The Middle English Period.

The Middle  English Period.

¬  Introduction:-

Þ          The old English period had relatively pure Anglo Saxon tongue even though little influences of Latin, Celtic and Danish tongue had been. But since 1066 English began to change drastically. It becomes a hybrid language. Before Norman conquest, English language gad come to touch with Normans king Edward who reigned from 1042 to 1066 had spent his youth in France. When he becomes king, he knew no English no English custom and had no friends and he preferred Norman Courtiers and councilors. This gives us idea that French must have been spoken in the court at that time. This process was completed by William, the conqueror but it was limited to the court. Common folks were untouched. So side by side tow tongues existed; English and Norman-French.

Þ          As the king and the courtiers spoke Norman-French, it was social status. Learned man too adopted it. But 90% of population still spoke Anglo-Saxon tongue. Gradually these two languages mingle to give us Middle English. By 13000 the Norman French it was established. Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales’ (1346) has 12-14% of words of French origin. Following are the reasons that French began to have influence.

1. Reason of French influence:-

a)      The two communities inevitably come into contect with the each other. Inter marriages took place

b)     Some of the people sent their children to France for education,

c)      After two hundred years the Norman believed themselves as English.

d)     It was the ‘official’ (governmental) language. However in 1362 English replaced. French as the language of law court. With Latin was also growing.

e)      Persian French began to enter England toward the end of 14^th Century.

f)       French translations come.

2. Characteristic of Middle English:-

Þ          Characteristic of Middle English is seen in the variety of dialects. Chaucer’s work and a poem ‘patience’ from west Midland mark this difference showing Chaucer very near modern English. West Saxon dialect had supremacy, which gave a leveling tendency. In absence of any ‘standard’ English, various writers wrote in their ‘regional’ language. Near to Saxon tongue was that of the East Midlands. It was spoken around London. As the city became important these speech too became important. Oxford and Cambridge also used it. Caxton printed his books in it. So by 1450 ‘English’ had become synonymous with ‘East Midland’. Some of the writers began to adopt this tongue including Chaucer.

Þ          There are four aspects which will show us the education of the Middle English period.

(A) Grammatical change:-

1. Simplification of grammar:-

Þ          Grammar was on the way of simplification. ‘e’ vowel was leveled in final, unaccented, in flexional syllables. To make plural ‘en’ began to come, so plurals were leveled. But the Midland dialect shows ‘-es’ suffix. French had also it, but as time went on they to went away. Some survivals are: Children, oxen, chicken, brethren. To make verb en was added the ‘to’ replaced it. For the directional use it was there. e.g. ‘I go to fetch it’ or ‘I have come to help you.’ Since the as it is a part of infinitive, it also worked as infinitive. Chaucer shows both of these tendencies: ‘to ryden our’, ‘to goon on’, ‘to take our way’. Etc

2. Simplicity of language:-

            In simplicity grammar, Language to begun adopting simplicity. Inflexions were reduced. Genitive case (‘s) got another French word ‘of ’.  Except it other noun distinctions disappeared.

3. Substitution of Gender:-

Þ          Earlier it had not semantic understanding but according to the meaning gender was applied. As there was complexity, mostly masculine gender was applied but in French it was different. A word in England is masculine and same one in French is feminine. To solve the riddle neutral gender comes. Pronoun ‘she’ came into being in the middle of 12^th century.

(B) Change in pronounciation:-

            Written documents provide us proofs of grammatical changes but to find out them for pronounciation is very very tough task. As they very from place, people and time only a few have certainty in this manner.

1. Vowel /e/ changed into /C/ e.g. ham- hoom and now home, stane=stone. But Northun dialects preserved it though Norman loan words didn’t go for change. e.g. dame, chant, fame.

2. Lengthening and shortening vowels

          i.            In open syllables ca words which doesn’t have consonant at the end. e.g. we, she,  break was lengthened and shorted in closed syllable.(A word which had consonant at the end; bloster, grammar. etc.) So the difference in tilling-tiling, canning-caning etc is found. There were plenty of violations as well.

        ii.            /i:/ changed into /ei/ and /o/ into /u/ eg. Feet was spoken as like fate and food, boon, doom etc were spoke like the modern word ‘show’.

      iii.            /e/ and /i/ changed into diphthongs like /ei/ and /au/. ‘game’, ‘fame’, ‘find, had long vowels in modern English.

      iv.            ‘r’ and ‘s’ changed position. e.g. ‘to burn was ‘bernan’ or ‘brennan’. ‘Brid’ was ‘bryd’. ‘clasp’ was ‘clapse’ and lipsed’ was ‘lisped’

There were many fluctuations in this pronouncing methods throughout the period.

(C) Change in spellings:-

            Change in spelling does not indicate change in pronounciation.

1. ‘û’ began to be written as ‘ou’ because of French scribes. e.g. hûs and mûs turned into ‘hours’ and ‘mour’.
2. ‘o’ was represented by ‘oo’, ‘home’ was ‘hoom’ and ‘coomen’ for ‘come’
3. ‘c’ was replaced by ‘k’ in front of vowels ‘e’, ‘i' and ‘y’. e.g. ‘cyning’ and ‘cene’ become ‘king’ and ‘keen’ but before ‘a’, ‘o’, ‘u’ it remained the same. ‘c’ was spoken ‘ch’ so old English ‘cild’ become ‘child’. ‘ch’ contain the same origin and spoken a ‘k’ e.g. character , chronic, chorus etc.
4. ‘g’ was pronounced like ‘y’ so from ‘giefan’=yeven-give and ‘gearu’ –year come the words.
5. Because of new soft ‘g’ (now alphabet ‘j’) word come e.g. gentle, gesture.
6. French replaced ‘cw’ into ‘qu’. e.g. cwen(queen), cwellen(kill).
7. ‘es’ in many words was removed e.g. estrauge straunge and now strange’. Squire, state our other words.

(D) Change in addition and vocabulary:-

Þ          Vocabulary addition and change was greatly noticed in this period that the others. Mainly it is because of Norman French influence. ‘wed’ and ‘marry. Both word words existed. ‘wed’ is a native one. Meaning ‘to give pledge’ and ‘marry’ a French one meaning to become a husband ‘ Web is provincial which had nothing to do with marriage but now it is understood as same. But proper word for is ‘marriage’. Some such words are kingly royal, child-infant and meal-repast.

Þ    Similarly living animal were cooked French name were given. e.g. ‘sheep’ and ‘mutton’. A living sheep is killed and when cooked it becomes not ‘sheep’ but ‘mutton. We have now-pig pork, cow beef and calf veal.

Þ    William congurero’s name is referred with giving names of fendal and memorial system like demesne, domain, castle, baron, livery. Under the memorial system the centre of a district’ was the manor house or the villa who worked as villains and their places of living as ‘village’. Longer of it war ‘tun’; but French made it ‘town’. The word villain meant that these people were coarse had uncouth behaviour and lacked refinement find how it is surprising that ‘villain or villainy world in modern English have been established.

Þ    Law system brought new words. English words were there but when the person was brought into court. As French were officials, French mane were given e.g. arson, trespass , cheat, larceny, treason and later on embezzlement.

Þ    Legal words come. They are:

                        Assize,             justice,             curfew

                        Judge,              jury,                 verdict

                        Commission,   license,             statue

                        Prison,             punish,             plaintiff.

Þ          Church related words: canon, curate, cardinal, fricir,, deacon, parson, archdeacon. Scholarship brought new words. e.g. of abstract terms of: Mercy, pity, charity, beauty, humility, courtesy. Astrology and medical words: influence, jovial, humour, saturnine, choleric, sanguine, cordial, physic.

Þ          Literature: Tragedy, comedy: Holy visits to foreign countries/place brought many new words. ‘assassin’ was an eastern/ Arabic word. From the town mosul come muslin(a kind of fine fabric). Damascus gave ‘damask’. Castle of hasarat gave hazard. Some other Arabian word are algebra, azure, scarict, orange.

Þ          During this middle English period surnames were first adopted by English man. Earlier it was used to distinguish a person; from one Tom to another Tom. Surnames are derived from various sources. They are following:

¬  Occupational: Tyler, Bowman, Baker, Fletcher ( arrow maker)

¬  Place names: Allwater, Allwood, Fieldsend.

¬  Other : Johnson, Jackson, Wilson, Robinson.

Þ          Middle English period is fairly rich in the adoption of various changes. Actually this provided flexibility for the language which was really helpful. When modern period began, the English language was well set.

The old English (Anglo Saxon) Period.

The old English (Anglo Saxon) Period.

¬  Introduction:-

Þ          There are three periods basically;

1.      The old English period (The Anglo Saxon-A.D. 600 to

2.      The Middle English period(1100 to 1500)

3.      The Modern English period(1500 onwards)

Þ          In the 600 A. D. Angles and Saxons succeeded in establishing the power over Britain. So our history begins with it as they firmly implanted their language. In 1066 the Norman invaded and they conquered and when 1100 came they consolidated their power. Their language begun to influence native Saxon tongue. By 1500 Renaissance came down and it swept away the whole Britain. SO these three dates are important.

Þ          Old English was not a single, homogenous language. Out of all dialects Wessex was most highly civilized. It came to be used for political, governmental system. The main work survives is epic ‘Beowulf’. Some other a few records are the as well. Other dialects also gave some words esp. doublets. ‘Whole’ is now hale’ (i.e. healthy) ‘raia’ is now ‘road’.

¬  Complicated Grammar:-

Þ          Grammar of Anglo-Saxon dialect was highly complex. Adjectives were strong and weak. Three gender system was there but ‘girl’ was neuter and ‘woman’ was ‘neuter’ and masculine’ both. By 1100 leveling began to take place and inflexion started disappearing. Many of plural nouns ended in- ‘as’ or ‘es’. That is how in modern English genitive plural is forms of ‘S’

¬  Gradation and Mutation:-

Þ          Gradation means process and Mutation means change. Change is vowel position in verbs. Addition of suffix to the root of a verb is for modification. That’s why Anglo-Saxon verbs have changed in present and past participle forms. E.g. drive-drove-driven or ride-rode-ridden. Though ‘climb is a weak verb, it takes now-ed. But it had forms like clumb and clumben. This tendency is gone. The following verbs have no mutation;

            Help, dive, lock, sulk, chew etc. The change is caused by ‘I’ mutation.

(A) Mutated Plurals:-

Þ          Inflexion ‘-iz’ was added to many nouns. It results in ‘I’. So it was in plural, Because of mutation it became    and in modern English ‘teeths’. Other words; mus (mouse), musiz mys= now ‘mice’ later on tendency of adding‘s’ came. It is call ‘i' mutation.

(B) Mutated Abstract Noun derived from adjectives Or Adjective to Abstract Noun:-

Þ          To make abstract noun from adjective Anglo-Saxon used suffix- ‘iou’. e.g. long-longidu. It which became lengd and now length.

(C) From noun new verbs mutation Or Noun to Verb:-

Þ          This is another tenaency. ‘brood’ becomes ‘breed’ which is another verb. Like wise food becomes verb ‘feed’.

(D)Adjective becomes verb by mutation or Adjective to verb:-

Þ          was ad suffix. e.g. ‘full’ gave us    which became ultimately turning fill. The termination Jon to added certain adjective to make verb thus halijam whole some had an where our verb is heal e.g. full become   and modern English ‘full’

(E) Mutated degrees:-

Þ          Anglo Saxon used- ‘ira’ and ‘ist’. Both of them changed and became ‘-er’ and ‘est’. Thus eald (old) became ‘elder and ‘eldest’. But sometime mutated forms are dropped otherwise we would have words like strong. Strenger - strengest ; long- lenger- longest.

¬  Foreign Influences:

Þ          Anglo-Saxon accepted many foreign words. The cardinal numbers are a case. Following is the list of some word which came from Indo-European languages.

§  Name of nature: day, night, sun, moon, star, wind, earth…

§  Animals: cow, mouse, goose, wolf..

§  Through Tree: door, timber, yoke, wheel, wagon.

§  Fighting: Shield

§  Agriculture: plough, mow

§  Colour: red yellow...

(A) Celtic words:- The original language of Briton was Celtic, but not considerable Celtic elements are absorbed into whole English. Words related to land scope’ ‘hill’, slough’, ‘valley’ have come.

(B) Latin words:- This is very important. They came because of (a) Roman occupassion and (b) Latin Christianity. The word ‘mile’, ‘wine’ etc. show this effect.

1.      Words related to building: wall, road, way, street.

2.      financial: money

3.      Place names: (Chester and caster) - camp, Manchester Winchester, Lancaster etc.

4.      Christianity: religious: Monastery, Mont, priest, mass, sacrifice.

(C) Norse/Danish words: Danes invaded Anglo-Saxons and had settled themselves since 9^th century. On political basis they made effect. Three way the language was influenced. (a) Place-names; settled by Norseman:

Þ          Termination likes ‘toft’- ‘thwaite’ and ‘thorpe’ and ‘by’. English words ‘borough’ and ‘bury suggest ‘by’ which means a town. e.g. whit by, Selby, grmspy.

Þ          ‘Thrope’- toft; thwaite – slaithwaite, Lintwhite, Lowest, Northrop, Oglethorpe.

¬  Addition of verbs: ‘get’ and ‘take’.

¬  Addition of pronouns: they and ‘them’.

¬  Relationship: husband, sister.

¬  Other: fleet, maid, knife, big, haven, skipped.

Þ          Many of the writers have adopted these changes in their language. The Bible and Shakespeare even though seem much more influenced actually are not but classical writers and modern writers are more influenced.

Þ          Anglo Saxon period has given us plenty of things as permanent ones, and they still are in our language. A small list is given below.

1.      Relationship: Father, mother, brother.

2.      Food: bread, butter, milk, meet.

3.      Weapon: sword, spear, bow, arrow, shield.

4.      Other words: star, loom, steer

5.      Phrases: might and main, fair on foul, kith and kin

6.      suffixes: dom, hood, ing, ness, ship

7.      Prefixes: forth- with

¬  Change in meaning:-

Þ          Some words are there. They have lost their original meaning and acquired a new.  Sometime the word has generalized or classified. Such words are: Lord, lady, steward, town, etc.

Þ          One time ‘knave’ meant ‘a boy’ but is retained in that sense in a pack of playing cards. ‘fiend’ meant ‘enemy’ but now ‘devil’.  ‘silly meant ‘happily but now ‘foolish’.

Þ          Association of some words changed and gave ideas. e.g. ‘bead’. It meant small globular object. In old English it meant a prayer’ but now it is related to object only. Unkempt , uncouth, bridal, god , thrill, etc. are such words.

Þ          Geographically one world is interesting. ‘shire’ a suffix is added to many country places.  ‘Shire’ is coming from a verb ‘to shear’ or ‘share’. The meaning is ‘to divide’. So one place is ‘York shire’ means York was divided into many ‘ridings’ .(people division): ‘ride’ comes from thriding’. York has four ridings; west, east, north, and south.

Þ          The English language not only began to go in the establishing way but also got development. It showed flexibility for adoption which really helped English to be a language of the country and world.

The Descent of the English Language

The Descent of the English Language

¬  Introduction:-

Þ          There are plenty of languages over world. The modern linguistics research has show that languages can be grouped in families. Pronounciation, grammar and vocabulary of a language are traced to the other. There are several families but we shall limit ourselves to Indo-European family as English is one of them.

Þ          The name of the family is Indo-European one. Aryan and ‘Indo-Germanic” names are there. Nearly 3500 years ago romantic tribes round the Black-sea and Siberia used to speak it. These tribes dispersed across the sub continent. Isolation of a tribe gave rise to addition and omission. Change in the main language by the 200 B.C. This language split into eight distinct language groups and this process of splitting continued. (See Diagram).

¬  Common things in Indo-European languages:-

Þ             There are some words, which indicate. Similarity of the languages of this family. Ancient languages were more complex than the present day languages. Amongst most contemporary language spoken today is of natives of Australia. Some pronouns like ‘my’, ‘you’, and some relationship nouns such as ‘father’, mother’ brother’ prove the argument but surprising distant relationship like aunt, uncle, cousin, don’t correspond in the same manner. Surprisingly cardinal numbers from one to ten have considerable similarly. The names of numbers in various languages like French, Italian, Spanish and Portuguese closely resemble the Latin and they are clearly derived from. Henry Bett in his book ‘Wandering Among words(1936)’ shows that ‘five’ is the same word as ‘hand’ in Labrador and Roman ‘V’ while both are related to counting of fingers. To add one ‘I’ indicating one finger or two and so on is done to ‘V’. Children and uneducated people do counting with the fingers. To do it simple pebbles were used. Latin word for ‘pebbles’ is calculate’. So our verb ‘calculate’ has come into existence and now a days into come to point. One of the higher and more complex process of mathematics.

¬  Primitive Germanic Group:-

Þ          Out of eight groups of Indo-European family, we shall consider primitive Germanic grows as it has the root English Language. 2000 year before in the most parts of central and northern Europe the language was spoken. On geographical basis it was breaking up into several different dialects. Constant shift was main aspect. Italic group is very important. Its sound system remained intact. Its influence is seen on Germanic group. Jacob Grimm found out following.

            Latin words               Changed into                         Germanic

            P= Pedem                    F= fot                                      =foot

            T= tres                         O=ori                                       = three

            D =decem                   T=tien                                      =ten

            C=Chine                      S=sheot                                   =sheet

Þ          If we notice these sound, they has been changed with slight change of lips. They seem trivial but effect is very much. It depends on the use of vocal, but lip constant or vice-versa.

Þ          These chances were explained by Grimm. SO it was known as Grimm’s Law. It did not answer all the questions. Verner improved it son later on it was known as Verner’s Law.

Þ          Primitive Germanic fell into three groups’ Gothic, Scandinavian and West Germanic. We have Gothic writing records. Scandinavian group has given us four languages. West Germanic gave us; High German, law German and Anglo Saxon language. From the last one we have middle and the modern English.

Þ          West Germanic is theoretical language. We have no written no writer documents. ‘R’ is added, or placed instead of‘s’ or ‘z’ in a word e.g. ‘Was’ is turned ‘were’ and is into ‘are’.

Describe the origin of language.

Describe the origin of language.

Q: 1 What are the chief theories of language?

¬  Introduction:-     

Þ          Language is a complex process. There are some symbols representing sounds. Combination of these sounds makes a language. But these sounds are only necessary for spoken language. Language is both spoken and written but primarily it is spoken. Through sounds ideas, thoughts and feelings are conveyed. Particular way sounds are put into words. Some rules are formed to make structure. Sounds according to this create raw material. Speaker and listeners then agrees to have some common understanding. This finally gives shape to language. In short we can say “Language is a system of sounds, words, patterns etc. us by humans to communicate thoughts and feelings.” Or it is “a form of language use by a particular group nation.”

¬  Language; evolutionary, not static:-

Þ          Language is a living form. It grows so it is evolutionary, not static. A process of changing, adding, omitting is continuously going on. If we compare Chaucer language and today language, a vast different is noticeable. Rigiditys in English language was not earlier tolerated which is not tolerated. Slang words are now accepted. Spelling have even been accepted. In the beginning, the process of change was slow but now because of many factors it is rapidly changing. American influence, T.V, printing, radio and cinema are chief causes for these changes. B.B.C. play a role to has correct English.

¬   language Differentiates man and animal:-

Þ          This is a remarkable thing. What distinguishes man and animals is language. It is the chief characteristic a mankind. All people of all countries speak language. Merely meaningless noise, don’t make language which the animals do. According to prof. Ltoyd James animals had perhaps language in mind but it couldn’t develop in the proper direction. “The species which developed mind and personality also developed speech.” Sir G. Eliot smith believed that “the discovery of speech marked the beginning of man.

Þ          There are some theories for the origin of language. They are not complete. There are disputes but they indicate at least various views.

(A) The bow-wow the theory (Imitation):-

Þ          It shows imitation theory. The earliest speech was perhaps an attempt to imitate sound. The young child adopts this type of expression. It is possibility that he adopting habits and manner which our adult ancestors had many years ago. He distinguishes a dog from other animals is that of ‘barking. It says ‘bow-wow’ and he begins to imitate it. Many see this a beginning of language. Many words support this theory. E.g. ‘snake’, wind’, water. E.g. while speaking them, their form is assumed through sounds. Some recently coined words are putt, whine, wail, whistle, babble. The onomatopoetic effect seen also.

(B) The ding-dong theory (rhythm):-

Þ          This theory is given by Max Muller, a German scholar. It is believed that in the formation of language man’s tendency to rhythm is traced. The universe has rhythm and the thing related to it has rhythm as well. This theory also had imitation bit is it is of movement of sound. The rhythm of a flowing, river or the swaying of these, early man ‘ding dong’ phonetically to them. From it a simple hum or chart developed. This theory brings us close to savage war-dance and the medieval ballads and the sea-chauties.

(C) The pooh-pooh theory(Emotional utterances):-

Þ          This theory is related to emotional interjections, evoked by pains, surprise, pleasures, wonder etc. Our present more national language is actually a refinement of our such brute noises. This name is given as such expressions are known as ‘pooh-pooh’. Earlier it was only related to contempt or disgust but often use gives meaning to it.

(D) The Gesture Theory(Body Expressions):-

Þ    Bodily expressions are counted in this theory. It is advocated by Wilhelm Wundt and supported by Richard Paget. Earlier man used sings and gestures of our hands to communicate something. This was natural ‘language’. This theory is relevant even today when we want to call somebody or asking one to go back, we use hands and use particular sings. To say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ head is shaken. Often to express many exclamations or utterance- lip, tongue jaw eye movements are done. Tongue and hand had combination earlier. E.g. when we lift our are to point upward, our tongue tip goes up. Even ‘you’ and ‘I’, ‘me’. ‘Thou’ expressing according to pointing finger the tongue twists. “Here” and “There’ are some more examples of this.

Þ          There are four chief theories but none of them is completed in itself. One may be true to a point but not all the ways. The speech shows a combination of these processes.

Psycholinguistics and Child Language Acquisition

Psycholinguistics and Child Language Acquisition

            Psycholinguistics merges the fields of psychology and linguistics to study how people process language and how language use is related to underlying mental processes. Studies of children’s language acquisition and of second-language acquisition are psycholinguistic in nature. Psycholinguists work to develop models for how language is processed and understood, using evidence from studies of what happens when these processes go awry.

Click Here to Read Full Answer.

Psycholinguistics - A Study of Language

Psycholinguistics - A Study of Language and Brain in relation to psychology

Psycholinguistics a recent branch of linguistics

            Psycholinguistics is a recent branch of linguistics developed in the sixties. It is the study of interrelationship of psychological and linguistic behaviour. It uses linguistic concepts to describe psychological processes connected with the acquisition and use of language. As a distinct area of interest, psycholinguistics developed in the early sixties, and in its early form covered acoustic phonology and language pathology.

Click Here to Read Full Answer.

VERBAL COMMUNICATION

VERBAL COMMUNICATION

INTRODUCTION

            In earlier lesson you have studied about the meaning, features and significance of communication in business management. Now you will be curious to know different types of communications. At what situation, which type of communication is required? What is the difference between verbal and non-verbal communication? How do you differentiate written and verbal communication? What may be advantages and limitations of verbal, non-verbal and signal communication? These simple questions are answered in the present lesson. In an organization there exists a number of possibilities of relationships among different components. Organizations are made of human beings who are social in nature. Hence, based on the needs and purposes, there are interactions among various elements of the organizations. The interaction is possible only through proper and smooth communication among these segments to achieve organizational goals. Verbal communication is possible through formal or informal interaction which is oral in nature. On the other hand, written communication is done in black and white. There are some other types of communication which neither require oral wordings nor written details. These are different body language, where different parts of body and its movements play significant role in exchange of information and ideas. Each type of communication has its own advantages and disadvantages.

Click Here to Read Full Answer.

Cycle of THE COMMUNICATION PROCESS

Cycle  of THE COMMUNICATION PROCESS

How do we describe communication process? “The transmission of the sender’s ideas to the receiver and the receiver’s feedback or reaction to the sender constitute the communication process”. The main steps of this cycle are as follows:

1. Input : the information or ideas the sender wants to give the receiver.

Click Here to Read Full Answer.

MEANING OF COMMUNICATION

MEANING OF COMMUNICATION

There are various definitions and meaning interpreted by different scholars.

1. T.S. Matthews says that Communication is something so difficult that we can never put it in simple words. But we do need a definition to understand the concept.
2. In his book Communication in Business, Peter Little defines communication as the process by which information is transmitted between individuals and/ or organizations so that an understandable response results.
3. W.H. Newman and C.F.Summer Jr. defines communication as, “Communication is an exchange of facts, ideas, opinions, or emotions by two or more persons”.
4. Click Here to Read Full Answer.

Linguistic communication

Linguistic communication

           

            Two million years ago, man made his first appearance on earth, heralding the down of an era yet unborn the era of communication. He produced sounds and made gestures ot convey his feelings of joy, fear and sorrow. Time passed by ‘man’ multiplied. His families expanded and coalesced into tribes. Soon a need for communication is arouse. Communication is done with purpose, we want to make someone do something or take some action or think of feel in a certain way. In simple words of Leland Brown. “Communication is the transmission and interchange of facts, ideas feelings or course of actions.”

v Meaning of Communication:-

            The word ‘communication’ is derived form Latin term ‘communicate’ or ‘communio’ both of which terms means ‘to share’. It is process of exchange facts, ideas, and opinions and as a means that individuals or organizations share meaning and understanding with one another. In other words, it is the transmission and interacting of facts, ideas and opinion, feelings, attitudes. Communication is a process involving the sorting, selecting and sending of symbols in such a way as to help the listener perceive and recreate in his own mind, the meaning contained in the mind of communicator 

            Communication has been defined as ‘transferring of a thought or ideas from one group of persons so that it can be understood and acted upon.” In order to transfer an idea, we must use symbols which stand for the idea. According to Petel Little, “Communication is the process by which information is passed between individuals or organiza-tions by means of previously agreed symbols.

v Nature of communication:-

            Organizations are represented as communication systems. Every organization has its own sub-systems and there is always interaction and interface between sub-systems to achieve goals. Communication transmits information and data to the total system. There must be two parties in the process of communication. The communicator or sender or transmitter of message and receive or recipient or listener or reader is another party at the end. The nature of communication is exchange of message and interaction. Communication may be through written or verbal action,

According to Peter Little, “Communication is defined as intercourse by words, letters, symbols or message and as a way that one organization member shares meaning and understanding with one another.”

v Process of Communication:-

            ‘Process’ is a course of action. Communication as an organization process affects all. It unable us to transfer information from one person to anther, from one department to another, from outside to organization. No matter whether the organization is an individual firm society or a body corporate. The ultimate object is that information transformed must be understandable to the receiver.

            Communication is the vehicle of individuals and group in the organizations. In this process of the transmitters select, when and what to communicate and determines their medium for transmission. The receiver takes the massage, interprets, perceives and responds to it. The whole sequence is the communication process as a process; it is routine and continuous forever. It is a never ending process cycle.

            According to David K. Bano, the whole process (sequence) of communication process involves six steps. 

Message è Sender è encoding è channel è receiver è decoding.

v Linguistic Communication:-

            Today, there are number of means of communication, language is the most widely used instrument. It is one of the most prized possessions of man. It has been used as a tool for communication for centuries. It has unable man to interact with the environment and to regulate his behaviours.

            Language acts as repository of wisdom, a propeller for the advancement of knowledge, and a telescope to view the vision of the future. Man had tried hard to exploit the flexibility and dynamism of language for the conduct of his day-to-day affair. But in this attempt he has been only partially successful. Though human society progressed with remarkable speech the use of langue for communication is not free for ignorance prejudice and superstition.

            Man communicates meanings through a sophisticated system of symbols. He alone has the power to express in words, sight, sound, touch, smell, and taste. Thus communication is the story of man and his efforts of interactions and naturally the sender and the receiver keeping on changing their roles.

            Another aspect of communication is it is essentially a social affair. The system of communication is commonly owned, accepted, and recognized by the members of community. It enables them to acquire, exchange, store, retrieve and process information. What is essential for communication to occur is the co-operation between two parties one active and other passive.

            In a short, the entire event takes place within a common frame of reference, also called communication environment. Thus the success of communication is measured in terms of not only the effective transmission of the massage but also the achievement of the intended result. It indicates the processes or initiation and reaction on the part of sender and receiver respectively. 

Ferdinand de Saussure ‘s Contributions

Ferdinand de Saussure ‘s Contributions

           

            Ferdinand de Saussure (November 26, 1857 – February 22, 1913) was a Swiss linguist whose ideas laid the foundation for many of the significant developments in linguistics in the twentieth century. He is widely considered the "father" of twentieth-century linguistics, and his work laid the foundation for the approach known as structuralism in the broader field of the social sciences. Although his work established the essential framework of future studies, his ideas contained many limitations and fundamental weaknesses as later scholars recognized that underlying structure and rules, while informative, cannot be the sole determinant of meaning and value in any social system.

Biography

            Born in Geneva, Switzerland in 1857, Ferdinand de Saussure was interested in languages early in his life. By age 15, he had learned Greek, French, German, English, and Latin, and at that age he also wrote an essay on languages. Coming from a family of scientists, he began his education at the University of Geneva studying the natural sciences. He was there a year, and then convinced his parents to allow him to go to Leipzig in 1876 to study linguistics.

            Two years later at the age of 21, Saussure studied for a year in BerlinHe returned to Leipzig and was awarded his doctorate in 1880. Soon afterwards he relocated to Paris, where he would lecture on ancient and modern languages for eleven years before returning to Geneva in 1891.

            Living in Geneva, teaching Sanskrit and historical linguistics, he married there and had two sons. Saussure continued to lecture at the university for the remainder of his life. However, it was not until 1906 that Saussure began teaching the course of "General Linguistics" that would consume the greater part of his attention until his death in 1913.

v Contributions to linguistics

v Laryngeal theory

While a student, Saussure published an important work in Indo-European philology that proposed the existence of a class of sounds in Proto-Indo-European called laryngeals, outlining what is now known as the "laryngeal theory." It has been argued that the problem he encountered, namely trying to explain how he was able to make systematic and predictive hypotheses from known linguistic data to unknown linguistic data, stimulated him to develop structuralism.

v The Course of General Linguistics (Cours de linguistique générale)

Saussure's most influential work, the Cours de linguistique générale (Course of General Linguistics), was published posthumously in 1916 by former students Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye on the basis of notes taken from Saussure's lectures at the University of Geneva. The Cours became one of the seminal linguistics works of the twentieth century, not primarily for the content (many of the ideas had been anticipated in the works of other nineteenth-century linguists), but rather for the innovative approach that Saussure applied in discussing linguistic phenomena.

Saussure made what became a famous distinction between langue (language) and parole (speech). Language, for Saussure, is the symbolic system through which we communicate. Speech refers to actual utterances. Since we can communicate an infinite number of utterances, it is the system behind them that is important. In separating language from speaking, we are at the same time separating: (1) what is social from what is individual; and (2) what is essential from what is accessory and more or less accidental.

            Saussure illustrated this with reference to a chess game. The chess game has its rules and its pieces and its board. These define the game, which can then be played in an effectively limitless number of ways by an infinite number of pairs of players. Any particular game of chess is of interest only to the participants. Thus in linguistics, while we may collect our data from actual instances of speech, the goal is to work back to the system of rules and words that organize the speech.

v revolutionary element in Saussure's work

            The most revolutionary element in Saussure's work is his insistence that languages do not  produce different versions of the same reality, they in effect produce different realities. That different languages conceptualize the world in significantly different ways is demonstrated by the fact that even such "physical" or "natural" phenomena as colors are not the same in different languages. Russian does not have a term for blue. The words poluboi and sinij, which are usually translated as "light blue" and "dark blue," refer to what are in Russian distinct colors, not different shades of the same color. The English word "brown" has no equivalent in French. It is translated into brun, marron, or even jeune depending on the context. In Welsh, the color glas, though often translated as "blue," contains elements that English would identify as "green" or "grey." Because the boundaries are placed differently in the two languages the Welsh equivalent of the English "grey" might be glas or llwyd.

v Semiotics

Saussure is one of the founding fathers of semiotics. His concept of the sign/signifier/signified/referent forms the core of the field. Equally crucial, although often overlooked or misapplied, is the dimension of the syntagmatic and paradigmatic axis of linguistic description.

            In Saussure’s theory, language is mostly the means of social communication with the help of “signs,” where the linguistic sign—a word—makes and defines the relationship between the acoustic image of the set of sounds or “signifier” (for instance: f, a, m, i, l, y ) and the actual image (or “signified”) of a “family” in our consciousness. This relationship, the bond between the signifier and signified, is both arbitrary and necessary.

            The principle of arbitrariness dominates all ideas about the structure of language. It makes it possible to separate the signifier and signified, or to change the relationship between them. The set of acoustic sounds, i.e. “signifier” (f, a, m, i, l, y), evokes just the image of the object, “family” (always, necessarily and also, strictly). In Saussure's linguistics, there is no place for any socially charged nuance or sensual addition that the word “family” might otherwise evoke. This strictly one-to-one correspondence, therefore, often came under criticism by literary or comparative linguists such as Vaclav while working with the concepts of aesthetics.

v Critiques of Saussure’s linguistic theories

            The following quotes from Saussure’s main work, Course in General Linguistics, illustrate some of his theories, particularly vis-a-vis real-life social organizations:

Some people regard language…as a naming process only…. This conception is open to criticism on several points. It assumes that ready-made ideas exist before words…finally, it lets us assume that the linking of a name and a thing is a very simple operation… (p. 65).

Without language thought is a vague, uncharted nebula. There are no pre-existing ideas, and nothing is distinct before the appearance of language… (p. 112).

Linguistics then works in the borderland where the elements of sound and thought combine; their combination produces a form, not a substance…. The arbitrary nature of the sign explains why the social fact alone can create a linguistic system. The community is necessary if values that owe their existence solely to usage and general acceptance are to be set up; by himself, the individual is incapable of fixing a single value… (p. 113).

It could also be argued that language usage is not (even in Saussure) a simple effect of la langue: the system is not changed by the individual usage as such, but through the community, which the language as an institution helps to form.

However, this concept of social praxis, which becomes crucial if one wants to understand the proper establishment and change of the language system, is missing in Saussure. Social praxis is a part of the larger reality that language is embedded in, but which structuralism seldom deals with in its methodological closure around the always already existing structure.

Some critics (see Bouissac 2003), perhaps without sufficiently detailed study of Saussure’s work, added a new dimension to the debate, further reinforcing the stereotype of a Saussurian doctrine which they contended had overlooked the social, processual, transformational, and fundamentally temporal nature of languages and cultures. Thus, in their eyes, Saussure's approach appeared to study the system only "synchronically," as if it was frozen in time (like a photograph), rather than also "diachronically," in terms of its evolution over time (like a film).

v Legacy/The impact of Saussure's ideas

v The impact of Saussure's ideas

The impact of Saussure's ideas on the development of linguistic theory in the first half of the twentieth century cannot be understated. Two currents of thought emerged independently of each other, one in Europe, and the other in America. The results of each incorporated the basic notions of Saussurian thought in forming the central tenets of structural linguistics.

v linguistic form is arbitrary

Saussure posited that linguistic form is arbitrary, and therefore all languages function in a similar fashion. According to Saussure, a language is arbitrary because it is systematic in that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Also, all languages have their own concepts and sound images (or signifieds and signifiers). Therefore, Saussure argues, languages have a relational conception of their elements: words and their meanings are defined by comparing and contrasting their meanings to one another. For instance, the sound images for and the conception of a book differ from the sound images for and the conception of a table. Languages are also arbitrary because of the nature of their linguistic elements: they are defined in terms of their function rather than in terms of their inherent qualities. Finally, he posits, language has a social nature in that it provides a larger context for analysis, determination and realization of its structure.

v the Prague school.

In Europe, the most important work in this period of influence was done by the Prague school. Most notably, Nikolay Trubetzkoy and Roman Jakobson headed the efforts of the Prague School in setting the course of phonological theory in the decades following 1940. Jakobson's universalizing structural-functional theory of phonology, based on a markedness hierarchy of distinctive features, was the first successful solution of a plane of linguistic analysis according to the Saussurean hypotheses. Elsewhere, Louis Hjelmslev and the Copenhagen School proposed new interpretations of linguistics from structuralist theoretical frameworks.

v systemic functional linguistics

In America, Saussure's ideas informed the distributionalism of Leonard Bloomfield[13] and the post-Bloomfieldian structuralism of such scholars as Eugene Nida, Bernard Bloch, George L. Trager, Rulon S. Wells III, Charles Hockett, and through Zellig Harris the young Noam Chomsky. In addition to Chomsky's theory of Transformational grammar, other contemporary developments of structuralism included Kenneth Pike's theory of tagmemics, Sidney Lamb's theory of stratificational grammar, and Michael Silverstein's work. Systemic functional linguistics is a theory considered to be based firmly on the Saussurean principles of the sign, albeit it some modifications. Ruqaiya Hasan describes systemic functional linguistics as a 'post-Saussurean' linguistic theory.[1

v structuralism

Outside linguistics, the principles and methods employed by structuralism were soon adopted by scholars and literary critics, such as Roland Barthes, Jacques Lacan, and Claude Lévi-Strauss, and implemented in their respective areas of study. However, their expansive interpretations of Saussure's theories, and their application of those theories to non-linguistic fields of study, led to theoretical difficulties and proclamations of the end of structuralism in those disciplines. This alone clearly underscores the fact that Saussure was no philosopher, only a ground-breaking theoretical linguist whose ideas could be summed up in a few words.

The differences we readily experience as independent of language are in fact constructed by it. This does not mean that language creates "actuality" (that is, trees, rocks, buildings, and people) but that language turns undifferentiated, meaningless nature into a differentiated, meaningful, cultural reality. The most significant feature of Saussure's work is the argument that language precedes experience. We have no direct access to the world; our relationship to it is always mediated by, and dependent on, language.

v Conclusion

Thus, his position emphasized the role of language to the expense of all other human faculties, individual and social, and did not address the origin of the meanings and cultural values that are communicated through the medium of language. Nevertheless, Saussure's work formed the foundation upon which the field could develop.