form (n.)

One of the most widely used terms in LINGUISTICS, with a correspondingly wide range of meanings. Its main areas of application are:

form v. meaning/function. In its most general sense, it refers to the abstract PHONOLOGICAL and/or GRAMMATICAL characterization of LANGUAGE, as opposed to its MEANING, as in such phrases as ‘linguistic form’, ‘grammatical form’, ‘one form–one meaning (OFOM)’. More specifically, it refers to the phonological/ grammatical/LEXICAL characteristics of linguistic UNITS, such as SENTENCES, MORPHEMES, LEXEMES, NOUNS, etc., these being referred to as linguistic forms. The term here is often contrasted with FUNCTION: one can study a unit such as the noun PHRASE from both formal and functional points of view (e.g. its internal syntactic structure v. its role as SUBJECT, OBJECT, etc., in a clause). More specifically still, it refers to a particular instance of a grammatical CATEGORY, as in such phrases as ‘the analysis of the forms be, seem, have . . .’ A set of forms displaying similar or identical grammatical FEATURES is said to constitute a form-class, e.g. walk, come, see are part of the form-CLASS of VERBS because they have similar MORPHOLOGICAL characteristics and SYNTACTIC DISTRIBUTION. Phonological/grammatical criteria which identify units and classes are known as formal criteria. ‘Formal’ here is also contrasted with the ‘notional’ approach of TRADITIONAL grammar, where attempts were made to characterize linguistic units in terms of UNIVERSAL notions, as in the definition of a sentence as ‘the expression of a complete thought’.

(2) form v. substance. Here, the term refers to the overall linguistic organization, or STRUCTURE, of speech or writing, as opposed to the physical REALIZATION of language in PHONIC or GRAPHIC SUBSTANCE. In this sense, SEMANTIC structure is included, along with grammar and phonology/GRAPHOLOGY, being part of the abstract language system.

(3) form v. substance and meaning. HALLIDAYAN linguistic theory models language in terms of three interdependent LEVELS: the level of ‘form’ (comprising the grammatical and lexical organization of language) is distinguished from the levels of SUBSTANCE and CONTEXT.

(4) forms (of a unit). The variant realizations of a linguistic unit are referred to as ‘forms’ of the unit, i.e. the members of a set of PARADIGMATIC alternatives. For example, the forms of the verb walk are walk, walking, walks, etc.

(5) The critical characteristics of a linguistic theory, especially as stated in the FORMALIZED terms of logic or mathematics, are referred to as the form of that theory. In GENERATIVE grammar, the formal characteristics of linguistic theory have received special attention, especially in the notion of ‘formal UNIVERSALS’. Formal semantics refers to analysis (in terms of truth conditions, etc.) of a logical system, such as PROPOSITIONAL calculus – an approach which has come to be applied to the study of natural languages.

اخر الاخبار

اخبار العتبة العباسية المقدسة

المجمع العلمي يجري اختباره الشهري لطلبة الحفظ في المثنى

قسم الصناعات: اعتماد أعلى معايير الجودة في التنجيد والتأثيث لدعم البنية الخدمية في العتبة المقدسة

قسم الشؤون الفكريّة يصدر الجزء الخامس من سلسلة دراسات في المنهج

جامعة الكفيل تنظّم دورة عن أساسيات الدفاع المدني لملاكاتها

المزيد

الآخبار الصحية

العنب.. فاكهة صغيرة بمفعول "خارق" للقلب والدماغ

دراسة تحدد "الحلقة المفقودة".. تسبب ارتفاع ضغط الدم

هذه الأطعمة تحمي دماغك من الشيخوخة وتزيد حدة الذكاء

خبراء يحذرون من مخاطر "الدهون المخفية" على القلب

المزيد

الآخبار التكنلوجية

الأرصاد الجوية تلجأ إلى الذكاء الاصطناعي.. لأي غرض؟

في منزلك.. "تعديل بسيط" يخفض ضغط الدم بشكل طبيعي

"ميزة جديدة" من إنستغرام تنافس تيك توك.. طال انتظارها

غوغل في مأزق.. بيانات 2.5 مليار مستخدم بقبضة القراصنة

المزيد

مواضيع ذات صلة

Mirror in nominal morphology

Appendix 2: Hapax legomena from the Cobuild corpus

Appendix 1: 20th century neologisms from the OED

Morphological Productivity Structural Constraints in English Derivation Conclusion

Verbal derivation and the separation hypothesis

The separation hypothesis

Theoretical implications: Against the separation of form and meaning in morphology

Rival morphological processes 4: Where have all the rivals gone? Summary

Conversion vs. -ize, -ify and -ate

Rival morphological processes -ize vs. -ate

Rival morphological processes -ize vs. -ify

Rival morphological processes 4: Where have all the rivals gone?