E-Book
36,99 €

A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics E-Book

David Crystal

4,3

36,99 €

Sammeln Sie Punkte in unserem Gutscheinprogramm und kaufen Sie E-Books und Hörbücher mit bis zu 100% Rabatt.

Mehr erfahren.

Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
Sprache: Englisch

Beschreibung

The fully updated new edition of the essential single-volume reference, covering the full fields of linguistics and phonetics

Now in its seventh edition, A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics remains the definitive resource work for students of linguistics and phonetics. Originally created by David Crystal and revised for the new seventh edition with Alan C. L. Yu, this dictionary features a wealth of new entries by a team of experts in phonetics, phonology, syntax, semantics, sociolinguistics, and psycholinguistics. Throughout the text, most pre-existing entries have been updated to reflect the current body of knowledge in the areas of linguistics and phonetics.

Covering more than 5,100 terms, the new seventh edition reflects the latest state of the field and accounts for evolutions in research and theory since the publication of the prior edition. The entries provide clear and authoritative definitions of each term and are supported by additional information such as the historical context in which a term was used or the relationship between a term and others from associated fields. This useful work:

Features new and updated entries reflecting the way established terms are now perceived in light of changes in the field
Integrates ideas from the minimalist program, situating linguistic theory in the broader cognitive sciences
Includes tables of abbreviations, symbols, and the International Phonetic Alphabet
Offers unique insights into the historical development of linguistics
Identifies major lexical variants as separate headwords, enabling readers to quickly find the location of a term
Provides word-class identifiers and usage examples for single-word headwords, especially useful for non-native English speakers

A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics, Seventh Edition is an invaluable reference work for professionals, students, and general readers alike, and remains an essential resource for anyone studying linguistics or phonetics at the university level.

Details

Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:

Android

iOS

von Legimi
zertifizierten E-Readern

Seitenzahl: 1321

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2023

Bewertungen

4,3 (18 Bewertungen)

Rezensionen(0 Rezensionen)

Leseprobe

A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics

Seventh Edition

Edited by

David Crystal and Alan C. L. Yu

Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey.

Published simultaneously in Canada.

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the Publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, (978) 750-8400, fax (978) 750-4470, or on the web at www.copyright.com. Requests to the Publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, (201) 748-6011, fax (201) 748-6008, or online at http://www.wiley.com/go/permission.

Trademarks: Wiley and the Wiley logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and/or its affiliates in the United States and other countries and may not be used without written permission. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book.

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives or written sales materials. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a professional where appropriate. Further, readers should be aware that websites listed in this work may have changed or disappeared between when this work was written and when it is read. Neither the publisher nor authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.

For general information on our other products and services or for technical support, please contact our Customer Care Department within the United States at (800) 762-2974, outside the United States at (317) 572-3993 or fax (317) 572-4002.

Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic formats. For more information about Wiley products, visit our web site at www.wiley.com.

A catalogue record for this book is available from the Library of Congress

Print ISBN: 9781119184539; ePub ISBN: 9781119184591; ePdf ISBN: 9781119184560

Cover Design and Image: Wiley

Set in 10/12pt SabonLTStd by Integra Software Services Pvt. Ltd, Pondicherry, India

Cover

Title Page

Preface to the Seventh Edition

Acknowledgements

List of Abbreviations

List of Symbols

The International Phonetic Alphabet

End User License Agreement

Guide

Cover

Title Page

Table of Contents

Preface to the Seventh Edition

Acknowledgements

List of Abbreviations

List of Symbols

The International Phonetic Alphabet

Begin Reading

End User License Agreement

Pages

iii

vii

viii

xii

xiii

xiv

xvi

xvii

xviii

xix

xxi

xxii

xxiii

xxiv

xxv

xxvi

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

180

181

182

183

184

185

186

187

188

189

190

191

192

193

194

195

196

197

198

199

200

201

202

203

204

205

206

207

208

209

210

211

212

213

214

215

216

217

218

219

220

221

222

223

224

225

226

227

228

229

230

231

232

233

234

235

236

237

238

239

240

241

242

243

244

245

246

247

248

249

250

251

252

253

254

255

256

257

258

259

260

261

262

263

264

265

266

267

268

269

270

271

272

273

274

275

276

277

278

279

280

281

282

283

284

285

286

287

288

289

290

291

292

293

294

295

296

297

298

299

300

301

302

303

304

305

306

307

308

309

310

311

312

313

314

315

316

317

318

319

320

321

322

323

324

325

326

327

328

329

330

331

332

333

334

335

336

337

338

339

340

341

342

343

344

345

346

347

348

349

350

351

352

353

354

355

356

357

358

359

360

361

362

363

364

365

366

367

368

369

370

371

372

373

374

375

376

377

378

379

380

381

382

383

384

385

386

387

388

389

390

391

392

393

394

395

396

397

398

399

400

401

402

403

404

405

406

407

408

409

410

411

412

413

414

415

416

417

418

419

420

421

422

423

424

425

426

427

428

429

430

431

432

433

434

435

436

437

438

439

440

441

442

443

444

445

446

447

448

449

450

451

452

453

454

455

456

457

458

459

460

461

462

463

464

465

466

467

468

469

470

471

472

473

474

475

476

477

478

479

480

481

482

483

484

485

486

487

488

489

490

491

492

493

494

495

496

497

498

499

500

501

502

503

504

505

506

507

508

509

510

511

512

Preface to the Seventh Edition

This is the Preface used in earlier editions, with minor updating. For an account of the present jointly edited edition, see the Addendum below.

When I took the first survey of my undertaking, I found our speech copious without order, and energetick without rules: wherever I turned my view, there was perplexity to be disentangled, and confusion to be regulated; choice was to be made out of boundless variety, without any established principle of selection; adulterations were to be detected, without a settled test of purity; and modes of expression to be rejected or received, without the suffrages of any writers of classical reputation or acknowledged authority.

Samuel Johnson, ‘Preface’ to A Dictionary of the English Language

One sign of immaturity [in a science] is the endless flow of terminology. The critical reader begins to wonder if some strange naming taboo attaches to the terms that a linguist uses, whereby when he dies they must be buried with him.

Dwight Bolinger, Aspects of Language, p. 554

It is over forty years since the first edition of this book, and the plaint with which I began the preface to that edition remains as valid as ever. What is needed, I said then, is a comprehensive lexicographical survey, on historical principles, of twentieth-century terminology in linguistics and phonetics. And I continued, in that and the subsequent prefaces, in the following way.

We could use the techniques, well established, which have provided dictionaries of excellence, such as the Oxford English Dictionary. The painstaking scrutiny of texts from a range of contexts, the recording of new words and senses on slips, and the systematic correlation of these as a preliminary to representing patterns of usage: such steps are routine for major surveys of general vocabulary and could as readily be applied for a specialized vocabulary, such as the present undertaking. Needless to say, it would be a massive task – and one which, for linguistics and phonetics, has frequently been initiated, though without much progress. I am aware of several attempts to work along these lines, in Canada, Great Britain, Japan and the United States, sometimes by individuals, sometimes by committees. All seem to have foundered, presumably for a mixture of organizational and financial reasons. I tried to initiate such a project myself, twice, but failed both times, for the same reasons. The need for a proper linguistics dictionary is thus as urgent now as it ever was; but to be fulfilled it requires a combination of academic expertise, time, physical resources and finance which so far have proved impossible to attain.

But how to cope, in the meantime, with the apparently ‘endless flow of terminology’ which Bolinger, among many others, laments? And how to deal with the enquiries from the two kinds of consumer of linguistic and phonetic terms? For this surely is the peculiar difficulty which linguists have always had to face – that their subject, despite its relative immaturity, carries immense popular as well as academic appeal. Not only, therefore, is terminology a problem for the academic linguist and phonetician; these days, such people are far outnumbered by those who, for private or professional reasons, have developed more than an incidental interest in the subject. It is of little use intimating that the interest of the outside world is premature, as has sometimes been suggested. The interest exists, in a genuine, responsible and critical form, and requires a comparably responsible academic reaction. The present dictionary is, in the first instance, an attempt to meet that popular demand for information about linguistic terms, pending the fuller, academic evaluation of the subject’s terminology which one day may come.

The demand has come mainly from those for whom a conscious awareness of language is an integral part of the exercise of a profession, and upon whom the influence of linguistics has been making itself increasingly felt in recent years. This characterization includes two main groups: the range of teaching and remedial language professions, such as foreign-language teaching or speech and language therapy; and the range of academic fields which study language as part of their concerns, such as psychology, anthropology, sociology, literary criticism and philosophy. It also includes an increasing number of students of linguistics – especially those who are taking introductory courses in the subject at postgraduate or in-service levels. In addition, there are the many categories of first-year undergraduate students of linguistics and phonetics, and (especially since the early 1990s) a corresponding growth in the numbers studying the subject abroad. My aim, accordingly, is to provide a tool which will assist these groups in their initial coming to grips with linguistic terminology, and it is this which motivated the original title of the book in 1980: A First Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. The publisher dropped the word First from later editions, on the grounds that it had little force, given that there was no ‘advanced’ dictionary for students to move on to; but, though my book has doubled in size during the intervening period, it still seems as far away from a comprehensive account as it did at the outset. Bolinger’s comment still very much obtains.

Coverage

Once a decision about readership had been made, the problem of selecting items and senses for inclusion simplified considerably. It is not the case that the whole of linguistic terminology, and all schools of thought, have proved equally attractive or useful to the above groups. Some terms have been used (and abused) far more than others. For example, COMPETENCE, LEXIS, GENERATE, STRUCTURALISM, MORPHOLOGY and PROSODY are a handful which turn up so often in a student’s early experience of the subject that their exclusion would have been unthinkable. The terminology of phonetics, also, is so pervasive that it is a priority for special attention. On the other hand, there are many highly specialized terms which are unlikely to cause any problems for my intended readership, as they will not encounter them in their initial contact with linguistic ideas. The detailed terminology of, say, glossematics or stratificational grammar has not made much of an impact on the general consciousness of the above groups. While I have included several of the more important theoretical terms from these less widely encountered approaches, therefore, I have not presented their terminology in any detail. Likewise, some linguistic theories and descriptions have achieved far greater popularity than others – generative grammar, in all its incarnations, most obviously, and (in Great Britain) Hallidayan linguistics and the Quirk reference grammar, for example.

The biases of this dictionary, I hope, will be seen to be those already present in the applied and introductory literature – with a certain amount of systematization and filling-out in places, to avoid gaps in the presentation of a topic; for example, whereas many introductory texts selectively illustrate DISTINCTIVE FEATURES, this topic has been systematically covered in the present book. I devote a great deal of space to the many ‘harmless-looking’ terms which are used by linguists, where an apparently everyday word has developed a special sense, often after years of linguistic debate, such as FORM, FUNCTION, FEATURE, ACCENT, WORD and SENTENCE. These are terms which, perhaps on account of their less technical appearance, cause especial difficulty at an introductory level. Particular attention is paid to them in this dictionary, therefore, alongside the more obvious technical terms, such as PHONEME, BILABIAL, ADJUNCTION and HYPONYMY.

Bearing in mind the background of my primary readership has helped to simplify the selection of material for inclusion in a second way: the focus was primarily on those terms and senses which have arisen because of the influence of twentieth-century linguistics and phonetics. This dictionary is therefore in contrast with several others, where the aim seems to have been to cover the whole field of language, languages and communication, as well as linguistics and phonetics. My attitude here is readily summarized: I do not include terms whose sense any good general dictionary would routinely handle, such as alphabet and aphorism. As terms, they owe nothing to the development of ideas in linguistics. Similarly, while such terms as runic and rhyme-scheme are more obviously technical, their special ranges of application derive from conceptual frameworks other than linguistics. I have therefore not attempted to take on board the huge terminological apparatus of classical rhetoric and literary criticism (in its focus on language), or the similarly vast terminology of speech and language disorders. Nor have I gone down the encyclopaedia road, adding names of people, languages and other ‘proper names’, apart from in the few cases where schools of thought have developed (CHOMSKYAN, BLOOMFIELDIAN, PRAGUE SCHOOL, etc.). Many of these terms form the subject-matter of my companion volume, The Penguin Dictionary of Language (1999), which is the second edition of a work that originally appeared as An Encyclopedic Dictionary of Language and Languages (Blackwell/Penguin, 1992).

In the first edition, to keep the focus sharp on the contemporary subject, I was quite rigorous about excluding several types of term, unless they had edged their way into modern linguistics: the terminology of traditional (pre-twentieth-century) language study, comparative philology, applied language studies (such as language teaching and speech pathology) and related domains such as acoustics, information theory, audiology, logic and philosophy. However, reader feedback over the years has made it clear that a broader coverage is desirable. Although the definition of, say, bandwidth properly belongs outside of linguistics and phonetics, the frequency with which students encounter the term in their phonetics reading has motivated its inclusion now. A similar broadening of interest has taken place with reference to psychology (especially speech perception), computing and logic (especially in formal semantics). The first edition had already included the first tranche of terms arising out of the formalization of ideas initiated by Chomsky (such as AXIOM, ALGORITHM, PROPOSITION), the fifth edition greatly increased its coverage in this area, and the sixth and seventh have continued this process, with especial reference to the minimalist programme. Recent decades have also brought renewed interest in nineteenth-century philological studies and traditional grammar. The various editions of the book have steadily increased their coverage of these domains, accordingly (though falling well short of a comprehensive account), and this was a particular feature of the fifth edition. The latest edition is just under a quarter of a million words. It contains over 5,800 items in boldface type, along with many related locutions identified through the use of inverted commas.

Treatment

I remain doubtful even now whether the most appropriate title for this book is ‘dictionary’. The definitional parts of the entries, by themselves, were less illuminating than one might have expected; consequently, it proved necessary to introduce in addition a more discursive approach, with several illustrations, to capture the significance of a term. Many entries accordingly contain an element of encyclopaedic information, often about such matters as the historical context in which a term was used, or the relationship between a term and others from associated fields. At times, owing to the absence of authoritative studies of terminological development in linguistics, I have had to introduce a personal interpretation in discussing a term; but usually I have obtained my information from standard expositions or (see the acknowledgements section) specialists – and for the seventh edition, an indispensable co-editor. A number of general reference works were listed as secondary sources for further reading in the early editions of this book, but this convention proved unwieldy to introduce for all entries, as the size of the database grew, and was dropped in the fourth edition.

My focus throughout has been on standard usage. Generative grammar, in particular, is full of idiosyncratic terminology devised by individual scholars to draw attention to particular problems; one could fill a whole dictionary with the hundreds of conditions and constraints that have been proposed over the years, many of which are now only of historical interest. If they attracted a great deal of attention in their day, they have been included; but I have not tried to maintain a historical record of origins, identifying all the originators of terms, except in those cases where a whole class of terms had a single point of origin (as in the different distinctive-feature sets). However, an interesting feature of the sixth edition has been a developed historical perspective: many of the entries originally written for the first edition (1980) have seriously dated over the past 40 years, and I have been struck by the number of cases where I have had to add ‘early use’, ‘in the 1970s’, and the like, to avoid giving the impression that the terms have current relevance. The seventh edition has also increased the number of person-references, with birth and death years.

I have tried to make the entries as self-contained as possible, and not relied on obligatory cross-references to other entries to complete the exposition of a sense. I have preferred to work on the principle that, as most dictionary-users open a dictionary with a single problematic term in mind, they should be given a satisfactory account of that term as immediately as possible. I therefore explain competence under COMPETENCE, performance under PERFORMANCE, and so on. As a consequence of the interdependence of these terms, however, this procedure means that there must be some repetition: at least the salient characteristics of the term performance must be incorporated into the entry for COMPETENCE, and vice versa. This repetition would be a weakness if the book were read from cover to cover; but a dictionary should not be used as a textbook.

As the book has grown in size, over its various editions, it has proved increasingly essential to identify major lexical variants as separate headwords, rather than leaving them ‘buried’ within an entry, so that readers can find the location of a term quickly. One of the problems with discursive encyclopaedic treatments is that terms can get lost; and a difficulty in tracking terms down, especially within my larger entries, has been a persistent criticism of the book. I have lost count of the number of times someone has written to say that I should include X in the next edition, when X was already there – in a place which seemed a logical location to me, but evidently not to my correspondent. The biggest change between the fifth and earlier editions was to bite this bullet. That edition increased the number of ‘X see Y’ entries. All ‘buried’ terminology was extracted from within entries and introduced into the headword list.

Within an entry, the following conventions should be noted:

The main terms being defined are printed in boldface. In the fifth edition, I dropped the convention (which some readers found confusing) of including inflectional variants immediately after the headword; these are now included in bold within an entry, on their first mention.

I also increased the amount of guidance about usage, especially relevant to readers for whom English is not a first language, by adding word-class identifiers for single-word headwords, and incorporating an illustration of usage into the body of an entry: for example, the entry on INESSIVE contains a sentence beginning ‘The inessive case (“the inessive”) is found in Finnish ….’ – a convention which illustrates that inessive can be used adjectivally as well as nominally.

Terms defined elsewhere in this dictionary are printed in SMALL CAPITALS within an entry (disregarding inflectional endings) – but only on their first appearance within an entry, and only where their technical status is important for an appreciation of the sense of the entry.

Addendum for the Seventh Edition

In this new edition, we have made special attempts to expand the linguistic diversity in the examples used. While English remains the more commonly referenced language when linguistic examples are called for, it is important for the users of this dictionary to appreciate the fact that the scope of linguistics and phonetics covers all linguistic activities in the world’s languages. We have also significantly expanded the coverage in the domains of sociolinguistics and syntax. Both subfields have witnessed significant paradigm shifts since 2008 and the new emphases call for major updates and additions of terminologies to be included in this new edition. Many terms that were new or current at the time when the last edition was published are no longer in wide circulation. In such cases, we updated the entries to highlight how the usage of a term has been revised or is superseded by a new term. There are also instances where a term has acquired such broad acceptance that any reference to its contemporality is no longer warranted. In general, we tried to streamline or split some entries so that the entries hue closer to the ‘dictionary’ segment of the glossary-dictionary-encyclopaedia continuum. We have maintained the practice of identifying the historical context in which a term was first introduced, although special efforts were made to avoid or reduce any meta-commentary regarding the successes and failures of particular theories or concepts.

David Crystal

Alan C. L. Yu

Acknowledgements

Crystal: For the first edition, prepared in 1978, I was fortunate in having several colleagues in my department at Reading University who gave generously of their time to read the text of this dictionary, in whole or in part, advised me on how to proceed in relation to several of the above problems, and pointed out places where my own biases were intruding too markedly: Ron Brasington, Paul Fletcher, Michael Garman, Arthur Hughes, Peter Matthews, Frank Palmer and Irene Warburton. Hilary, my wife, typed the final version of the whole book (and this before word-processors were around!). A second edition is in many ways a stronger entity, as it benefits from feedback from reviewers and readers, and among those who spent time improving that edition (1984) were K. V. T. Bhat, Colin Biggs, Georges Bourcier, René Dirven, Dušan Gabrovšek, Gerald Gazdar, Francisco Gomez de Matos, Lars Hermerén, Rodney Huddleston, Neil Smith, John Wood and Walburga von Rafler Engel. For the third edition (1990), the need to cover syntactic theory efficiently required special help, which was provided by Ewa Jaworska and Bob Borsley. During the 1990s, the arrival of major encyclopaedic projects, such as the International Encyclopedia of Linguistics (OUP, 1992) and The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (Pergamon, 1993) provided an invaluable indication of new terms and senses, as did the series of Blackwell Handbooks in Linguistics. As editor of Linguistics Abstracts at the time, my attention was drawn by the systematic coverage of that journal to several terms which I would otherwise have missed. All these sources provided material for the fourth edition (1996).

The fifth edition benefited from a review of the fourth edition written by the late and much-missed James McCawley, as well as by material from Lisa Green, William Idsardi, Allard Jongman, Peter Lasersohn and Ronald Wardhaugh, who acted as consultants for sections of vocabulary relating to their specialisms. It is no longer possible for one person to keep pace with all the developments in this amazing subject, and without them that edition would, quite simply, not have been effective. I am immensely grateful for their interest and commitment, as indeed for that of the editorial in-house team at Blackwells, who arranged it. The fifth edition was also set directly from an XML file, an exercise which could not have proceeded so efficiently without the help of Tony McNicholl. The sixth edition continued this policy of standing on the shoulders of specialists, and I warmly acknowledge the assistance of William Idsardi and Allard Jongman (for a second time), as well as John Field, Janet Fuller, Michael Kenstowicz, John Saeed, and Hidezaku Tanaka.

Yu: The preparation for the seventh edition took place during the height of the COVID pandemic. We were fortunate to have the assistance of a team of dedicated contributors, who helped to craft revisions of existing entries and first drafts of new ones. Indeed, this edition features over 400 updates, including 140 new entries. We wholeheartedly thank Charles Chang, Roey Gafter, Jeff Good, Brent Henderson, Darya Kavitskaya, Rebecca Lurie Starr and Michael Tabatowski for their exceptional efforts!

As always, we remain responsible for the use we have made of all this help, and continue to welcome comments from readers willing to draw our attention to areas where further progress might be made.

List of Abbreviations

Term

Gloss

Relevant entry

adjective

adverb(ial)

adverb

argument

AAE

African American English

African American Language

AAL

African American Language

AAVE

African American Vernacular English

vernacular

abl, ABL

ablative

abs, ABS

absolutive

abstr

abstract

abstract (1)

acc, ACC

accusative

act, ACT

active

adj, ADJ

adjective

AdjP

adjective phrase

adjective

adv, ADV

adverb

AdvP

adverb(ial) phrase

adverb

AFF

affix

AGR

agreement

AgrP

agreement phrase

agreement

AGT

agent(ive)

agentive

all, ALL

allative

aor, AOR

aorist

adjective phrase

adjective

APPL

applicative

arg

argument

art

article

ASL

American Sign Language

sign

asp

aspect

ASR

automatic speech recognition

speech recognition

ATB

across-the-board

ATN

augmented transition network

transition network grammar

ATR

advanced tongue root

root (2)

augm

augmentative

aux, AUX

auxiliary verb

auxiliary

base

anchor, base (1)

ben, BEN

benefactive

BEV

Black English Vernacular

vernacular

bijection principle

BSL

British Sign Language

sign

baby-talk

child-directed speech

BVE

Black Vernacular English

vernacular

complementizer

consonant

constituent

command (2), c-structure

componential analysis

component

contrastive analysis

conversation analysis

CAP

control agreement principle

caus, CAUS

causative

communicative dynamism

CED

condition on extraction domains

context-free

context

cho

chômeur

classifier

classifier (1)

class

classifier

classifier (1)

connective, connector

connective

coda

comp

compact

comp

comparative

comp

complement

comp, COMP

complementizer

con

constraint

cond

conditional

conj

conjunction

conn

connective, connector

connective

cons

consonantal

consonant

cont

continuant

coord

co-ordination, co-ordinator

co-ordination

cor, COR

coronal

complementizer phrase

complementizer

cps

cycles per second

cycle (3)

context-sensitive

context

cardinal vowel

cardinal vowels

consonant–vowel

CV phonology

deep

D-structure

determiner

diacritic feature

diacritic

discourse analysis

discourse

DAF

delayed auditory feedback

feedback

dat, DAT

dative

decibel

loudness

DDG

daughter-dependency grammar

def, DEF

definite

DEL REL

delayed release

delayed

dem, DEM

demonstrative

det, DET

determiner

distinctive feature

distinctiveness

DICE

discourse in common sense entailment

diff, DIFF

diffuse

dim, DIM

diminutive

dist, DIST

distributive

distributed morphology

direct object

direct (1)

dependency phonology

determiner phrase

determiner

default rule

default

DRS

discourse representation structure

discourse representation theory

DRT

discourse representation theory

different subject

switch reference

DTC

derivational theory of complexity

correspondence hypothesis

DTE

designated terminal element

dual

number

dur, DUR

durative

empty category

gap

externalized

E-language

ECM

exceptional case marking

raising

ECP

empty category principle

-ed

past tense form

-ed form

EEG

electroencephalogram

EGG

electroglottogram, electroglottograph(y)

electroglottograph

elat, ELAT

elative

ELF

English as a lingua franca

World Englishes

ELG

electrolaryngogram, electrolaryngograph(y)

electrolaryngograph

EMG

electromyogram, electromyograph(y)

electromyograph

-en

past participle form

-en form

EPG

electropalatogram, electropalatograph(y)

electropalatograph

EPP

extended projection principle

projection

erg, ERG

ergative

ERP

event-related potential

electroencephalogram

EST

extended standard theory

EVAL

evaluator component

evaluator

excl

exclusive

exclusive (1)

functional

f-structure

f, F

feminine

gender

feature

contour (2), edge

formant

fundamental frequency

FCR

feature-co-occurrence

feature restriction

fem, FEM

feminine

gender

fMRI

functional magnetic resonance imaging

foc

focus

freq

frequentative

FSG

finite-state grammar

FSL

finite-state language

finite-state grammar

FSP

functional sentence perspective

foot

foot (1)

fut, FUT

future

future tense

fv, FV

final vowel

final

General American

government-(and-)binding theory

government-binding theory

GEN

generator component

generator

gen, GEN

genitive

grammatical function

function (1)

GLOW

Generative Linguists of the Old World

generative phonology

phonology

GPSG

generalized phrase-structure grammar

PSG

generalized generalized phrase-structure grammar

generalized phrase-structure grammar

head

modification (1)

heavy syllable

weight

high tone

tone

high variety

diglossia

hab

habitual

HMC

head movement constraint

head phrase

head

HPSG

head-driven phrase-structure grammar

hertz

cycle (3)

inflection

inflection (2)

internalized

I-language

item and arrangement

immediate constituent

constituent

immediate dominance

immediate dominance (2)

IDENT

identity

Indo-European

family

iff

if and only if

logical consequence

imp

imperative

imp

imperfect

imperfect tense

imper, IMPER

imperative

imperf

imperfect

imperfect tense

impf, IMPF

imperfect

imperfect tense

inc

incorporation

incep, INCEP

inceptive

inch, INCH

inchoative

inceptive

incl

inclusive

inclusion (3)

indef

indefinite

indic, INDIC

indicative

inf, INF

infinitive

-ing

-ing form of English verb

-ing form

inst, INST

instrumental

inter(rog)

interrogative

intr(ans)

intransitive

transitivity

indirect object

indirect (1)

inflection phrase

inflection (2)

item and process

IPA

International Phonetic

Alphabet

Association

IPA

International Phonetic

Association

irr

irrealis

realis

ISO

International Organization for Standardization

ISO 639–3 codes

KAL

knowledge about language

lexical category

l-marking

light syllable

weight

low tone

tone

low variety

diglossia

LAD

language acquisition device

logical form

LFG

lexical-functional grammar

LIPOC

language-independent preferred order of constituents

LIPOC

loc, LOC

locative

LOT

language of thought

mentalese

lexical phonology

linear precedence

linear precedence rule

LPC

linear prediction coefficient

linear prediction

masculine

gender

maximal

command (2)

modal verb

modal

modification

modification (1)

morphophonemic (level)

harmonic phonology

mot

masc, MASC

masculine

gender

MAX

maximality

MDP

minimal-distance principle

med

medial

MIT

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

MIT

MLE

Multicultural London English

MLU

mean length of utterance

metrical phonology

minimalist program(me)

morphophonemic

phonology

morphological structure

distributed morphology

neuter

gender

n, N

noun

nasal

nucleus

nas

nasal

NCC

no-crossing constraint

NDEB

non-derived environment blocking

derived environment

neg, NEG

negative, negation

negation

neut, NEUT

neuter

gender

NGP

natural generative phonology

NLP

natural language processing

natural morphology

morphology

nom, NOM

nominal(ization), nominalizer

nominal

nom, NOM

nominative case

nominative

natural phonology

phonology

noun phrase

noun

NSR

nuclear stress rule

nucleus (1)

NUM

number

NVC

non-verbal communication

communication

object

onset

onset (1)

Obj, OBJ

object

obl, OBL

oblique

OCP

obligatory contour principle

OFOM

one form–one meaning

form (1)

object marker

object

optimality theory

prosodic

prosody

participle

patient

phonetic (level)

harmonic phonology

phonological

phonology

phrase

postposition

predicate, predicator

predicate

preposition

part, PART

participle

part, PART

particle

particle (1)

part, PART

partitive

pass, PASS

passive

PCC

person case constraint

PCF

phonetically consistent form

per, PER

person

perf, PERF

perfect(ive)

perfect

phonetic form, phonological form

phonetic form

PIE

Proto-Indo-European

family

pl, PL

plural

number

place

phrase-marker

pos(s), POS(S)

possessive, possessor

pronoun

postpositional phrase

postposition

prepositional phrase

preposition

P&P

principles and parameters

principle

PPT

principles and parameters theory

principle

preposition

pred

predicate

prep, PREP

preposition

pres, PRES

present

tense (1)

pro, PRO

pronoun

prog

progressive

progressive (1)

pron

pronoun

Prt, PRT

particle

particle (1)

phrase structure

phrase-structure grammar

PSG

phrase-structure grammar

punct

punctual

qualification

quantifier

question

reduplicant

anchor, reduplication

referring

R-expression

root

root (3)

recip

reciprocal

reciprocal (2)

red

reduplication

redup

reduplication

refl, REFL

reflexive

reflex

reflexive

rel, REL

relative

relative (1)

REST

revised extended standard theory

relational grammar

RNR

right node raising

received pronunciation

RRG

role and reference grammar

RTN

recursive transition network

transition network grammar

RTR

retracted tongue root

root (2)

radical underspecification

underspecification

strong

metrical phonology

sentence

initial symbol

shallow

S-structure

subject

surface

S-structure

S′

clause introduced by subordinator

S′

SAAD

simple active affirmative declarative

SAAD

small clause

structural change

SCC

strict cycle condition

cycle (1)

structural description

SFH

semantic-feature hypothesis

semantics

sg, SG

singular

number

SIL

Summer Institute of Linguistics

sing

singular

number

subject marker

subject

son

sonorant

SPE

Sound Pattern of English

Chomskyan

spec, Spec

specifier

same subject

switch reference

stat, STAT

stative

Sub, SUB

subject

Subj, SUBJ

subject

subj, SUBJ

subjunctive

subord

subordination, subordinator

subordination

SUFF

suffix

syll

syllable

trace

transformation

tu (etc.)

T forms

TAG

tree-adjoining grammar

transformational grammar

transformation

TGG

transformational generative grammar

transformation

TMA

tense–mood–aspect

TMA

tns, TNS

tense

tense phrase

tense

tr(ans)

transitive

transitivity

TTR

type/token ratio

lexical density

ultimate constituent

constituent

universal grammar

universal

underlying representation

underlying

UTAH

uniformity of theta-role assignment hypothesis

little

v, V

verb

vous (etc.)

T forms

vowel

consonant

verb second

VBE

Vernacular Black English

vernacular

voc

vocalic

VOT

voice-onset time

verb phrase

verb

weak

metrical phonology

word (level)

harmonic phonology

WFR

word-formation rule

word formation

word grammar

wh-

what, who (etc.)

wh-

word and paradigm

y/n

yes/no

yes–no

question

List of Symbols

Alphabetization is on the basis of the name of the symbol, as shown in the second column. The list does not include arbitrary symbols (such as category A, B) or numerical subscripts or superscripts (e.g. NP1).

For phonetic symbols, see p. xxv.

Term

Name

Gloss

Relevant entry

acute

indicates a particular consonant pronunciation

diacritic

acute

rising tone

nucleus (1)

acute

stressed foot

foot (1)

alpha

variable value

alpha notation

angle bracket, left

must precede

precedence

≫

angle bracket, right double

ranks higher than

ranking

↔

arrow, bidirectional

reversible relationship

biuniqueness

⤻

arrow, curved

arc

⇒

arrow, double level

(for transformations) becomes, rewrite as

rule

↘

arrow, falling

terminal juncture

juncture (1)

→

arrow, level

becomes, rewrite as

rewrite rule

→

arrow, level

sustained juncture

juncture (1)

↗

arrow, rising

rising juncture

juncture (1)

↗

arrow, rising

tonal spreading

spreading (3)

asterisk; Kleene star

zero or more matching instances

Kleene star

asterisk; star

unacceptable, ungrammatical

acceptability, asterisk (1)

asterisk; star

multiple instances

asterisk (2)

asterisk; star

reconstructed form

asterisk (4)

asterisk; star

segment with priority association

asterisk (5)

asterisk; star

boundary tone on stressed syllable

asterisk (5)

asterisk; star

constraint violation

asterisk (6)

–

bar

type of phrasal category

bar

[]

bracket notation

enclose elements to be horizontally matched

bracketing (c)

< >

brackets, angle

enclose graphemes

allo-

< >

brackets, angle

interdependency between optional features

bracketing (d)

{}

brackets, curly; braces

enclose alternative elements

bracketing (b), conjunctive

{}

brackets, curly; braces

enclose morphemes

morpheme

{}

brackets, curly; braces

enclose morphophonemes

morphophoneme

()

brackets, round; parentheses

enclose optional elements

bracketing (2a)

/ /

brackets, slash; slashes

enclose phonemes

bracketing (3)

[]

brackets, square

enclose distinctive features

bracketing (3)

[]

brackets, square

enclose phonetic segments

bracketing (3)

[]

brackets, square

enclose structural units in a string

bracketing (1)

[]

brackets, square

enclose syntactic features

bracketing (4)

[]

⟦ ⟧

brackets, square

enclose semantic features

bracketing (4)

[[]]

⟦ ⟧

brackets, double square

mark denotation

bracketing (5)

breve

unstressed foot

foot (1)

circle [round a segment]

not associated

association line

circle, subscript

devoicing, voicelessness

voice

circumflex

rising-falling

nucleus (1)

colon

long consonant

length

cross

grid placeholder

metrical grid

cross

deletion

association line

cross

unspecified segment

skeletal tier

—

dash

location of element in a string

context (1)

delta

empty element

delta

double bar

type of phrasal category

bar

double line

deletion

association line

exclamation mark

non-optimal candidate

tableau

grave

indicates a particular consonant pronunciation

diacritic

grave

falling tone

nucleus (1)

hacek

indicates a particular consonant pronunciation

diacritic

hacek

falling-rising tone

nucleus (1)

hand

optimal candidate

tableau

hash; double cross

string boundary

boundary-symbol

hash; double cross

terminal juncture

juncture (1)

lambda

wavelength

lambda (2)

lambda

type of logical operator

lambda (1)

ligature, high

is concatenated with

concatenation

ligature, low

coarticulation

——

line

existing association

association line

——

line, broken

structural change

association line

–

macron

level tone

nucleus (1)

–

macron

bar

binding

–

minus

negative binary feature

binary feature

moraic level

mora

percentage

tone associates with edge syllable of a phrase

percentage symbol (1)

percentage

variation in acceptability

boundary tone

percentage symbol (2)

percentage symbol (3)

plus

element boundary

boundary-symbol

plus

positive binary feature

binary feature

plus

plus juncture

juncture (1)

′

prime

single-bar category

bar

″

prime, double

double-bar category

bar

question mark

marginally acceptable,

acceptability

sigma, capital

marginally grammatical superfoot

superfoot

sigma, capital

sentence

initial symbol

sigma, small

foot, syllable

head

slash, forward

in the context of

context (1)

slash, forward

single-bar juncture

juncture (1)

slash, forward double

double-bar juncture

juncture (1)

tilde

contrasts in one dialect

dia-

tilde

links alternants

alternation

tilde [above symbol]

nasalization

nasal

tilde [through symbol]

pharyngealization, velarization

pharyngeal, velar

≈

tilde, double

contrasts in more than one dialect

dia-

𝜙

zero

zero morph

morpheme

The International Phonetic Alphabet

revised to 2020

A

A An abbreviation for argument in GOVERNMENT AND BINDING THEORY. A-position is a position in D-STRUCTURE to which an ARGUMENT (or THETA ROLE) can be assigned, such as SUBJECT and OBJECT; also called an argument-position. It contrasts with A-bar-position (or A′-position), also called a non-argument position, which does not allow the assignment of a theta role, such as the position occupied by an initial WH-item (e.g. who in Who did she ask?). The distinction does not have a clear status within the VP-INTERNAL SUBJECT HYPOTHESIS. A binding relation where the ANTECEDENT is in an A-position is said to be A-bound (otherwise, A-free); one to an A-bar-position is A-bar-bound (otherwise, A-bar-free). MOVEMENT to these positions is handled by A-movement and A-bar-movement, respectively. See also CHAIN (2).

abbreviated clause see REDUCE (3)

abbreviation (n.) The everyday sense of this term has been refined in LINGUISTICS as part of the study of WORD-FORMATION, distinguishing several ways in which words can be shortened. Initialisms or alphabetisms reflect the separate pronunciation of the initial letters of the constituent words (TV, COD); acronyms are pronounced as single words (NATO, laser);clipped forms or clippings are reductions of longer forms, usually removing the end of the word (ad from advertisement), but sometimes the beginning (plane), or both beginning and ending together (flu); and blends combine parts of two words (sitcom, motel).

abbreviatory (adj.) A term, derived from abbreviation, which appears within LINGUISTICS and PHONETICS as part of the phrase abbreviatory convention – any device used in a formal analysis which allows rules that share common elements to be combined (see BRACKETING (2)), thus permitting greater economy of statement.

abducted (adj.) see VOCAL FOLDS

abessive (adj./n.) A term used in GRAMMATICAL DESCRIPTION to refer to a type of INFLECTION which expresses the meaning of absence, such as would be expressed in English by the PREPOSITION ‘without’. The abessive CASE (‘the abessive’) is found in Finnish, for example, along with ADESSIVE, INESSIVE and several other cases expressing ‘local’ temporal and spatial meanings.

A-binding (n.) see BINDING THEORY, BOUND (2)

ablative (adj./n.) (abl, ABL) In languages which express GRAMMATICAL relationships by means of INFLECTIONS, a term referring to the FORM taken by a NOUN PHRASE (often a single NOUN or PRONOUN), typically used in the expression of a range of LOCATIVE or INSTRUMENTAL meanings. English does not have an ‘ablative CASE’ (‘an ablative’), as did Latin, but uses other means (the PREPOSITIONS with, from and by in particular) to express these notions, e.g. He did itwithhis hands.

ablaut (n.) A term from MORPHOLOGY referring to a change in the quality of a VOWEL internal to a STEM to indicate some grammatical category. For example, many English VERBS display ablaut in the past TENSE such as ride~rode or tell~tol-d; similarly, in the Bantu language Mokpe, some verbs use ablaut to distinguish the IMPERATIVE from the SUBJUNCTIVE lâ ~ lé. See also GRADATION (2), MUTATION.

A-bound (adj.) see BOUND (2)

abrupt (adj.) A term sometimes used in the DISTINCTIVE FEATURE theory of PHONOLOGY, as part of the phrase abrupt release: it refers to a sound RELEASED suddenly, without the acoustic turbulence of a FRICATIVE, as in PLOSIVE CONSONANTS. Its opposite is DELAYED release, used to characterize AFFRICATES.

absolute (adj.) (1) A term used in TRADITIONAL GRAMMATICAL DESCRIPTION, and occasionally in LINGUISTICS, to refer to a SENTENCE CONSTITUENT which is isolated from or abnormally connected to the rest of the sentence. English displays an absolute use of ADVERBS and ADJECTIVES in sentence-INITIAL position, e.g. However, he arrived later;Happy, she went to sleep. In Latin, there are such EXOCENTRIC constructions as the ‘ABLATIVE absolute’, as in hoc facto (= ‘this having been done’).

(2) In linguistic theory, the term refers to a type of UNIVERSAL. An absolute universal is one which characterizes all languages, without exception; it contrasts with RELATIVE universal.

(3) See RELATIVE (3).

absolutive (adj./n.) (abs, ABS) A term used to designate a particular CASE pattern in many LANGUAGES in which the SUBJECTS of INTRANSITIVE sentences and the OBJECTS of TRANSITIVE sentences are marked the same (displaying absolutive case) while the subjects of transitive sentences are marked differently (said to have ERGATIVE case). Languages that dominantly display this pattern, such as Georgian, Inuktitut and Kurdish, are often referred to as ergative-absolutive languages.

absorption (n.) (1) A term used in GENERATIVE GRAMMAR for a process in which an ELEMENT incorporates a SYNTACTIC FEATURE that it does not normally possess. An example would be a CASE feature on a VERB, normally assigned to an NP OBJECT, which is absorbed by a PASSIVE PARTICIPLE.

(2) In PHONOLOGY, an absorption process is seen especially in some TONE languages, where a sequence of tones at the same level is conflated. For example, a falling (high-to-low) CONTOUR tone might be followed by a low tone, yielding a possible high-low-low sequence; one low tone would then absorb the other, resulting in a high-low sequence. See also OBLIGATORY CONTOUR PRINCIPLE, SPREADING (3).

abstract (adj.) (1) (abstr) A term used in PHONOLOGY to describe any analytical approach which relies on unobservable elements, such as UNDERLYING forms; opposed to concrete or natural. Theories vary in the amount of abstractness they permit, and this is sometimes reflected in the title of an individual approach, such as in NATURAL GENERATIVE PHONOLOGY.

(2) A traditional term used in GRAMMAR to describe NOUNS which lack observable REFERENCE, such as thought, mystery and principle; opposed to concrete, where the nouns have physical attributes, such as tree, box and dog. The distinction is treated with caution in LINGUISTICS because of the difficulty of deciding which category many nouns belong to, especially when dealing with all aspects of perception and behaviour. Music and happiness, for example, have been called abstract nouns, though the first is perceptible to the senses, and the second can be related to observable behaviour. Linguistically oriented grammars prefer to operate with such FORMAL distinctions as COUNTABILITY.

accent (n.) (1) The cumulative auditory effect of those features of pronunciation which identify where a person is from, regionally or socially. The LINGUISTICS literature emphasizes that the term refers to pronunciation only, and is thus distinct from DIALECT, which refers to GRAMMAR and VOCABULARY as well. The investigation of the ways in which accents differ from each other is sometimes called accent studies. Regional accents can relate to any locale, including both rural and urban communities within a country (e.g. ‘West Country’, ‘Liverpool’) as well as national groups speaking the same language (e.g. ‘American’, ‘Australian’), and our impression of other languages (‘foreign accent’, ‘Slavic accent’). Social accents relate to the cultural and educational background of the speaker. Countries with a well-defined traditional social-class system, such as India and Japan, reflect these divisions in language, and accent is often a marker of class. In Britain, the best example of a social accent is the regionally neutral accent associated with a public-school education, and with the related professional domains, such as the Civil Service, the law courts, the Court and the BBC – hence the labels ‘Queen’s English’, ‘BBC English’, and the like. RECEIVED PRONUNCIATION (RP) is the name given to this accent, and because of its regional neutrality RP speakers are sometimes thought of as having ‘no accent’. This is a misleading way of putting it, however: linguistics stresses that everyone must have an accent, though it may not indicate regional origin. The popular label ‘broad accent’ refers to those accents that are markedly different from RP.

(2) The emphasis which makes a particular WORD or SYLLABLE stand out in a stream of speech – one talks especially of an accented sound/word/syllable, or the accent(ual) pattern of a PHRASE/SENTENCE. The term is usually found in a discussion of metre (METRICS), where it refers to the ‘beats’ in a line of poetry – the accented syllables, as opposed to the unaccented ones. But any style of spoken language could be described with reference to the relative weight (accentuation) of its syllables: one might talk of the ‘strongly accented’ speech of a politician, for instance. Technically, accent is not solely a matter of LOUDNESS but also of PITCH and DURATION, especially pitch: comparing the VERB record (as in I’m going to record the tune) and the NOUN (I’ve got a record), the contrast in word accent between record and record is made by the syllables differing in loudness, length and pitch movement. The notion of pitch accent has also been used in the PHONOLOGICAL analysis of these languages, referring to cases where there is a restricted distribution of tone within words (as in Japanese). A similar use of these variables is found in the notion of sentence accent (also called ‘contrastive accent’). This is an important aspect of linguistic analysis, especially of INTONATION, because it can affect the ACCEPTABILITY, the MEANING, or the PRESUPPOSITIONS of a sentence, e.g. He was wearing a redhat could be heard as a response to Was he wearing a red coat? whereas He was wearing aredhat would respond to Was he wearing a green hat? The term STRESS, however, is often used for contrasts of this kind (as in the phrases ‘word stress’ and ‘contrastive stress’). An analysis in terms of pitch accent is also possible (see PITCH). The total SYSTEM of accents in a language is sometimes called the accentual system, and would be part of the study of PHONOLOGY. The coinage accentology for the study of accents is sometimes found in European linguistics.

(3) In GRAPHOLOGY, an accent is a mark placed above a letter, showing how that letter is to be pronounced. French accents, for example, include a distinction between é, è and ê. Accents are a type of DIACRITIC.

accentology, accentuation (n.) see ACCENT (2)

acceptability (n.) The extent to which linguistic DATA would be judged by NATIVE-SPEAKERS to be possible in their language. An acceptable UTTERANCE is one whose use would be considered permissible or normal. In practice, deciding on the acceptability of an utterance may be full of difficulties. Native-speakers often disagree as to whether an utterance is normal, or even possible. One reason for this is that INTUITIONS differ because of variations in regional and social backgrounds, age, personal preferences, and so on. An utterance may be normal in one DIALECT, but unacceptable in another, e.g. I ain’t, I be, I am. Much also depends on the extent to which people have been brought up to believe that certain forms of LANGUAGE are ‘correct’ and others are ‘wrong’: many do not accept as desirable those sentences which the PRESCRIPTIVE approach to GRAMMAR would criticize, such as I will go tomorrow (for I shall go … ), or This is the man I spoke to (for … to whom I spoke). To a LINGUIST, all such utterances are acceptable, in so far as a section of the community uses them consistently in speech or writing. The analytic problem is to determine which sections of the community use which utterances on which occasions. Within a DIALECT, an utterance may be acceptable in one CONTEXT but unacceptable in another.

Linguistics has devised several techniques for investigating the acceptability of linguistic data. These usually take the form of experiments in which native-speakers are asked to evaluate sets of utterances containing those language features over whose acceptability there is some doubt (acceptability tests). It is necessary to have some such agreed techniques for judging acceptability as, especially in speech, very many utterances are produced whose status as sentences is open to question. In one sample of data, someone said, I think it’s the money they’re charging is one thing. The job of the linguist is to determine whether this was a mistake on the speaker’s part, or whether this is a regular feature of a speech SYSTEM; if the latter, then whether this feature is idiosyncratic, or characteristic of some social group; and so on. Such investigations by their nature are inevitably large-scale, involving many INFORMANTS and sentence patterns; they are therefore very time-consuming, and are not often carried out. An utterance which is considered unacceptable is marked by an asterisk; if marginally acceptable, usually by a question mark, as follows:

*the wall was arrived before

?the wall was arrived before by the army sent by the king

These conventions are also used to indicate ungrammatical or marginally grammatical sentences. In linguistic theory, though, the difference between the acceptability and the GRAMMATICALITY of a sentence is important. A sentence may be grammatically correct, according to the RULES of the grammar of a language, but none the less unacceptable, for a variety of other reasons. For example, owing to the repeated application of a rule, the internal structure of a sentence may become too complex, exceeding the processing abilities of the speaker: these PERFORMANCE limitations are illustrated in such cases of multiple EMBEDDING as This is the malt that the rat that the cat killed ate, which is much less acceptable than This is the malt that the rat ate, despite the fact that the same grammatical operations have been used. In GENERATIVE linguistic theory, variations in acceptability are analysed in terms of performance; grammaticality, by contrast, is a matter of COMPETENCE. See also INTERPRETABILITY, FELICITY CONDITIONS.

acceptable (adj.) see ACCEPTABILITY

access (n

Tausende von E-Books und Hörbücher

Ihre Zahl wächst ständig und Sie haben eine Fixpreisgarantie.

Sie haben über uns geschrieben: