

Grammar


Tenses


Present

Present Simple

Present Continuous

Present Perfect

Present Perfect Continuous


Past

Past Simple

Past Continuous

Past Perfect

Past Perfect Continuous


Future

Future Simple

Future Continuous

Future Perfect

Future Perfect Continuous


Parts Of Speech


Nouns

Countable and uncountable nouns

Verbal nouns

Singular and Plural nouns

Proper nouns

Nouns gender

Nouns definition

Concrete nouns

Abstract nouns

Common nouns

Collective nouns

Definition Of Nouns

Animate and Inanimate nouns

Nouns


Verbs

Stative and dynamic verbs

Finite and nonfinite verbs

To be verbs

Transitive and intransitive verbs

Auxiliary verbs

Modal verbs

Regular and irregular verbs

Action verbs

Verbs


Adverbs

Relative adverbs

Interrogative adverbs

Adverbs of time

Adverbs of place

Adverbs of reason

Adverbs of quantity

Adverbs of manner

Adverbs of frequency

Adverbs of affirmation

Adverbs


Adjectives

Quantitative adjective

Proper adjective

Possessive adjective

Numeral adjective

Interrogative adjective

Distributive adjective

Descriptive adjective

Demonstrative adjective


Pronouns

Subject pronoun

Relative pronoun

Reflexive pronoun

Reciprocal pronoun

Possessive pronoun

Personal pronoun

Interrogative pronoun

Indefinite pronoun

Emphatic pronoun

Distributive pronoun

Demonstrative pronoun

Pronouns


Pre Position


Preposition by function

Time preposition

Reason preposition

Possession preposition

Place preposition

Phrases preposition

Origin preposition

Measure preposition

Direction preposition

Contrast preposition

Agent preposition


Preposition by construction

Simple preposition

Phrase preposition

Double preposition

Compound preposition

prepositions


Conjunctions

Subordinating conjunction

Correlative conjunction

Coordinating conjunction

Conjunctive adverbs

conjunctions


Interjections

Express calling interjection

Phrases

Sentences


Grammar Rules

Passive and Active

Preference

Requests and offers

wishes

Be used to

Some and any

Could have done

Describing people

Giving advices

Possession

Comparative and superlative

Giving Reason

Making Suggestions

Apologizing

Forming questions

Since and for

Directions

Obligation

Adverbials

invitation

Articles

Imaginary condition

Zero conditional

First conditional

Second conditional

Third conditional

Reported speech

Demonstratives

Determiners


Linguistics

Phonetics

Phonology

Linguistics fields

Syntax

Morphology

Semantics

pragmatics

History

Writing

Grammar

Phonetics and Phonology

Semiotics


Reading Comprehension

Elementary

Intermediate

Advanced


Teaching Methods

Teaching Strategies

Assessment
Domain assignment
المؤلف:
APRIL McMAHON
المصدر:
LEXICAL PHONOLOGY AND THE HISTORY OF ENGLISH
الجزء والصفحة:
57-2
2024-11-29
1135
Domain assignment
The facts of English phonology, where the majority of phonological rules apply on only one level, motivated Kiparsky's (1982) hypothesis that `the phonological rules at each level of the lexicon and in the postlexical component constitute essentially independent mini-phonologies' (1985: 86). Each rule is assigned to a particular level or component, and each level in turn is defined by the rules which are located there. Although this model is perhaps suitable for English phonology in the unmarked case, processes which must apply in more than one component, like Palatalization, would have to appear twice or more in the grammar, in this approach.
Mohanan (1982) and Mohanan and Mohanan (1984) argue that such a model is untenable for Malayalam, a language with much more overlap between lexical levels and between the postlexical and lexical components. Rather than multiply listing each rule, Mohanan (1982, 1986) proposes that the rules should each be listed once, but that each should carry a domain specification. Mohanan claims that this notion of phonological modularity parallels developments in syntax. In early transformational-generative syntax (Chomsky 1965), rules `belonged to' individual modules; in Government and Binding theory (Chomsky 1981), however, rules are essentially independent of modules, so that `the same set of rules is allowed to apply in multiple modules, with different consequences' (Mohanan 1986: 13). Kiparsky (1985) accepts this revision of domain assignment, and suggests that the marking of rules for application on particular levels may be more restricted than Mohanan's model implies, because the constraints of LP, which operate differently in different modules, may themselves restrict rule operation; consequently, apparently quite different processes may be recognized as lexical and postlexical applications of the same rule, with distinct inputs and outputs determined by the differential application of principles like SCC and SP in the two components.
Kiparsky tentatively concludes that `it may, in fact, be possible to restrict the marking of domains to specifications of the form “rule R does not apply after level n”’ (1985: 87). A more extreme statement of the same kind of view is Borowsky's (1990: 3) Strong Domain Hypothesis, which states that `all rules which are marked for a particular domain of application apply at Level 1 only'. All other rules are available throughout the phonology, and apparent restrictions to certain levels result from the principles of the theory, not from any rule-specific stipulation.
In Borowsky's model, the unmarked mode of application would involve operation both lexically and postlexically, and at all lexical levels. Note, however, that Borowsky's hypothesis refers to potential application, with actual application often severely restricted by the constraints of LP. Her proposal cannot therefore be invalidated simply by observing that there are apparently few, if any, rules which do apply on all levels and in both components. Mohanan (1986: 46±7) takes a different, and weaker view; his principles of domain assignment (given in (2.24)) make postlexical application only the unmarked option. Evidence on the relationship of sound changes and phonological rules will suggest that the postlexical level is the unmarked domain for newly introduced rules; lexicalization may then proceed.
(2.24) In the absence of counterevidence, choose the minimum number of strata as the domain of a rule.
In the absence of counterevidence, choose the lowest stratum as the domain of a rule.
The domain of a rule may not contain nonadjacent strata.
الاكثر قراءة في Phonology
اخر الاخبار
اخبار العتبة العباسية المقدسة
الآخبار الصحية

قسم الشؤون الفكرية يصدر كتاباً يوثق تاريخ السدانة في العتبة العباسية المقدسة
"المهمة".. إصدار قصصي يوثّق القصص الفائزة في مسابقة فتوى الدفاع المقدسة للقصة القصيرة
(نوافذ).. إصدار أدبي يوثق القصص الفائزة في مسابقة الإمام العسكري (عليه السلام)