Тема I 19.1 — I 19.3.3, II 6.2.2, II 7.2, III 26.1.2, V 2.1 — V 2.2, V 5.4 — V 5.5.1, V 5.5.3 —V 7, з 6

Тематические гласные III 2.1

Текст В 2, I 1, I 5, I 5.2, I 6 — I 6.2, I 8, III 26.1.2, V 4.2, V 4.2.3 — V 5.1, V 5.4, З 3

Терм I 8.2, I 8.4, I. 13, I 18

Типология см. Языкознание типологическое

Типология сопоставительная В 1.6

Трансфикс III 2.2.5, III 2.2.6, III 9

Трансформационный субкомпонент З 5, см. тж. Трансформация синтаксическая

Трансформация морфологическая III 2.2.3 — III 2.2.4

Трансформация синтаксическая II 7.2, II 10 — II 11

Факультативность III 4.3.1, III 18.3.2

Флексия внутренняя III 2.2.3, III 2.2.4, III 19.4 — III 19.4.1

Флективность III 8, III 8.2 — III 8.4

Фокус II 6.2.3, II 6.2.4

Фонема V 4.1, V 4.2.2

Фонологический компонент В 7.5

Форма слова III 1.1, III 16 — III 18.1, III 18.3.7, III 19.3, III 25.1

Форма слова аналитическая III 1.1, III 15.2, III 17.1, III 19.2 — III 19.2.1

Форма слова синтетическая III 1.1

Форматор III 2.2.6

Фрейм В 6 — В 7.6.1, В 8.2, В 9, I 18, II 7.3, V 2.2, V 3.1, V 5.2 — V 5.3, V 7.6, V 8.4, V 8.6, З 1, З 5, В ПМ 3, В ПМ 5, V ПМ 29

Фузионность III 8 — III 8.1

Функтор I 8.2 — I 9.1

Функтор ирреальности I 9 — I 9.1

Функтор реальности I 9 — I 9.1

Функция В 2.2, В 3, З 2

Функция иллокутивная I 11 см. тж. Акт иллокутивный

Целостность языковой системы В 2.2, В 3 — В 5, В 9

Целостность языковых единиц В 8 — В 8.2, В 9, V 8.4 — V 8.5

Циркумфикс III 2.2.5, III 9

Части речи IV 1 — IV 2.3, IV 2.4.3

Числа категория III 17, III 17.1.1, III 18.2.1

Член предложения II 3 — II 3.2, II 4, II 5.2, II 5.4, II 6.1

Эвристические процедуры (в речевой деятельности) В 1.7

Эллипсис II 2.1 — II 2.3, II 10.2, III 19.2.2

Ядро (синтаксической конструкции) II 5.1, II 9 _/305//306/

Язык-источник (в сравнительно-историческом языкознании) В 1.1

Язык семантический I 8 — I 8.1, III 4.2 см. тж. Словарь семантический

Языка система В 1.7, В 2 — В 5, V 1, В ПМ 2

Языковой системы компоненты В 7 — В 7.6

Языковой союз В 1.5

Языкознание историческое В 1.3

Языкознание сопоставительное В 1.6

Языкознание сравнительно-историческое В 1.1

Языкознание сравнительно-сопоставительное В 1.6

Языкознание типологическое В 1.4

Языки агглютинативные III 4.3.1, III 4.3.2, III 6.2, III 7.2.2, III 7.2.5, III 10.1 — III 10.2, III 15.1 — III 15.3, III 17.1.1 — III 17.1.2, III 18.1, III 18.3.2, III 25.1, IV 1

Языки аналитические III 4.3.2, III 15.1 — III 15.3

Языки изолирующие В 7.3, III 4.3.1, III 4.3.2, III 15.1 — III 15.3, III 17.1.1, III 18.3.2, IV 1, IV 2.2.1 — IV 2.2.2, IV 3.3, III ПМ 25

Языки инкорпорирующие III 15.3

Языки моносиллабические III 2.1, III 14.5.2

Языки флективные III 4.3.2, III 6.2, III 7.2.2, III 15.1 — III 15.3, III 18.1, IV 1, III ПМ 25

Языки эргативные I 18, II 7.2 _/306//307/

Summary

Linguistics in our time displays a clearly pronounced tendency to a disintegration which is due to two major factors: first, each of the linguistic disciplines (phonology, syntax, etc.) has developed into a highly specialized autonomous science in its own right and, second, the existing schools of thought are sometimes so different, conceptually and terminologically, that the situation is reminiscent of that of Babel. It seems obvious that a «linguistic ecumenism» is badly needed.

A functional approach to language and speech is believed to be capable of providing a broad framework for an integrated description of language phenomena. The notion of function as ultima ratio presupposes the invariably top-down direction of all language processes: everything in language and speech is designed to serve the ultimate goal of communicating meaning, so that morphology functions mostly to serve syntax while the latter does the same with respect to semantics.

Language is thus construed as a complex functional system of components among which semantic component, syntactic, nominative, morphological, and phonological ones with their subcomponents are to be singled out. The components are organized hierarchically. At the same time, the system is made a whole due to connections that run through the components both ‘vertically’ and ‘horizontally’. Autonomy, Integration, and Hierarchy seem to be the three principles that underlie the system of language.

Each of the components is characterizable in terms of units and rules of their functioning. Each of these units, in its turn, is characterizable as an integrated whole on the one hand and as a structure, made up of its elementary constituents, on the other. The structures in question can be referred to as frames (in the sense of M. Minsky) specific to individual components.

The composition and the functioning of the above-named components are overviewed in the respective chapters of the book. Particular attention is given to the problem of syntactic units and their semantic correlates. An elementary syntactic construction is chosen as the basic unit of syntax, the latter being viewed largely as a system of such constructions. In fact, it is only syntaxemes — nodes of the elementary syntactic trees — that can be immediately assigned semantic roles (Actor, Patient, etc.). The semantic correlate of any other construction is an outcome of a complex interaction of its elementary prototype(s) and the effects supplied by the transformation(s) it is the result of.

It is also emphasized that allocating a linguistic unit to a class or a subclass means nothing more than admittance of its sensitiveness to rules of a certain type. From this point of view the perennial attempts at discriminating between, for instance, words and non-words should be discarded in favour of _/307//308/ a more realistic Three-Terms Coding Principle. According to the latter, two polar types (words and word-constructions, affixes and function words, etc.) are singled out together with an intermediate type (quasi-words, quasi-affixes, etc.) which embraces various subtypes exhibiting more or less pronounced structural «tightness» depending on their reaction to specific rules.

The top-down principle holds true with respect to speech production and perception as well. Both processes seem to start with a diffuse mental image — that is with something pertaining to semantics. The above postulated duality of all the linguistic units which, are holistic entities on the one hand and compositions of elementary «atoms» on the other is mirrored by two types of strategies in speech perception and production: one is specific to the brain’s subdominant hemisphere which is known to specialize in dealing with Gestalt-type percepts, while the other is typical for the dominant one responsible mostly for analytical procedures. Operating with big informational «chunks» as certain unstructured wholes is more economical but runs a risk of ignoring relevant details, while the analytical strategies are fairly exact but time-consuming. All in all, speech is viewed as a dialogue of the two hemispheres. _/308//309/