis of a system is called an articulation. The classes within a process are referred to as chains, but the classes in a system are paradigms. The components of chains are called parts, and the components of system are named members. These distinctions are the result of individual analysis, but when analysis is continued, we must discuss the derivates of a class in a hierarchy.

11. Functions
A precise terminologi will required to distinguish and state the kinds of dependences that hold among linguistic items, and Hjelmslev proposed such a terminology in the section called “Function”. A function, then, is a dependence that fulfills conditions for an analysis, so that there is a function between a class and its components. The terminal of a function are called functives, and a functive that is not itself a function will be called an entity.

12. Sign and Figurae
When we consider language in and for itself, we must
Conclude that :
1. Language is first and foremost a sign system
2. But, it is not a pure system
3. It consist ultimately of a system of nonsign,
the figurae which are used to construct sign

13. Expression and Content
De Saussure had allready shown that we cannot consider expression or content alone and arrive at a worthwhile study of language.
We thus recognize in the linguistic content, in its process, a specific form, the content-form, which is independent of, and stands in arbitrary relation to the purport and forms it into a content-substance.

14. Invariants and Variants
Hjelmslev considered that the distinctive factor as the relevant one in registering invariants and for distinguishing between invariants and variants.

15. Linguistic Scheme and Linguistic Usage
Language best compared to bring out their similiarities and differences based on their meaning.The linguistic hierarchy is called the linguistic schema and the nonlinguistic hierarchies, when they are ordered to the linguistic, are called the linguistic usage.

16. Variants in the linguistic schema
Variants in the linguistic schema can be considered free or bound. It is called “combinatory” variants. Bound variants are found in the chain, and they can be called varieties, while the free variants are.

17. Functions and Sum
• A sum is a class that has function to one more classes within the same rank and a syntagmatic sum called a unit and a paradigmatic sum is called a category.
• Functions are always present either between sums or between functions in other words every entity is a sum of variants.

18. Syncretism
• Syncretism is generally a fusion of two or more forms(for example, different cases) that were originally different.
• Hjelmslev definition about syncretism is in ter of suspension , since “the commutation between two invariants may be suspended under given condition”.
• We call a dominance obligatory and optional dominance can therefore be distinguished, since the obligatory type is found when the dominant, with respect to the syncretism, is a variety and the optional when the dominant is an invariant

19. Catalysis
• Catalysis is the unexpressed or missing term should be supplied , and the procedure Hjelmslev’ proposed.
• An example of the need for such a procedure, he mentioned the latin preposition since, which occur only with the ablative case.
• Hjelmslev definition of catalysis is thus a registration of cohesion through the replacement of one entity by another to which it has substitution.

20. Entities of the Analysis
The entities that Hjelmslev dealt with are not the same as those treated by other linguist or by traditional grammar. Linguistic theory as he understood it requires us to analyze a text, a method that leads us to recognize the form behind the “substance” which is empirically accessible, and behind the text, a system consisting categories.

21. Language and Non-Language
A language may be defined as a paradigmatic whose paradigms are manifested by all purports’ and a ‘text correspondingly as’ a syntagmatic whose chains. If expanded indefinitely are manifested by all purports

22. Connotative semiotics and Metasemiotics
• A denotative semiotic, it is described a language whose meanings are referential, not connotational, since emotional and stylistic differences of meaning are not included.
• Demotative semiotics is established the connotative semiotic can be related to it and then , a metasemiotic and a metasemiology must be considered

23. Final perspective
• There are two seemingly opposed result of this method of studying language as a set of dependences or as functions between constants and variables.
• Linguistic theory is led by an inner necessity to recognize not merely the linguistic system.
• At that point linguistic theory has related its prescribed goal “humantes et universitas”

literary genre

Literary Genres






Narrative, Lyrical/ reflect-ive (soliloquy): Ballad (verse narrative), Sonnet (a lyric of fourteen lines), Ode (celebration of victory), Elegy lament of death)

Short story


Novella (novelet)





Opera, etc.

Satire, Diary, Autobiography, Nature Writing, etc


Verse, Condensed

Prose (and dialogue)


Prose (dialogue)


Direct, in the voice of the dramatic personae

Half-hidden, sometimes direct in the narration, now and then hidden behind the characters’ speeches.

Fully hidden behind the masks of the characters

Direct, Half-hidden


Speaker, plot of thought, tone of voice (mood), figurative language (simile, metaphor, personification, apostrophe, irony, paradox, imagery, symbols,)

Characters & characterization, setting of place and time, plot, point of view, style, and theme

Characters & characterization, scenery (setting of place and time), plot, theme (and costumes, lighting system, sound system)

Speaker, style, central purpose, central idea.


An invented prose narrative, that is usually long and complex, and deals especially with the human experience through a usually connected sequence of events.


l A brief prose fiction

l Restricted in character and situation and is concerned with a single, dynamic effect

l Usually falls between 2,000 and 10,000 words in length

l Began in the 19th Century with the works of Edgar Allan Poe and Guy de Maupassant

l Exponents: Henry James, O. Henry, E. T. A. Hoffmann, Chekhov, Kafka, D. H. Lawrence, Katherine Mansfield, Sherwood Anderson, Ernest Hemingway, Katherine
Anne Porter, John O'Hara, Flannery O'Connor, J. D. Salinger, John Cheever, John Updike, Donald Barthelme, and Raymond Carver.

Suggestions for Reading

l Read the story more than once

l First reading is for enjoyment

l Second reading is for comprehension

l Third reading is for analysis

l Do not stop before you finish the story

l Cope with the boredom and ignorance on the first part of the story

l Be sure that you get the tension or conflict that represents the appeals of the story

Structural Elements

Characters : imagined persons that inhibit a story; the agents (doers) of a story

Characterization: the qualities of characters

Setting : the background of the story

Plot : the arrangement of happenings

Point of view : the way of narrating the story

Style : the arrangement of words into sentences

Theme : the meaning of the story

Characters & Characterization


l Major: those frequently involved in the story

Minor: those that support the major characters


l Rounded (complex)

Flat (simple

Identity of Characters

l Name:

l Sex:

l Age:

l Home:

l Education:

l Occupation:

l Marital Status:

l Religion:

l Political Interest:

Qualities of Characters

l Physical Qualities:

l Tall, white skinned, long brunet, hooked nose, etc

l Mental Qualities:

l Smart, intelligent, educated, wise, etc.

l Social Qualities:

l Warm, congenial, friendly, encouraging, etc.

l Moral Qualities:

l Honest, loyal, kind, moral, trustworthy, etc.


of Place

l Deals with WHERE the story takes place

l Frequently explicit, occasionally implicit

l Continent

l Country

l States

l City

l Other specific location

of Time

l Deals with WHEN the story takes place

l Sometimes explicit and occasionally implicit

l Age

l Century

l Year

l Month

l season

Plot Structure


l the setting forth of the beginning (introducing characters, places, or preparing for a particular event)


l The tensions or conflicts (external & internal) in the story


l The outcome of the story

Traditional Plot Structure

Flash Back Plot Structure

Other Aspects of Plot


l Cause-effect relationship: what happen earlier becomes the causes of what happen next

l a good novel or short story should be well-plotted in which the happenings are knitted together


l Possibility to happen

l a good novel or short story should be plausible to happen in real life

Point of View

l Participant

l Narrator introduces him/herself as a character

l 1st person narrator

l Narrator as major character

l Narrator as minor character

l Non-participant

l Narrator does not introduce him/herself as a character

l 3rd person narrator

l Omniscient (the eye-of-God technique)

l Selected omniscient

l Objective (camera/fly-on-the wall technique)


  1. Grammatical Structure (in Narration and Dialogues)

l Standard, or and Non-standard

  1. Sentence Construction (in Narration and Dialogues)

l Long, or and Short

  1. Diction

l Special Expression

l Special Term

l Dialect

l Accent

l Borrowings

4. Figurative Language

l Simile

l Metaphor

l Personification

l Hyperbole, etc

5. Imagery and Symbols

l Anything that appeals to the senses

Something that stands for something else


l The meaning of the plot

l A statement, or a proposition

l Full predication (consists at least of a subject and predicate)

l Different from SUBJECT MATTER

l Deals with the message that the author wants to deliver to the audience

One plot may have more than one theme


EDSO (English Department Student Organization) adalah sewatu organisasi kesiswaan di Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta,yang mempersatukan bermacam-macam karakter mahasiswa program study Bahasa Inggris guna menjadi suatu wadah yang berbentuk kekeluargaan baru yang berfungsi untuk menampung sgala macam aspirasi yang bersumber dari Mahasiswa Bahasa Inggris.

Tidak peduli Ambon,Batak,Madura,Papua ataupun Jawa...Bagi EDSO semua anggota yang tergabung di dalamnya adalah sebuah kesatuan keluarga yang saling melengkapi..Berbagi kebersamaan,kebahagiyaan atow bahkan Kesedihan dalam setiap Anggota EDSO adalah hal wajib yang dilakukan setiap harinya . Smua hal ituw,memberikan SPIRIT besar bagi anggotanya dalam melangkah untuk menyongsong kehidupan yang indah.
Struktur susunan kepengurusan di edso (English Department students Organisation) Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta.

penciptaan manusia

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Alhamdulillah… Alhamdulillahilladzii arsalarasulahu bilhuda wa diinilhaq liyuzdhirahu ‘aladdinikullihi wakafa billahi syahida

Ashshalatu washshalamu ‘ala asyrafil anbiyaa’I wal mursalin wa’ala alihi wamantabi’ahu ilaa yaumiddiin.

Segala Puji hanya untuk Alloh yang memiliki seluruh pujian.Tuhan semesta alam yang menguasai hari pembalasan. Yang pada hari itu akan di mintai setiap amal perbuatan kita. Yang pada hari ituw mulut kita di kunci rapat tidak bisa bicara, Dan setiap anggota tubuh kita di mintai pertanggung jawaban atas apa yang telah di perbuatnya, Tidak ada hewan sekecil semut pun yang berjalan di malam hari ataowpun di siang hari kecuali pasti di ketahui Nya dan Tidak ada benda sekecil atom pun baik di atas langit ataupun di bawah bumi kecuali PASTI di ketahui-Nya..Tidak ada Tuhan yang berhak di sembah melainkan Alloh Azza wajalla....

Salawat ma’asalam juga terhatur kepala junjungan vesar Rosulolloh SAW, Yang menjadi Inspirator dan suri tauladan dalam menyusuri keindahan agama islam yang akan membawa kedamaian baik di dunia maupun di akhirat.
Dan para sahabat yang telah gugur mendahului kita dalam memakmurkan kesejahteraan islam, berjuang dengan segala apa yang mereka punya,baik berupa harta ataupun harta mereka.

“Susungguhnya manusia dalam kerugian, kecuali orang2 yang beriman dan beramal sholeh, berwasiat dalam kebenaran dan berwasiat dalam kesabaran”

Karena dalam proses perjalanan manusia, manusia akan mengalami 5 perkara yang smua nya itu akan menjadi tolak ukur kemaksimalan amal baik yang tlah manusia lakukan selama di dunia ini.

Rasulullah SAW bersabda : “Manfaatkanlah lima perkara sebelum lima perkara: Masa mudamu sebelum masa tuamu; Masa sehatmu sebelum masa sakitmu; Masa kayamu sebelum masa kemiskinanmu; Masa luangmu sebelum masa sibukmu; Masa hidupmu sebelum masa kematianmu.”

Proses Penciptaan manusia :

إن مثل عيسى عند الله كمثل آدم خلقه من تراب ثم قال له كن فيكون

Sesungguhnya misal (penciptaan) Isa di sisi Allah, adalah seperti (penciptaan) Adam. Allah menciptakan Adam dari tanah, kemudian Allah berfirman kepadanya: "Jadilah" (seorang manusia), maka jadilah dia. (QS. 3:59 )

ولقد خلقنا الإنسان من صلصال من حمإ مسنون

Dan sesungguhnya Kami telah meciptakan manusia (Adam) dari tanah liat kering (yang berasal) dari lumpur hitam yang diberi bentuk. (QS.15:26)

وإذ قال ربك للملائكة إني خالق بشرا من صلصال من حمإ مسنون

Dan (ingatlah), ketika Tuhanmu berfirman kepada para malaikat: "Sesungguhnya Aku akan menciptakan seorang manusia dari tanah liat kering (yang berasal) dari lumpur hitam yang diberi bentuk. (QS.15:28 )

فإذا سويته ونفخت فيه من روحي فقعوا له ساجدين

Maka apabila Aku telah menyempurnakan kejadiannya, dan telah meniupkan ke dalamnya ruh (ciptaan) Ku, maka tunduklah kamu kepadanya dengan bersujud. (QS.15:29 )

والله خلقكم من تراب ثم من نطفة ثم جعلكم أزواجا وما تحمل من أنثى ولا تضع إلا بعلمه وما يعمر من معمر ولا ينقص من عمره إلا في كتاب إن ذلك على الله يسير

Dan Allah menciptakan kamu dari tanah kemudian dari air mani, kemudian Dia menjadikan kamu berpasangan (laki-laki dan perempuan). Dan tidak ada seorang perempuanpun mengandung dan tidak (pula) melahirkan melainkan dengan sepengetahuan-Nya. Dan sekali-kali tidak dipanjangkan umur seorang yang berumur panjang dan tidak pula dikurangi umurnya, melainkan (sudah ditetapkan) dalam Kitab (Lauhulmahfuz). Sesungguhnya yang demikian itu bagi Allah adalah mudah. (QS.35:11 )

Tujuan manusia diciptakan

“Dan (ingatlah) Aku tidak menciptakan jin dan manusia melaikan untuk mereka menyembah dan beribadat kepadaKu” (Az-Zarriyat:56)

..Alloh tidak menciptakan jin dan manusia agar mereka tunduk dan berserah diri kepada Nya. Patuh untuk menjalankan apa- apa yang di perintah-Nya dan menjahui dari segala bentuk yang dilarang-Nya sebagai bentuk mengabdikan diri karena telah di berikan nikmat-Nya yang tiada pernah terputus di dunia ini.

Kita dilarang mendekati hal-hal berbau kesyirikan bahkan sampai melakukan nya karena ituw merupakan dosa yang paling besar yang tak kan pernah di ampuni oleh Alloh. Tiada hal apapun yang berhak di sekutukan dengan Allloh Azza wajalla,karena tiada hal apapun yang dapat menandingi kebesaran Alloh.Tiada yang berhak disembah kecuali Dzat Yang mampu dalam mencipta dunia dan seisinya serta dalam memberikan rizki pada setiap mahluk Nya.AllohuAkbar..

Tujuan lain

Menurut Al-Qur’an adalah untuk menjadi khilafah (wakil) Tuhan di muka bumi (Al-Baqarah :31) , manusia di harapkan Alloh SWT untuk menjadi instrumen-instrumen melaksanakan kehendak-kehendak Nya di muka bumi.

Manusia di berikan ilmu pengetahuan (‘ilm) dan kebebasan memilih agar melaksanakan fungsinya sebagai khilafah,untuk dapat menerimanya manusia di lengkapi sarana,berupa akal dan fasilitas lain di luar dirinya,berupa wahyu Tuhan yang di turunkan kepada manusia yang telah mencapai tingkat kesempurnaan,Yang dalam bentuk konkretnya diwakili oleh Nabi Muhammad S.A.W.Dengan kata lain ,dibekali sarana internal,yaitu akal dan anugerah fasilitas wahyu,manusia itu potensial memiliki pengetahuan dan kebebasan memilih dalam kerangka menjalankan peran khilafah untuk membangun kebudayaan /peradaban sebagai tujuan penciptaannya.

Akal dan Wahyu : Prespektif Tujuan Penciptaan Manusia

Dalam kajian filosofis,subjek yang menciptakan segala yang ada (maujudat) disebut Tuhan,sementara itu segala yang ada sebagai penciptaan-Nya disebut Alam.Alam merupakan tanda-tanda Tuhan.Dalam Al’Qur’an menyebutkan :”Akan kami tunjukan tanda-tanda Kami di jagad raya dan didalam diri mereka sendiri (QS Fushshilat (42): 53)

Manusia adalah salah satu makhluk ciptaan Tuhan yang ada di alam semesta ini. Manusia adalah makhluk dua dimensi .Di satu piak dia diciptakan dari tanah yang menjadikan nya makhluk fisik dan Di pihak lain manusia adalah makhluk spiritual karena dalam Al-Qur’an (QS.Hijr 15:29 dan Shad 38:72);telah di tiupkan kedalam ruh dari Tuhan.Dengan demikian manusia menduduki posisi yang unik antara alam dan Tuhan,yang memungkinkan dirinya berkomunikasi dengan keduanya (Kartanegara,2002:137)

1. Manusia sebagai Puncak
Timbulnya sebatang pohon mempunyai tujuan utama yaitu menghasilkan buah (Rumi). Dalam realias pohon pisang akan terus tumbuh sampai menghasilkan buah ,dan setelah itu mati.Demikian pula dengan “Alam”,sebagai ‘buah’nya adalah manusia,manusia adalah puncak atau tujuan terakhir penciptaan alam maka aeluruh isi alam adalah untuk manusia,ibarat seluruh akar,batang dan daun pisang dipersiapkan untuk buahnya.Bila direnungkan,Semua yang ada di dunia ini adalah untuk manusia,sebuah hadist qudsi menyebutkan (“Kalau bukan karenamu,tidak akan Kuciptakan alam semesta ii seluruhnya”.) dan dalam Al-Qur’an di sebutkan (“Dialah (TUHAN) yang menjadikan segala apa yang ada di bumi untukmu.” [QS.Al-Baqarah (2):29]).

Dalam konteks penciptaan alam manusia secara biologis adalah makhluk yang paling lengkap dan paling canggih,dalam pengertian mengandung semua usur yang ada dalam kosmos,mulai dari unsur mineral,tumbuh-tumbuhan,hewan hingga unsur-unsur khas manusia sendiri yang merupakan daya-dayanya yang istimewa.

Ibn Sina,memperkenalkan panca indera manusia adalah :
1. Indera bersama (common senses)
2. Daya retentif (al-khayal) : kemampan merekam bentuk-bentuk lahiriyah
3. Daya imajinasi (al-mutkhayyilah) : kemampuan untuk menggabugkan secara mental berbagai bentuk fisik sehingga menghasilkan bentuk yang unik,yang mungkin tidak ditemui dalam dunia nyata ,seperti kuda terbang
4. Daya estimatif (al-wahmiyah) :kemampuan untuk menilai sebuah onjek dari sudut manfaat dan bahayanya.
5. Daya memori (al-hafizah),kemampuan menyimpan data baik empiris maupun non-empiris
Unsur khas manusia adalah akal,secara fungsional ,akan terbagi dalam dua daya: 1.kemampuan kognitif atau teoritis(al-quwwah al-alimah) yang dengannya manusia dapat mengetahui sesuatu,bahkan lebih jauh dapat meraih dan menyusun ilmu pengetahuan,dan 2.kemampuan manajerial atau praktis (al-quwwah al-amilah)yang dengannyamanusia mampu mengelola dan mengendalikan dorongan-dorongan jiwanya yang disebut nafsu karena itu ada yang menyebutnya moral

Manusia dapat meraih dan menyusun ilmu pengetahuan karena melalui kemampuan kognitif akalnya dapat mengabstraksi makna.makna-makna yang diperoleh akal manusia itu,baik dari data-data inderawi maupun konsep-konsep mental yang abstrak,kemudian disusun secar ssistematis,dianalisis dan diteliti sedemikian rupa sehingga manusia mampu memahami sebagaimana adanaya. Akal mempunyai kemampuan manajerial untuk mengelola dan mengendalikan nafsunya.Filosof Mulim membagi nafsu menjadi 3 macan,yaitu :1.nafsu syahwat,2.nafsu amarah dan 3.nafsu rasional—bila tidak dikelola secara baik dan diarahkan secara seimbang sehingga pemenuhannya berlebihan dan melampaui batas,maka akhlak dalam jiwa manusia akan terjadi kekacauan mental dan muncul tindakan tercela.
Wahyu merupakan sabda atau firman Tuhan yang disampaikan kepada manusia yang menjadi pilihan-Nya untuk terus disampaikan manusia lainnya sebagai panduan hidup

Bentuk ibadah mahluk lain

Stiap mahluk Alloh di ciptakan untuk Beribadah kepada Nya, Baik Manusia ,Malaikat, Jin, Hewan ataupun Tumbuhan..Apakah Anda tahu bahwa setiap malam hewan-hewan selalu berdzikir kepada Alloh Azza wajalla. Di kesunyian malam hari suara keras nan lantang bergema memecah dinginnya malam ketika sebagian manusia terlelap dalam mimpi indahnya...Gukk..Gukkk....Auuung......hehe suara gonggongan anjing yang selalu terjaga tiap malam..Dan suara ayam yang mengingatkan kita akan masuknya waktu subuh...kukuruuuyukkk.........hehe....ataupun suara cicitan burung yang merdu di dengar kala pagi menjelang...
Apakah itu hanya sekedar fenomena biasa????
Renungkanlah kawan....
Smua ini adalah merupakan seebuah peringatan bagi kita.Kita yang di anggap memiliki derajat lebih tinggi kalah dengan hewan – hewan mulia yang selalu terjaga di setiap malam dan bangun di pagi hari seraya memenuhi kwajibannya untuk berdzikir kepada Alloh Azza Wajalla.Sesungguhnya suara yang mereka keluarkan tidak hanya sekedar suara yang keluar tMiringanpa ada artinya...tapi ini semua merupakan bentuk wujud dzikir kepada Alloh Azza waajalla...

“Tidakkah kamu tahu bahwasanya Alloh,kepada-Nya bertasbih apa yang ada di langit dan di bumi ,dan juga burung dengan mengembangkan sayapnya,Masing-masing telah mengetahui (cara) sholat dan tasbihnya(masing-masing makhluk mengetahui cara shalat dan tasbih kepada Alloh SWT dengan ilham dari Alloh SWT) Dan Alloh Maha mengetahui apa yang mereka kerjakan”. (An Nur :41)

“ Langit yang tujuh , bumi, dan semua yang ada di dalamnya bertasbih kepada Alloh . Dantidak ada sesuatu pun melainkan bertasbih dengan memuji-Nya , etapi kamu sekaliantidak mengertitasbih mereka.Sesungguhnya Dia adalah Maha Penyantun dan Maha Pengampun”. (AL-ISRAA’ :44)

Idih ...... Berapa malunya diri kita ini...msak kalah ma binatang-binatang kya anjing,ayam dan burung ataupun binatang lainya .... Mari dunk ah sebagai manusia yang tlah Alloh pilih antara iblis dan malaikat,masak perbuatan kita kalah ce ma binatang-binatang kecil ituw....AYOWWWW dunk tunjukkan MERAHHH mu....jangan kalah ma binatang-binatang kecil seperti burung ,ayam ataupun yang lainnya wokehh...

linguistic theory

Traditional Grammar

1. Boethius

He was known as the “schoolmaster of the West”. His plan for a liberal education consist of two part, known through the terms he invented for them:

• Trivium dealt with the three “expression of knowledge”: grammar, logic and rhetoric.
• Quandrium consisted study of arithmetic, geometry, astronomy and music.

The basic position discussed in the phisys-Nomos and anomaly-anomaly disputes recurred in a more sophisticated form and that the difference between Stoic and Aristotelian logic was relevant to understanding the solution proposed. Theories of meaning and truth were, therefore, intimately related so that neither grammar runs nor logicians nor philosophers were likely to make satisfactory until their attention was sifted from the abstract meanings of isolated words as dealt with in the categories and in the definitions of the ‘Parts of Speech’, to concrete expression in actual use. Logic became the prestige study of the day, the media “scientific – then it had to be ‘logical’ ”

2. Peter Helias
He based his grammatical descriptions on the writing and speech of the best models available to him. Instead of basing their rules for correct usage on the ancients, the medieval under the influence of the logical approach to all problems, began to appeal to wheat they considered the inherent logic of their language.
For this reason this periods was called “laicization of grammar” today these grammar are called “general grammar”
Helias accepted the basic definition of Pricisian and than added his own comments usually based on Aristotle’s logic. He defined ‘grammar’ as:
The science that shows us how to write and speak correctly ….it is the task of this art to order the combination of letter into syllabus, into words, words into sentences…avoiding solecisms and barbarism.

Characteristics of grammar:
• Arts: most fundamental principled ands assumption will be the consequence of human choice and not impress ional necessity.
• In the natural science: it will have an exact procedure, for which rules can be formulated.
3. Petrus Hispanus
Three terms that used by Hispanus :
• Signification
• Supposition and
• Appellation
Logicalness, handbooks of dialectic upon the Aristotelian
• Categorimatic : any term that can stand ads the subject or predicate
• Syncategorimatic : all other expression, especially those that are not nouns ands verbs..
MEANING is signification; define as the representation of thing though a conventional vocal sound.
• Principal signification : all of these expressions, amo ( I love), ammas (loving)
• Co signification: the grammatical accidents/relation the form has.
• Substantial: the first terms represents the meaning of nouns and nominal and the second meaning of what me call.
• Adjectival signification : adjectival link
The relation between signification and supposition:
Signification : Supposition
Meaning : Things
Intension : Extension
Denotation : Connotation
Concept : Instance
Type of supposition
• Categorimatic
• Syncategorimatic
Modern Logicians and linguists
• Object language
• Meta language
“Linguistics System” as found in modern transformational Grammar.
4. The Modistae
Because they concern themselves with these “modes” which entitle“ on the modes of signification”. The mosdistae were in agreement about two things:
a. The basic kinds of modes
b. How these modes are principally expressed
The treaties called “on the modes of signification” were often divided into three parts:
a. Defined and examined the notion of the various modes
b. Considered what modes are characteristics of the various parts of speech
c. Dealt with construction
Correspondingly, the modistae distinguished active ands passive
The works of modistae
a. Advantages:
• Methods of grammar of the modistae was based on meaning
• It did rigorously show the relation among a language, the world as the medieval describes it to themselves, the language used by people of common educational background.
• Their work reminds us forcibly that much of grammar and linguistics, consist of a particular way of talking about language however it is defined.
• Those who share the same experience can talk to each other reality.
• Those with divergent interest and problems communication less well since the lack a common language.
b. Disadvantages:
• They were tempted to conduce that there was some kinds of mechanical connection among the properties of things
• The way things are conceived and the way the are expressed.
• As inconsistent as this thinking was it would return the study of language almosdt to the plane of the cratylus
• The mosdistae following the logical tradition, were mainly considered with examining declarative sentence
• That the kinds of grammar they examined was semantic not formal.
5. Etymology
Is the origin of words, when the meaning of nouns or verb is gathered by interpretation. Further quotation form Isidore’s work will indicate the kinds of information it contains. We can also see how little “folk etymology” has progressed over the centuries:
• Different language
• Different nation
• Grammar
A. Perspective Grammar

1. Traditional Grammar Vs. Linguistic
Traditional Grammar Linguistic
• Meant the basically Aristotelian orientations towards the nature of language as exemplified in the work of the ancient Greeks and Romes.
• The speculative work of the medievals
• The perspective approach of eighteenth century grammarians • Meant the empirical
• Structural approach to language as represented principal by American linguistic during the periods of the early 1948’sd to mid 1950’sd
2. Structural Vs. Traditional Grammar
Specifications Structural Traditional Grammar
Assigning rules for language Objective subjective
Responds Merely state the observable fact of language without attempting and explanation is given Assign the reason why certain grammatical features of language occur and how they must behave
Levels of analysis distinguished various levels of analysis easily distinguished by using expressions
The fact why it can be understand Has précised from disputed psychological, logical or metaphysical system due to its cultural history which links it to a fundamentally Aristotelian psychological theory of a dualistic type
Chapter 6
The Nineteenth Century
This period is so called synchronic point of view, according to which language are describes without reference to their history.
The personages of these periods are:
1. Stoics create the term etymology
2. Varro, his finding about regularity the nature of language
3. Julius Caesar Scalier (1484-1558) about relation of language compared Latin and Greek
4. Joseph Justus Scalier (1540-1609) tried to classify all language of European according to a limited number of ‘matrices’ which indicated the closer relation of some than others
5. Etien Guichard compiled an etymological Harmony of Languages. Guichard assump that since all of these language (Hebrew, Chaladaic, Syrian, Greek, Latin, French, Italian, Spanish, German, Flemish and English) can be represented in alphabet
6. Pallas (1744-1811) publish the Linguarum Totius Orbs Vocabularia
7. Lorenzo Hervas y Panduro compiled a 21 volume encyclopedias called Iswa dwell’universo
8. Ramus Rask, he pointed that experience had showed lexical correspondences to be unreliable index of common origin or relation of language, so that the surest way to compare language is to attend to (1) the roots of languages and (23) the sound correspondences among the roots of the language.
9. Jakob Grimm (1785-18623) publish his first edition of the Dutch Grammatik in 1818. he presented schematically as

And was noted before, the contrast are sometimes better expressed as follows:

10. Carl Verner in 1875 was able to dispose of the irregular status of other exceptions to Grimm’ds law by showing that another conditioning factor that had to be considered was the place of the accent in IE languages.
The nineteenth century linguistics considered analogy as a process and thought that with this and the process of sounds change they had discovered the secret of life for languages. Language was considered to be kinds of organism, which has its own laws of life, growth, and decline. One force that caused language to change was an impersonal, inexorable sound law. Sound laws as such were said to be wholly without exceptions.
Whatever the theoretical quarrels that divided scholars of this period, there were tremendous advances in information gained and in referents of descriptive technique.
The conclusion it can be appreciated that great strides were made toward the structural point of view in the description and comparison of language. The condition under which progress was chiefly made can be seen the explicit affirmation of the importance of analogy in language, since this process involved the assumption of an important resemblance among terms that differ. A voiced sound is phonetically different from a voiceless one, but the work of Grimm showed that this difference can be reduce to a significant unity by assuming a different point of view.

Ferdinand de saussure

Ferdinand de Saussure was created the theory of Modern of Linguistics.
Ferdinand de Saussure clearer about the meaning than Edward Sapir.
The modern of Linguistics came from the bachelor from Swiss, he is Ferdinand de Saussure. His book which the title Cours de Linguistique generale that was published in 1916.
Ferdinand de Saussure is focus on learning language from the meaning side. The application of these idea to language study is obvious. Language can be considered a
“ thing “ separate from our use of it as individuals, because it is inherited entire from the other speakers who teach it to us and is not our product. Language is a social fact, since it general throughout a community and exercises a constraint on he speakers. This constraint is peculiar, since: 1. it is consist in our lack of any alternatives, if we wish to communicate through it, 2. it is imposed on us by education, but when we master it, we are aware of no constrain.

According to de Saussure, he is identify the meaning of language in three parts, there are:
 Signifie, is the things
 Signifient, is the concept in the brain
 Signifier, is the term or expression of that things

Some of his main contributions tolinguistics can be summarized by examining the terms the either coined or to which he gave a characteristic stamps:
1. The distinction among La Langue, La Parole, Le Langage
2. The distinction between Diachronic and Synchronic language study
3. The definition of the “ Linguistics Sign “
4. The distinction between associative and syntagmatic relations in language
5. The notion of content, as opposed to linguistic signification and value
6. His description of the concrete and abstract units of language.

1. La Langue, La Poarole, Le Langage
La Langue is the social fact, being general throughout a community and exercising constraint over the individual speakers. ( each of languages as a system. Like as the France language, the English language, Indonesian Language etc.)
La Langage, is a language as special characteristics of human. In this case, Le Langage does not have a principle of unity within it that enables us to study it scientifically. Le Langage is not asocial fact, pure and simple, since it includes the individual factors attributable to the individual speakers.
La Parole, is a language that is used appropriate concretely. Such as: dialect, utterance, words. In this case, La Parole is many acts of speaking and the realization of the grammatical constraints of language, assuming that all the speakers use the language grammatically.
A definition of language that fits the notion of social fact according to de Saussure

In this case La langue is the set of passively acquired habits we have ben taught by our speech community, in terms of which we understand other speakers and produce combinations other speakers of our community understand. La parole includes anything a speaker might say.
Le langage encompasses anything a speaker might say as well as the constraints that prevent him from saying anything ungrammatical.

2. The distinction between Diachronic and Synchronic
Diachronic is a study of language with pay attention the things that have the history’s characteristic. While Synchronic is a study of language with pay attention just to the “ structure “ of language without we have to pay attention to the history’s side. From this analogy it appears that the synchronic study of language has decided advantages, from a practical as well as a scientific point of view, over the historical. The historical approach cannot profitably be used to study the development of any set of linguistic forms unless one has been reliably informed about: A. The systematic relations of these forms in an earliest state of a language. B. the differences to be found in their systematic relations at a different state of a language.

3. The definition of “ Linguistics Sign”
In de Saussure’s view the linguistics sign “is unites, not a thing and a name, but a concept and an acoustic image…. A psychic entity with two sides”. The definition can be described in this diagram
The sn as defined here, is said to be the concrete and integral object of linguistic science. The term “ sign” as de Saussure used it is a quite general expression. It can refer to what others distinguish as sentences, clauses, phrases, words or morphemes.
Signs are of two basic types, which will account for a important difference in the discussion of the properties of the sign. If sign cannot be analyzed into constituent signs, it is a simple sign; if it consist of two or more meaningful parts, it is called a sntagme.

4. The distinction between Associative and Syntagmatic Relations in language.
Actually in Associative relations, we learn about the language from the structural sides. Any link in the chain of speech will suggest other language units to us, because the units either resemble or differ from each other in form or meaning. Ferdinand de Saussure illustrated this point by his examples which can be equally well exemplified by its English equivalent,” teaching”. This word could remind us of others that have a similar form, for example any word ending in-ing , such as walking, reading, shopping. Other compounds of teach, such us teacher, teaching, taught, these words can change because it is influenced by the syntaxes sides. Other words with similar meaning but different forms, such as tutor, mentor or words different in both form and meaning, such as chalk, whiteboard etc.
Associative relations are called relations in absentia since the terms consist of an item present in the utterance and others that are no actually in the utterance.
Synagmatic Relations is also called relations in prasentia, since the terms of the relations are actually co-occurent items. For de Saussure a syntagme was any combination of discrete, successive units of which there are at least two, with no limit on the possible number. These segment could be phonemes, syllables, morphemes, words, parts of words, phrases and so on.
An example of syntagmes English expressions like; reread, against all, human life, God is good etc. De Saussure saw that syntagmatic relations that the forms of a language can be accurately described.

5. Linguistic Value, Content, and Signification
 The way in which signs can be linguistically described is through relation between syntagmatic and paradigmatic as a result called Linguistic Value.

7. 6. His description of the concrete and abstract units of language.


Boas was self-taught in linguistics. His first interest in his university years had been the physical sciences and it was primarily an interest in geography, with its anthropological implications. That took him to baffinland. There he found, contrary to the current teaching, Boas had worked out his own scheme for the orderly description of languages, and he outlined it in the introduction to the handbook of American Indian languages. This work called for three basic divisions in the description: 1) The phonetics of the language, 2) The meaning categories expressed in the language and 3) The grammatical processes of combination and modification by which these meanings must be expressed.
In discussing phonetics Boas showed that he was approaching by experience the views of de saussure concerning the systematic nature of language sounds. The number of sounds which may be produced is unlimited. In our own language, we select only a limited number of all the possible sounds: For instance, some sound like p are produced by the closing and sudden opening of the lips: others like the t by bringing the tip of the tongue into contract with the anterior portion of the palate and producing a closure at that point and by suddenly expelling the air.
. This sound would to our ear partake of the character both of the t and p.Unlike de saussure, Boas intended to focus on la parole.For him language is only “ articulate speech: that is…communication by means of groups of sounds produced by the articulating organs.”. These sounds can be accurately described for any language, he believed and he thought that reports by some analysists.
B.Grammatical Categories
Besides having its own peculiar phonethic system, Boas held that each language has its own grammatical system. Of all possible phonethic sequences. Each language uses only some those with which meaning associated. The selection of meaning is as varied and autottomous as the phonetic individualities.if each idea could be expressed by a single phonetic group.
NOUNS in most IE language nouns are classified according to the categories of gender, modified by forms expressing singularity and plurality and appear in syntactic combination in various cases. According to Boas, none of these apparently fundamental aspects of the noun are necessary element of articulate speech. He ponted out that suppression of gender does not hamper clarity. By example:
- There is a house or There are houses
- He her it with cut man woman knife or The man cut the woman with a knife
Here we find merely a string of nouns in apposisition with a number of pronouns, even though the language does distinguish subject and object pronouns. Even English has expression that cross over this logical vs formal boundary as in ny future wife ir my late housband, which are comparable to tense classification in some American Indian language.
PRONOUNS The IE classification of pronouns is quite arbitrary. Boas showed since it does not exhaust the logical possibilities inherent in the notion of person:
Logically, our three persons of the pronouns are based on the concepts of the self and the notself, the second of which is subdivided, according to the needs of speech into the two concept of person addressed and person spoken of. When rherefore we speak of a first person plural. We mean logically either self and the person addressed or self and the person spoken of. A true first person plural is impossible. Because there can never be more than one self
VERBS Boas found the IE verbal categories such as person, number, tense, mood and voice to be equally arbitrary and quite unevenly developed in various language. We find an expression like the man is sick neither overly explicit nor particularly detailed, but when we compare it with various languages we find that is could be considered both for its means the single definit man is sick at the present time. This can be seen by comparing his two versions of an English sentence: 1) The man is sick 2) The single definit man is sick at the present time. Boas was showing the paradigmatic and syntagmatic relation intowhich each memberof the originalsentence enters.
Sapir was a genius: his interest were not confined to anthropology and linguistics. Most of what he said in this vein can be understood in term of the traditional views of psychological processes discussed in chapter 5 of the present book.
LANGUAGE DEFINED, The introductory chapter of language contains a definition of language that at first seems to be nothing more than a summary of the traditional view: “ Language is a purely human and non-instinctive method of communicating ideas, emotions and desires by means of a system of voluntarily produced symbols.
THE ELEMENTS OF SPEECH, Chapter 2 of language discusses the most fundamental units of language, radical, grammatical elements, word and sentences. By “the elements of speech” he did not mean the traditional “ part of speech” which he considers later in the book and rejects. This formulation employs four kinds of symbols : 1) Capital Letters. 2) Lower case letters for example, 3) Parenthesis, 4) plus signs.
THE SOUNDS OF LANGUAGE, An elementary example of his interest in the patterning of language sounds is given in “ sound patterns in language.” Referred to earlier. He took the example of two speakers A and B and their pronunciation of s,th, and sh and in diagram indicated that B`s s is not identical with his th but is closer to it phonetically than to A`s s. B`s sh is phonetically closer to A`s s than to his sh.
LINGUISTIS FORM, Sapir`s preoccupation with language was first and foremost revealed in his study of linguistic form, a sesrch for patterns among the sounds and sound sequences of a language. According to Sapir, then there are two ideas to be considered in studying linguistic form the basic concept communicated by a language and the formal methods by which these basic concepts are related and modified Grammatical processes are formal methods for indicating the relation of a secondary concept to the main concept of radical element.
In the linguistic form has three modalities:1) Declarative which is expressed by the word order and implied by the –s suffix of the verb, 2) The “subjectivity” of farmer indicated by its position before the verb with the suffix –s. 3) The “ objectivity” of duckling expressed by its position after kills two number concepts “ singularity in both farmer ( expressed by the lack and of the verb of plural suffix ) and duckling ( expressed by the lack of the plural suffix and a time concept expressed by the lack of the preterite suffix in the verb, as well as by the suffixed –s.
LANGUAGES COMPARED, The comparison of language, dialects of the same language or different historical stages of the same language will involve the same kinds of methods and criteria. It is the data that are accidentally different. Any language description is implicitly a comparison of that language with other languages that would respond in the same or in a different fashion to the descriptive categories employed.An illustration of this can be shown by the old Anglo-saxon paradigm :
Singular plural
N. Ac fot fet ( older foti )
G fotes fota
D fet (older foti) fotum
In the more regular middle English paradigm:
Singular plural
N. Ac fot fet
G. fotes fete
D. fote feten
LANGUAGE RACE AND CULTURE, The relations among language, race, and culture have always been a concern of anthropologists, and sapir was one of the scholar, in the tradition of boas, who helped explode at least for the scientific community the myths about predictable connections between the racialcharacteristics of speakers and their linguistic habits or between the kinds of language people speak and the kind of culture the language reveals.
The most connections between a culture and its language, sapir found will be seen on the level of vocabulary. In one aspect of culture, however sapir and one of this most brilliant pupils, Benjamin Lee Whorf thought that language plays a central role. If we define culture as what as society does and thinks.
In the view of both Whorf and sapir. It is illusory to think that experience can occur without the formative guidance of the linguistic habits of the person experiencing and that the world we live in is first and foremost one to a large extent unconsciously built up on the language habits of the group.

One difficulty to be solved was the central one of language-its meaning and the relation of linguistic form to meaning. In Language Sapir’s treatment of meaning relied on traditional psychology, but used modern strucyural methods to describe linguistic form. Since form alone remains constant in actual utterances, while meaning varies with attention, the object of an autonomous linguistics for Sapir was to be linguistic form.

Leonard Bloomfield was the most concerned with making linguistics both autonomous and scientific. “Scientific” implied restricting evidence to empirical data. It should be clear that the psychological, dualistic approach of the Saussure and Sapir entitled using data that were not amenable to empirical study. Bloomfield had no intention of making linguistic subordinate to another, non linguistic discipline; rather it was his goal to make it an autonomous science by pointing out that the aspect of language which he though to be the proper object of scientific linguistics.
Behaviorism in the strict Watsonian formulation of it is all but dead. But the linguistic work of Bloomfield underlies and inspires the work of many linguist still, especially in the US. Many of his findings have been revised, some have been abandoned, but Language was such a thorough, significant, and suggestive survey of the field of linguistic that it has been termed the “ bibble of American linguistics.” Much of it has been superseded by later analysis, but no single book has replaced it.
According to Watson, the sort of empirical study he proposed was badly needed. He considered the traditional psychology that Mc. Dougall represented to be a poor substitute for science, because it deals with a scienctifically indefensible notion of “soul”, Watson found his notion to be religious in origin, a consequence of the idea of the supernatural. The latter notion, he said, can be traced to a primitive stage in human society when a group of men, too lazy to work but skilled in observing others behavior, saw that they could put others into a state of fear through the threat of the supernatural, then require the others to support them in return for deliverance from the unknown danger. For Watson this was the origin of religion, which he thought always builds on fear and not love.
Watson was convinced that by investigating stimuli leading to respons behaviorism would provide a basis for predicting human behavior, a result that would be impossoible in a study based on instrospection. He defined “ stimulus “ as “ any object in the general environment or any change in the psychological condition of the animal, such as the change we get when we keep it from sexual activity, feeding, or building a nest,” which leads to some of behaviors.
He defined a “response” as “that system of organic activity that we see emphasized in any kind of of activity, such as building a skyscraper drawing plans, having babies, writing books and the like’ which is the consequence of stimulus.

Language as Bloomfield conceived it, is a set of signals, and the structure of the set can be studied by the linguist without commitment to any theory about what there is to signal or how it is possible for human beings to signal
“The Study of Language”
“The study of language” surveys the various views of language that we have examined earlier in this volume and the sifting points of view that inspired them. Although this account contains references to the main landmarks in linguistics study, all are assessed from a behavioristic point of view. Bloomfield concluded that all linguistic work prior to that of the historical linguists was misguided in one or more ways, principally because of the deductive or normative approach.
“The Use of Language”
Bloomfield illustrated the notion of simple circumstances with a story about Jack and Jill, walking down the lane. Jill sees an apple, makes a noise with her larynx, tongue, and lips, and Jack climbs a tree to get the apple, which Jill then devours. These simple circumstances can be broken down into:
A. Practical events preceding the act of speech.
B. Speech.
C. Practical events following the act of speech
Jack and Jill events can be write:
S→R ; S→r--------------s→R
Bloomfield defined a “ speech-community” as “ agroup of people who interact by means of speech”. The notion of a speech community suggest away of illustrating the difficult distinction between languages and dialects within a language. Within the speech community there are differences in the density of communication.

“The language of The World”
Bloomfield listed the language of the world by their geographic distribution. The number of speaker they have, and the language family to which they belong. The summary is interesting, but will not be dealth with at length here, since it is not indicative of Bloomfields original contributions to linguistics.

“The Phonemes”
Bloomfield distinguished several kinds of phonemes. Those that were discovered in the experiment with ‘pin’ are called simple primary phonemes. He found thirty-two simple primary phonemes in Chicago English. Compound phonemes are those made up of primary ones, but which function as units.

“Types of Phonemes”
That are no particular organs that serve only for the production of speech. Bloomfield then citied some sound types that are frequently found as phonemes in familiar languages. “Noise-sounds” include stops, trills, and spirants; “musical sounds” include nasals, laterals, and vowels. Consonantal articulations, and specifying the degree of closure and friction. Vowels are defined as “modifications of the voice-sound tahat involves no closure, friction, or contact of the tongue or lips. The other sounds are consonants (stops, trills, spirants, nasals, and laterals). Although they are usually voiced. Some language distinguish various kinds of vowels, such as muflled, murmered, or whispered vowels.

Bloomfield discussed modification: “the typical of the organs described in the last chapter may be viewed as a kind of basis, which may be modified in various ways…through the length of time through which a sound is continued;…loudness…musical pitch…position of organs not immediately concerned in the characteristic action; the manner of moving the vocal organs from one characteristic position to another.

These supplementary values arise from several sources, and Bloomfield listed some of the more common ones: (1) the social standing of the speaker; (2) his local provenience; (3) the perception of archaism; (4) technical terms; (5) learned forms; (6) foreign forms or foreign-learned forms; and (7) slang.

“Grammatical Forms”
Bloomfield discussed four basic ways in which linguistics forms are arranged: (1) order; (2) modulation or use of secondary phonemes, (3) phonetic modification or change of the primary phonemes, and (4) selection or differing arrangements of the same constituents resulting in different meanings.

“Form classes and Lexicon”
The form class of lexical are (1) the structure and constituents of a form, (2) the inclusion of a special constituent, or (3) the identity of the form itself.
J. R. Firth
Contextual theory and prosodic phonology

 Bronislaw Malinowski

Bronislaw malinosky spent most of life in England and found prominence there in the field of anthropology. He is interest in linguistic problems was aroused. Contect of situation is the expression that sums up Malinowski’s basic insight into how the meanings of language sould be stated. Malinowski’s view of how meanings sould be stated, he assumed that (1). The sentence is the basic linguistic datum, and (2). The word is there for, a secondory abstraction. He defined a sentence as an utterance bounded by silence or audible pauses. For Malinowski the sentence is most important as a social tool. According to Malinowski, language is a means of social activity and cooperation, and the meaning of an utterence in a particular set ofcircumstanes is to be seen in its effect on the environment, which speech seeks to preserve or altor.
• Phatic communion
Phatic communion is a term that Malinowski invented to label non referential uses of language. Malinowski escape because he presupposes referendial knowledge on the part of speakers. More cogently, one might object that many forms of speech do not appear to ellect anything, a difficulty similar to bloomfields displaced speech.
• Translation
The reasons for this are exppresed in term much like the Sapir whorf hiphotesis, that for two different culture an entirely different world of things to be expressed exists. Language is essentially pragmatic, lexical items, grammar, situational grammar..
 J R Firth
The work of J R firth, and of the group called the London school that has succes him is worth considering at this point. Bloomfield did not think that the phonemic approach is the only way, nor indeed the best way, to reveal to phonological structure of a language.
• Firth’s conception of linguistic
Firth began a disccusion of the a theoritical standing of linguistic with a quotation from Goethe. The object to be studied in linguistics, according to firth, is languagein actual use, since using language is one of the forms of human life and speech is immersed in the immediancy of social intercourse. The purpose of the study is to break up the meaningful aspect of language in such a way that the linguistic and non linguistic can be correlated .
• Therminology
Firth recognized that his therminology is idiosyncretic, but he did not find this to be a draw back. He was not interested in systematizing or subtituting a new dogmatic rigidity in linguistic description
• Contextual analysis
The situational approach requires that we analyze the typical speech situation as follows:
1. Interior relation of the text it self
a. Syntacmatic relations between elements of structure considered at the various levels of analysis.
b. Paradigmatic relations of terms or unit that commute within systems to give values to the elements of structure.
2. Interior relations within the context of situation
a. The text in relation to the non verbal constituent, with its total effective or creative result.
b. Analytic relation between “bits” and “pieces” of the text.
• Prosodic Analysis
One of firth’s most characteristic contributions to the field of linguistic was alluded to above in the account of contextual analysis where it was pointed out that firth considered the level of phonethic to be a level of meaning. This type of phonological analysis is called “prosodic”, because it contaiin as one of its fundamental elements, features that are not recocnized as astonomous in the phonemic approach.
Sentence prosody intonation:
a. Prosodies of sentence pieces: lengh, tone, stress and tone relation between syllables
b. Syllable prosodies: length, tone, stress, palatalitation and labio velaritation.
c. Prosodies of syllable parts: aspiration, retroflectin, plotion and unecploded closure
d. Phonematic consonant and vowel units: velars, dentals, billabials, front, back, rounded and unrounded vowels.
A Phonemic analysis of the language result in the following phonemes:
Stops ptk glottal p
Laterals l r semi vowels y w
Nassals m n vowels i, e, a, o, u
Fricatives s s h hy
The advantages of this approach are that the syllabic pattern of the language is preserve, consonant clusters need not be postuled, and sequences which share nasality can be treated as related exponents of a single phonological category.
• Monosystemic vs Polysystemic Analysis
Firth and the London School had two principle objections to American principally, Bloomfieldian or post Bloomfieldian structuralism. According to the Bloomfiedian view, phonemics is based on a single system of language, an assumption that goes counter to firth’s conception of linguistic structure. Firth did not believe that the analysis of discourse could be developed from phonemic procedures. The American practice of excluding grammatical criteria ( except for such fundamentals as word and sentence boundaries) from conideration in establishing phonemic contrasts seemed to firth to be ignoring the fact that any point in a language can and should be considered the locus of many systemic and structural rlations.
He titles of available prosodic analyses, such as Allen’s “Aspiration in the Harauti nominals” and Robin’s “Nasalization in Sundanese”, also in studies in linguistic Analysis, might seem to suggest that prosodies are only stated for a limited number of structures. Actually a complete prosodic analysis of a language would assign partinent prosodises for nominal, verbal, and syllabic structures. For syllables words, phrase,clauses, sentences, and larger pieces.
• Redundency
The term “Redudancy” uggests that the phonemically relevant features in a language are what define the basic segments and that there are other, automatically predictable features which are “ extra ” and therefore, not functional in the same sense. Equally involved in the procedures. The prosodists contend that these sound differences such as allophonic variations are “ redundant “ only on the hyphothesis that phonology need investigate one system, the lexical distinctions made by phonemes. According to Allen, the fact that phonemicists then give distributional statements, listing the allophonics variants of phonemes predictable according to their environment, is proof that the initial as sumption was wrong. Allen thinks this is beside the point; de Saussure held correctly that the object of linguistic science was la langue, envisagee en elle meme et pour elle meme.
• Conclusion
Firth appears to have pointed uot one of the weaknesses of the Bloomfieldian approach, which worked basically with the differential function of linguistic signals, both phonological and grammatical. De saussure would support whole heartedly, makes us reconsider the base of some of the dichotomies with which we have been working. Situational approach, based on common sense, and therefore, subjective to a great extent, which seemed intuitively togive promise of interesting and revealing developments.
In 1957 Noam Chomsky’s syntatic structures was published, inaugurating a vigorous movement in American linguistics, based on objections to the Bloomfieldian tradition. Chomsky, like Firth challeged the validity of phonemics, of immediateconstituent structure as the totality of linguistics relations and the usefulness of distinguishing morphology and syntax or lexical and grammatical meaning. Chomsky, on the other hand, with an increasing number of American linguistics, claims that there are intuitively given linguistic universals that can be more carefully defined througforma linguistic investigation, and that these will provide the bridges between languages and cultures.
Chapter 11
Louis Hjelmslev
The Autonomy of Linguistics, His Prolegomena record dissatisfact-ion with the status of Linguistics as an autonomous science, and sketched how autonomy might be approached. The prestige of Logical Positivism, exemplified in the Wiener Kreis and the writings of Rudolf Carnap, is evident. The Prolegomena is generally reckoned the most important of his publications, and his other works as preparatory for and consistent with it. Some read the Prolegomena as a logical development of de Saussure's basic ideas and of what Structuralism implies. Others saw it as a justification for practical techniques they had developed, and a codification of what they had been aiming at. Its perspective helps make approaches like Stratificational and Systemic Grammar more intelligible, and clarifies structural bases of Chomsky's work. Hjelmslev's own views of how his thought compared with de Saussure's are also relevant to evaluating directions in linguistic study.
Glossematics. Glosse- in Greek matches the Romance root for tongue in the word language; -modes suggests a study with mathematical abstractness and rigor. It resembles the logistical study of language by Carnap and others, but without their neglect of the dual nature of the linguistic sign (Hjelmslev 1947:76). It also suggests how that degree of abstractness is attained, and its consequent power: computability free of subjective connotations, or even of objective denotations, which Bloomfield found a mark of scientific discourse. Mathematics and logistic deal objectively with quantity undistracted by differences in quality.
The premised nature Hjelmslev proposes for object to be considered a language (Hjelmslev 1947:78):
1. Content and expression
2. Succession (text) and system
3. Content and expression are linked by commutation
4. Constraints within succession and system
5. Lack of isomorphism between content and expression, and non-expressive constituents of expressions.
The Prolegomena and the Empirical Principle. This is Hjelmslev's concern: linguistic theory has suffered from premature and irrelevant involve-ment with uses to which Language can be put. Language is definable without reference to those studies and autonomously investigable apart from them. Language as System is logically prior to, and independent of, Language as Process. It is 'a self-sufficient totality, it should be exact, with each succeeding step defined on the preceding step; and it should be appropriate, based on, and applicable to, experience.
The title, Prolegomena, says this work is not the theory, but a preface concerned with the properties such a theory should have, how the theory ought to proceed, and how immanent study relates language to social phenomena.
The Empirical Principle.
Hjelmslev distinguishes this from induction. He defines that as proceeding from component to class: his approach proceeds from class to component, structurally. He says that induction results only in vague reifications incapable of generalization beyond a single language, e.g. constructs like subjunctive mood common to Latin and Greek (Latin distinguishes indicative from subjunctive, Greek opposes both to an optative, etically and emically).
Langue as Pure Form.
Hjelmslev found more than one sense for langue in Saussure's pioneer work. He believed others could only grasp Saussure's insights when 'langue is not identified with pure form, but where language is conceived as a form within the substance, and not independent of the substance . This was a fault he found in the Prague School's definition of Phoneme.
Such a view did not agree with the last line of the Cours:
Logical Implication. This perspective identifies part of the unity of Unified Science: independent of the content of particular sciences, it involves an implicit definition of description and explanation, and the relation between them. Hjelmslev prefers an intra-, not an extra-linguistic account. Its procedure relies on formal logic, particularly logical implication. He takes the form of all scientific theorems to be the 'If., then' expression of implication, or transposable into it. Such theorems, he says, assert only that 'if a condition is fulfilled, the truth of a given proposition follows' (PTL 14).
Arbitrary vs. Appropriate. Hypotheses can be formed on the basis of theorems. But hypotheses (as Hjelmslev uses the term) are subject to verification while theorems are not. He discusses neither axioms nor postulates, since he finds them more primitive than linguistic theory. So glossematic theory is arealistic (as Firth said) by being arbitrary, realistic in its appropriateness (as in Firth's 'renewal of connection'). Its aim is 'self consistent and exhaustive description.
Langue, Text and Context De Saussure insisted on the centrality of la langue (not parole or langage) for a linguistic discussion of language and Hjelmslev presents text as the sole given. Missteps in linguistic study result from the admixture of concerns like logic, message, or nonlinguistic consequences other than System determining text as Process. For some linguists, the Prolegomena clarified the dimly perceived unity of what they had been doing; for others, its degree of abstraction foredoomed Glossematics.
Content: Purport, Schema, and Usage. Once granted contextualiz ation and its implications, several consequences follow in Hjelmslev's approach. (1) A principle of generalization suggests to him the elimination of what he labels variants, like ram, ewe, mare, stallion, man, woman, boy, girl for invariants like he, she, sheep, horse, human being child of which they can be said to be composed. (2) By distinguishing forms of opposition or contextualization from what happens to fill such patterns, he defines a linguistic schema as a pattern to be filled, while a linguistic usage focuses on fillers of that formal pattern. (3) Bound expression-level variants (like allophones) are varieties, determined by pattern, not phonetic similarity (unlike allophones). (4) This prepares for acceptance of purport as an unorganized, or as yet unformed, aggregate of what content figurae are actually about or might have connection with. This is like traditional matter as opposed to form: he adopts de Saussure's gaffe of calling it substance.
One term in an interdependent relation may be unexpressed. For instance, in a fragment of a Latin manuscript showing the preposition ad, the unattested term can be confidently supplied — ad always govern the accusative case, no matter what the lexical form may be. Hjelmslev calls the process catalysis. The analysis of text in general, then, can be understood as a form of catalysis,
This is how codes are broken: a consistent principle of deformation conceals normally formed messages. We guess what that principle is and apply it to the text. If correct, we have encatalyzed form to substance. That is, we have imposed or discovered its structure, as in the case of Linear B: once it was assumed to be Greek, its anomalous purport was seen to be structured. So it follows that neither phonetic nor semantic substance can, of themselves, be defining of Language.
'Meaning' Systems. Games like chess fit this description. They differ from languages by functioning without the need of two planes (expression [a pawn's shape] and content [a pawn's moves]) which are not isomorphic: when there is a one-to-one correspondence between expression and content, Hjelmslev calls it a symbolic, not a semiouc system. For example, flag semaphores, Morse code, or the language of flowers are symbolic systems; English is a semiotic system.
There are further differences: languages involve, not merely a semiotic system, but a connotative semiotic, distinct from the denotative one. In a denotative semiotic, no plane is a semiotic: flag systems and Morse code do not, like languages, provide for the affective use of expression figurae. To say that languages permit the use of denotative expressions for affective purposes is to define what Bloomfield called connotations in another way.
Several themes found in Hjelmslev's Glossematics are developed in Stratificational Grammar. Its principal theoretician is Sydney Lamb, and given his concern for keeping continuity in tech nical terms, it could have been called Levels Grammar. A stratum is a natural or artificial layer; strata parallel levels above and below them, defining them and being defined by them. Layers of sedimentary rocks form geological strata, tide or temperature ranges are oceanic strata, educational or economic levels are social strata, and the process of formation or the resultant state is stratification. Firth's image of spectral diffusion makes a similar point: light can be examined artificially as discrete bands without being confused about its unitary nature. Stratificational Grammar seeks to isolate elements.
The Stratificational Approach.
Following Algeo's order of presentation, Stratificational Grammar (SG) is said to study language as consisting of a number of strata or levels, and finds other grammars deal with it in simpler terms, e.g. by describing morphemes as consisting of phonemes. In SG, the relation between the morpheme and phoneme levels is not membership, but realization (cp. Firth's exponence). Although recognition of levels entails stratification, other grammars can be inexplicit about how many strata they recognize, what relations within strata are, and how relations between strata are defined. The number of strata required has varied in SG (cf. Lamb 1983:189 ff). In 1979, Lamb and Gleason recognized six strata in three areas:
semology: hypersememic sememic
grammar, lexemic
phonology: phonetic
Arrangement vs. Process. Strata dispense with the need of process terms which empiricists find dubious in synchronic accounts. In SG, no linguistic item X ever appears, then disappears, is replaced by, or changes into, anything else: a semological unit WX (e.g. become dead) can be a unit x die on one stratum realized as у bite the dust on another, unchanged and unchangeable.
But Stratification finds nothing intrinsically wrong with process terminology. Linguists are free to create an imaginary time dimension along which they move units, or an imaginary space for storing things, describing only their respective arrangements. Both item-and-arrangement (IA) and item-and-process (IP) ways of talking about linguistic structures are metaphors-one might be preferred over the other, but not on the basis of linguistic reality. Lamb, however, believes his stratal account is more than metaphoric; he believes it is an analog of structural differences in the brain involved in speech production and perception.
Chapter 12
Transformational grammar

In linguistics, a transformational grammar, or transformational-generative grammar (TGG), is a generative grammar, especially of a natural language, that has been developed in a Chomskyan tradition. Additionally, transformational grammar is the Chomskyan tradition that gives rise to specific transformational grammars. Much current research in transformational grammar is inspired by Chomsky's Minimalist Program.
Deep structure and surface structure
In 1957, Noam Chomsky published Syntactic Structures, in which he developed the idea that each sentence in a language has two levels of representation — a deep structure and a surface structure.[2] [3] The deep structure represented the core semantic relations of a sentence, and was mapped on to the surface structure (which followed the phonological form of the sentence very closely) via transformations. In his 1995 book, Issues of Modernism in the works of Abd-al-Qāhir al-Jurjānī, Egyptian linguist scholar Muttaleb suggests that Chomskian notions of deep and surface structure were clearly defined, fifteen centuries earlier, by the Persian linguist Abd al-Qahir al-Jurjani [4]. Chomsky believed that there would be considerable similarities between languages' deep structures, and that these structures would reveal properties, common to all languages, which were concealed by their surface structures. However, this was perhaps not the central motivation for introducing deep structure. Transformations had been proposed prior to the development of deep structure as a means of increasing the mathematical and descriptive power of Context-free grammars. Similarly, deep structure was devised largely for technical reasons relating to early semantic theory. Chomsky emphasizes the importance of modern formal mathematical devices in the development of grammatical theory:
But the fundamental reason for [the] inadequacy of traditional grammars is a more technical one. Although it was well understood that linguistic processes are in some sense "creative", the technical devices for expressing a system of recursive processes were simply not available until much more recently. In fact, a real understanding of how a language can (in Humboldt's words) "make infinite use of finite means" has developed only within the last thirty years, in the course of studies in the foundations of mathematics.
(Aspects of the Theory of Syntax,
Development of basic concepts
Though transformations continue to be important in Chomsky's current theories, he has now abandoned the original notion of Deep Structure and Surface Structure. Initially, two additional levels of representation were introduced (LF — Logical Form, and PF — Phonetic Form), and then in the 1990s Chomsky sketched out a new program of research known as Minimalism, in which Deep Structure and Surface Structure no longer featured and PF and LF remained as the only levels of representation.
To complicate the understanding of the development of Noam Chomsky's theories, the precise meanings of Deep Structure and Surface Structure have changed over time — by the 1970s, the two were normally referred to simply as D-Structure and S-Structure by Chomskyan linguists. In particular, the idea that the meaning of a sentence was determined by its Deep Structure (taken to its logical conclusions by the generative semanticists during the same period) was dropped for good by Chomskyan linguists when LF took over this role (previously, Chomsky and Ray Jackendoff had begun to argue that meaning was determined by both Deep and Surface Structure)
Grammatical theories
In the 1960s, Chomsky introduced two central ideas relevant to the construction and evaluation of grammatical theories. The first was the distinction between competence and performance. Chomsky noted the obvious fact that people, when speaking in the real world, often make linguistic errors (e.g. starting a sentence and then abandoning it midway through). He argued that these errors in linguistic performance were irrelevant to the study of linguistic competence (the knowledge that allows people to construct and understand grammatical sentences). Consequently, the linguist can study an idealised version of language, greatly simplifying linguistic analysis (see the "Grammaticalness" section below). The second idea related directly to the evaluation of theories of grammar. Chomsky made a distinction between grammars which achieved descriptive adequacy and those which went further and achieved explanatory adequacy. A descriptively adequate grammar for a particular language defines the (infinite) set of grammatical sentences in that language; that is, it describes the language in its entirety. A grammar which achieves explanatory adequacy has the additional property that it gives an insight into the underlying linguistic structures in the human mind; that is, it does not merely describe the grammar of a language, but makes predictions about how linguistic knowledge is mentally represented.
For Chomsky, the nature of such mental representations is largely innate, so if a grammatical theory has explanatory adequacy it must be able to explain the various grammatical nuances of the languages of the world as relatively minor variations in the universal pattern of human language. Chomsky argued that, even though linguists were still a long way from constructing descriptively adequate grammars, progress in terms of descriptive adequacy would only come if linguists held explanatory adequacy as their goal. In other words, real insight into the structure of individual languages could only be gained through the comparative study of a wide range of languages, on the assumption that they are all cut from the same cloth.
The usual usage of the term 'transformation' in linguistics refers to a rule that takes an input typically called the Deep Structure (in the Standard Theory) or D-structure (in the extended standard theory or government and binding theory) and changes it in some restricted way to result in a Surface Structure (or S-structure). In TGG, Deep structures were generated by a set of phrase structure rules.
For example a typical transformation in TG is the operation of subject-auxiliary inversion (SAI). This rule takes as its input a declarative sentence with an auxiliary: "John has eaten all the heirloom tomatoes." and transforms it into "Has John eaten all the heirloom tomatoes?". In their original formulation (Chomsky 1957), these rules were stated as rules that held over strings of either terminals or constituent symbols or both.
(Where NP = Noun Phrase and AUX = Auxiliary)
In the 1970s, by the time of the Extended Standard Theory, following the work of Joseph Emonds on structure preservation, transformations came to be viewed as holding over trees. By the end of government and binding theory in the late 1980s, transformations are no longer structure changing operations at all, instead they add information to already existing trees by copying constituents.
The earliest conceptions of transformations were that they were construction-specific devices. For example, there was a transformation that turned active sentences into passive ones. A different transformation raised embedded subjects into main clause subject position in sentences such as "John seems to have gone"; and yet a third reordered arguments in the dative alternation. With the shift from rules to principles and constraints that was found in the 1970s, these construction specific transformations morphed into general rules (all the examples just mentioned being instances of NP movement), which eventually changed into the single general rule of move alpha or Move.
Transformations actually come of two types: (i) the post-Deep structure kind mentioned above, which are string or structure changing, and (ii) Generalized Transformations (GTs). Generalized transformations were originally proposed in the earliest forms of generative grammar (e.g. Chomsky 1957). They take small structures which are either atomic or generated by other rules, and combine them. For example, the generalized transformation of embedding would take the kernel "Dave said X" and the kernel "Dan likes smoking" and combine them into "Dave said Dan likes smoking". GTs are thus structure building rather than structure changing. In the Extended Standard Theory and government and binding theory, GTs were abandoned in favor of recursive phrase structure rules. However, they are still present in tree-adjoining grammar as the Substitution and Adjunction operations and they have recently re-emerged in mainstream generative grammar in Minimalism as the operations Merge and Move.
In generative phonology, another form of transformation is the phonological rule, which describes a mapping between an underlying representation (the phoneme) and the surface form that is articulated during natural speech
Chapter 13
Systemic Functional Language
Systemic functional linguistic (SFL) views language in a social semiotic perspective. Halliday and Hasan consider semiotic the study of sign system or in other words, as the study of meaning in its most general sense.
Language in the perspective of social-semiotic has three principles, namely:
a. Language always occurs as a text, whether it is spoken or written.
b. Language is used to express meanings.
c. Language is functional, its reflects the attitudes, opinions, and the ideology of users.
As a language is organized to express meanings. Meanings in SFL are known as ‘metafunction.’ The metafunction languages are:
a. to understand the environment (ideational meaning)
b. to act on the others in it (interpersonal meaning)
c. to breathe relevance into the other two (textual meaning)

The reflection of the attitudes, opinions, values of the users will be clearly seen through register system below.
1. Text and Context
A text is a unit of language in use. It is not grammatical unit. As if a clause or a sentence and it is not defined by it size. Another definition of text is a passage of discourse which is coherent in these two regards.
As a text language always surrounded by its environment or its context. Context is simply “other text that accompanies the text or ‘text that is with’”. The context here refers to the context of culture and context of situation.
Context of situation refers to all those extra-linguistic factors which have some bearing on the text itself.
Context of situation defined into three components, corresponding three metafunction. The three components are:
a. The field of discourse: ‘the play”
b. The tenor of discourse: ‘the players’.
c. The mode of discourse: ‘the parts’.
Context of culture in a text means a package…of things that typically go together in the culture.

2. Register
Register is a semantic concept. It can be defined as a configuration of meanings that are typically associated with particular situational configuration of field, mode and tenor. Halliday and Hasan states, that the register is the set of meanings, the configuration of semantic paterns, which are typically drawn upon under the specified conditions, along with the words and structures that are used in the realization of these meaning. Halliday, Hasan and Martin state that register system clearly on the whole text.
a. Field
Field is the cotextual projection of experiential meaning as apart of ideational meaning.
The first function is referential. Here the focus is in the denotative content of the message or the subject matter. This function oriented towards referring to entities, states, events, and relationships and is represented in the propositions.
The second function, Emotive, shows connotative rather than denotative meaning; subjective rather than objective; personal rather than public. References to states of mind, feeling, health, and the like have this as their primary function.
Third is conative function, is when language was being used to influence others.
Fourth is phatic function, focuses on the channel; on the fact that participant are in contact
The fifth function is poetic function, the orientation towards the message and the selection of element from the code which draw attention to them and to the text.
The last function, metalinguistic, derives from an orientation of the code, which is the language being used to talk about language.
In understanding the field, some semiotic resources should be taken into consideration. Those semiotic resources are: Lexis (Abstraction, Technicality, and Metaphor), Grammar (Lexical Density, Complexity of Clauses and Groups, Cohesion, Activity Sequence, Text Structure, and Genre).

b. Tenor
Tenor here refers to ‘who is taking part, to the nature of participant, their statuses and roles: what kinds role relationship obtain among the participants, including permanent and temporary relationship of one kind on another, both the types speech role that they are taking on in the dialogue and the whole cluster of socially significant relationship in which they are involve.”
Tenor also refers to the negotiation of social relationship among participant. Status refers to “the relative position of interlocutors in a culture’s social hierarchy.”

c. Mode
Mode refers to the role language is playing in realizing social action. According Halliday in Martin, mode refers to what part of language is playing, what the participants are expecting the language to do for them in the situation: the symbolic organization of the text, the status that it has, and its function in the context, including the channel, and also the rhetorical mode, what is being achieved by the text in terms of such categories as persuasive, rhetorical didactic, and the like.”
3. Lexicogrammar
a. Idetional Meaning (expresses cognitive meaning)
1). Nominal Group: has function of a class of thing and some category of membership within the class.
2). Adverbial Group: is accompanied by the modifying such as rather, so, more, etc.
a). Experential Meaning
(1). Types of Processes and Their Participants.
• Material Process
• Mental process
• Behavioral Process
• Verbal Process
• Relational Process
• Existential Process
(2). Circumtances
• Extent, Location, Manner, Cause, Accompaniment, Matter and Role
b. Logical Meaning
• MOOD system, the function is to structure sentences (more correctly, ‘clauses’) which ‘count as’ speech acts which facilitate social exchange.
• Modality System means the speaker judgment of the probability or the obligation involved in what he is saying. Modality refers to the area of meaning that lies between yes and no – the intermediate ground between positive and negative polarity.
c. Textual Meaning
It is which predicted from the mode discourse expresses discoursal meaning by drawing on the system and network of theme to create utterances in actual communicative event and to organize these utterance in ways which are not only able to carry proportional content but are also ordered cohesively.