Banber Erevani hamalsarani. Banasirut'yun.
| E - ISSN | : | 2738-2575 |
| P - ISSN | : | 1829-457X |
Vol. 8 No. 2(23) (2017)
Articles
-
Articles
Transition from Index to Symbol in Language
AbstractThe propositions that naming is performed on the basis of the properties of the named realia and that the word consists of morphemes, allow us to conclude that the morpheme is actually the designation of the given realia’s property. The meaning of the property does not exhaust the content of the morpheme fully; it is rather its primary and most essential component, besides which there exists another one – a somewhat blurred and still existing phonetic meaning of sounds that are constituents of the morpheme. From the point of view of referential (extralinguistic) meaning the morpheme can be characterized as a symbol (according to Ch. S. Peirce’s terminology). However, the full semiotic characteristics of the morpheme should also take into account the intralinguistic meaning, based on the meanings of its components, thus acknowledging not only the symbolic but also the index aspect of the morpheme.
References -
Articles
Agreement between Components of Composite Predicate in Modern Armenian
AbstractIn modern Armenian, there can be an agreement between the components of the composite predicate. It is mostly expressed by
categories of person, number, and negation. The agreement is used when one of the components of the composite predicate is expressed by a personal pronoun, negative pronoun or by a word which has a category of person, by adding an article.References -
Articles
The Method of Classifying Words through Questions
AbstractIn this article, we are trying to present to a wide circle of researchers the method of classifying parts of speech, which in the eighties within the limits of one article was proposed by A. E. Khachatryan (A. E. Khachatryan, Classification of Parts of Speech through Questions, Bulletin of Yerevan University, 1986, No. 3, pp. 56-65). A. Khachatryan quite logically asserts and convinces us that adverbs should rightfully take their place next to nouns, adjectives, numerals, and verbs as they have a conceptual meaning and answer the corresponding questions: these are words indicating time, place, the manner of action, measure and degree. Thus, all parts of the speech answer the corresponding questions: what? what kind of? how much? what to do? when? where? how? how many times? (to what degree? to what extent?).
The definition of parts of speech without considering the conceptual meaning will be empirical.
With the help of interrogative pronouns, the corresponding lexical and grammatical categories of words are formed. The proposed classification logicallyreflects the semantic differentiation of parts of speech.
In typological studies, it possible to compare adequate language units, to identify their similarities and differences, to determine language universals by this method, which is very important for linguistics. This method is logical, and therefore simple, so it can be used in schools and universities.References -
Articles
The Typology of Verbal Form Plusquamperfect in Old Armenian, German and Latin
AbstractIn Old Armenian, German and Latin Plusquamperfectum typologically is characterized with active-like and passive-like conjugations, different basic forms of stems, synthetic and analytic constructions in verbal paradigms, and with the functions of auxiliary verbs.
References -
Articles
G. Ghapantsyan as a Theorist of General Linguistics
AbstractG. Ghapantsyan’s general linguistic viewpoints have been formulated by means of complicated reformative developments. In essence, dealing with the questions of linguistic theory, he tried to balance on the one hand the traditional linguistic directions
(Young Grammarians’ doctrines, sociological doctrines, etc.) and on the other hand- the images of “new-doctrinal” linguistic ideas - taking only the most prominent concepts from these two doctrines. Of course, he did not always manage to do it, because the reality the representative of which was him was not convenient for truthful scientific values. In Armenian linguistics, it was G. Ghapantsyan, who first introduced the notions of phoneme and morpheme. With his “General Linguistics”, general linguistics was set in as a scientific discipline in Armenian linguistics.References -
Articles
Etymological Experiments and Corrections
AbstractThe present article, proceeding from morpho-semantic analyses and analyses of linguistic universals, offers to derive a number of Armenian words, still not etymologized or considered to be borrowings, from PIE root *smē- (*smeī-, *sm-ei-) "to smear, rub" and its derivative variants (extended by root determinatives and framed by different ablaut steps). They are: մերսել "massage" [<*mer-k՚-], մարզել "to train" [<*mŗ-g՛h-], մաշտել "scrape off" [<*(s)mǝ(r)-s-], մշտել "poke" [<*(s)mō(r)-s-], մարմանդ "mild" [<*(s)mǝr-m-], մրափ "slumber" [<*(s)mōr-], մզել "squeeze" [<*(s)mō-(r)-g՛h-], մերժել "reject" [<*(s)mer-gwh-] etc.
References -
Articles
Grigor Ghapantsyan’s Onomastic Studies
AbstractGrigor Ghapantsyan is one of the greatest Armenian linguists of the beginning and middle of the 20th century, whose theories and opinions are relevant and actual until nowadays. He is one of the most quoted scientist-Armenologists whose works are very well-known abroad. G. Ghapantsyan’s range of scientific interests was rather wide. He carried out a lot of toponymic studies in which he explored not only the place names but also the anthroponyms, theonyms, patrimonial names. In general, the great scientist analyzed the toponymy of Armenian Highland and Asia Minor. He discovered the еtymology of the ethnonyms “Armen” and “Hay”. G. Ghapantsyan reconstructed the patrimonial names in the ancient toponyms, ethnonyms of those tribes which participated in the formation of the Armenian people, and on the basis of these tribes and their settlements, he restored the аncient homeland of Armenians, the relations of the Armenian language with the ancient Indo-European, Caucasian and Semitic languages. Ghapantsian’s most famous onomastic works аrе "Historical-Linguistic Significance of the Toponymy of Ancient Armenia" (1940), "Suffixes and Suffixal Elements in the Toponymy of Ancient Asia Minor" (1948). Later, his onomastic and philological studies were collected and published in the two-volume "Historical-Linguistic Works"( volume I -1956, volume II– 1975).
References -
Articles
On the Etymology of the Armenian Verb տանիմ
AbstractThe article dwells upon different versions of the verb տանիմ whose origin has always been considered unclear. The study results substantiate G. Jahukyan’s assumption on the Indo-European origin of this verb. Besides, the study reveals that the genuine etyma of the verb տանիմ are also the semes “1.win, conquer; 2.percolate” which have not been noted by anyone earlier.
References -
Articles
Stereometric and Planimetric Interpretations of Language Sign
AbstractThe existence of the semiosphere which includes the sign and nonsign components is balanced by the relativity of logical space; whatever is the space of some planes, in turn, can become the plane of another space. The spatial and planar parameters of a linguistic sign are inherent in all linguistic types, systems, their ontological and structural levels, and transitions between these levels. Stereometric and planimetric interpretations are identified by using the language code. The latter for the
language is the same as for automatic systems, their procedures, from the moment of launch to completion. The language code is an organization which is inherent in the entire language composition, which includes all the patterns necessary to realize the intentions of the given composition.References
