Nowa wersja platformy, zawierająca wyłącznie zasoby pełnotekstowe, jest już dostępna.
Przejdź na https://bibliotekanauki.pl
Preferencje help
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników

Znaleziono wyników: 4

Liczba wyników na stronie
first rewind previous Strona / 1 next fast forward last
Wyniki wyszukiwania
Wyszukiwano:
w słowach kluczowych:  HISTORY OF LINGUISTICS
help Sortuj według:

help Ogranicz wyniki do:
first rewind previous Strona / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote Cognitive conception of language in works of Jan Michal Rozwadowski
100%
|
2007
|
nr 1(3)
157-166
EN
Connections between the process of perception of reality, its cognition and verbalisation of concepts constitute main subject of cognitive linguistics but were noticed and described earlier. According to Jan Rozwadowski (1867-1935) language pictures the world, and changes in language are conditioned by the ways of world's perception by humans. The article presents also other conceptions of Rozwadowski that are similar to cognitive linguistics: role of culture in the process of naming, shifts in words' meaning, connection between semantics and grammar, and metaphor as a fundamental mechanism of language.
2
Content available remote POUR UNE HISTORIOGRAPHIE ENGAGÉE: OR WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE HISTORY OF LINGUISTICS
100%
|
2005
|
tom 47
109-117
EN
The present paper intends to voice a series of critical observations based on the author's thirty-five years in the field, while at the same time offering a number of suggestions as to how the history of linguistics may improve its scholarship, and its image. Several years ago, members of the Henry Sweet Society got to read a lengthy quotation from Frederick Neumeyer's introduction to his 1996 book 'Generative Linguistics: A historical perspective' in which he reports that many of his colleagues 'feared that (he) would become tarred with the brush of being an 'historian of linguistics', who, (-), occupy a status level even lower than that of a 'semiotician' ' (HSS Bulletin 26.25). Newmeyer explained 'That this attitude results from the belief that most people who write on the history of linguistics have only the most minimal training in modern linguistics and devote their careers to attempting to demonstrate that their pet medieval grammarian or philosopher thought up some technical term before somebody's else's pet medieval grammarian or philosopher' (1996: 2). This is no doubt a caricature of what most of us have been doing during the past twenty and more years, but the suspicion may be lurking that on some aspects Newmeyer's friends may not have been entirely off the mark. One does not have to share Rüdiger Schreyer's more recent assessment either according to which 'nobody takes much interest in, or notice of, linguistic historiography - nobody in the big world beyond the ivory towers (of academe) and nobody in the linguistic community that is the natural habitat of the linguistic historiographer' (2000: 206), and maybe this would be too much to expect: 'beyond the ivory towers' even Noam Chomsky would not have become as widely known had he not become a critic of US foreign policy. Peter Schmitter is no doubt right in saying that it is not enough to write 'intelligent treatises on the necessity and usefulness of historiographic research', but his concession (Schmitter 2003a: 214) that he himself has no concrete proposal to make as to how to remedy the situation is not too encouraging. It may well be that many practitioners of linguistic historiography have become too self-satisfied and inward looking over the years, given the availability of three journals, several bulletins, an ever-increasing number of colloquia, conferences, and other international meetings around the world. It seems to me that there is enough blame to go around. One may be more inclined to share Peter Schmitter's disappointment that the findings of linguistic historiography have not successfully entered into textbooks, dictionaries of linguistic terminology, and other such places.
EN
In the present contribution written record of public criticism of the journal Listy filologicke in January 1952 is edited. This document bears an interesting witness of the period: by reproaching the journal with various offences against the ideas of communist authorities such as not reporting on Soviet linguistics or not publishing papers on practical topics, in actual fact the subsequent change of its publisher was legitimized.
4
Content available remote 100 let Časopisu pro moderní filologii
80%
EN
Summarizing the key stages of the journal's 100-year history inseparable from the history of the country, the paper introduces the outstanding personalities associated with it as editors and contributors, the theoretical issues which informed its orientation and content, such as the philology-linguistics-literary studies relations, its changing structure, language focus and readership.
first rewind previous Strona / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.