Separation Hypothesis

Nonfiction, Entertainment, Drama, Anthologies
Cover of the book Separation Hypothesis by Eva Forster, GRIN Publishing
View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart
Author: Eva Forster ISBN: 9783638476492
Publisher: GRIN Publishing Publication: March 7, 2006
Imprint: GRIN Publishing Language: English
Author: Eva Forster
ISBN: 9783638476492
Publisher: GRIN Publishing
Publication: March 7, 2006
Imprint: GRIN Publishing
Language: English

Seminar paper from the year 2005 in the subject English Language and Literature Studies - Linguistics, grade: 1,7, University of Stuttgart (Linguistik-Anglistik), course: Advanced Morphology, 17 entries in the bibliography, language: English, abstract: In the following I will concentrate on one special idea in theoretical linguistics and its implications for morphology - the Separation Hypothesis, developed by Robert Beard (1966- 1995). Beard tried 'to find a universal set of principles governing all meanings expressed morphologically, [...] and claims that the semantic side of morphology obeys principles which are to a large extent independent of its formal, or morphophonological, side.' (Carstairs-McCarthy 1992:173) As a consequence his approach is a rigid separation of the two aspects of morphology - form and meaning (therefore the name of his hypothesis, on which he built his morphological framework). The aim of this paper is to show how the Separation Hypothesis works and to elaborate on the main arguments in favour of this hypothesis and the problems that might occur when dealing with morphology in this way. To highlight its unique status and underline its main ideas it will be contrasted with Lieber's lexical approach to morphology. Yet, this approach will be introduced only as far as it is needed to accentuate the characteristics of Beard's theory. As the very short glance on morphology as a subdiscipline has shown, this field of linguistic theory is, due to its status as an interface, an ideal area for divers investigations. It goes without saying that the Separation Hypothesis, the basis of Lexeme-Morpheme-Base Morphology, could be contrasted with numerous other theories different or similar to it, in order to set it apart. Nevertheless, this paper will focus only on Lieber's lexical approach to morphology in opposition to Beard's, since a) Beard himself uses her theory as a contrast in his papers and b) any other outline simply would go beyond the scope of this paper.

View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart

Seminar paper from the year 2005 in the subject English Language and Literature Studies - Linguistics, grade: 1,7, University of Stuttgart (Linguistik-Anglistik), course: Advanced Morphology, 17 entries in the bibliography, language: English, abstract: In the following I will concentrate on one special idea in theoretical linguistics and its implications for morphology - the Separation Hypothesis, developed by Robert Beard (1966- 1995). Beard tried 'to find a universal set of principles governing all meanings expressed morphologically, [...] and claims that the semantic side of morphology obeys principles which are to a large extent independent of its formal, or morphophonological, side.' (Carstairs-McCarthy 1992:173) As a consequence his approach is a rigid separation of the two aspects of morphology - form and meaning (therefore the name of his hypothesis, on which he built his morphological framework). The aim of this paper is to show how the Separation Hypothesis works and to elaborate on the main arguments in favour of this hypothesis and the problems that might occur when dealing with morphology in this way. To highlight its unique status and underline its main ideas it will be contrasted with Lieber's lexical approach to morphology. Yet, this approach will be introduced only as far as it is needed to accentuate the characteristics of Beard's theory. As the very short glance on morphology as a subdiscipline has shown, this field of linguistic theory is, due to its status as an interface, an ideal area for divers investigations. It goes without saying that the Separation Hypothesis, the basis of Lexeme-Morpheme-Base Morphology, could be contrasted with numerous other theories different or similar to it, in order to set it apart. Nevertheless, this paper will focus only on Lieber's lexical approach to morphology in opposition to Beard's, since a) Beard himself uses her theory as a contrast in his papers and b) any other outline simply would go beyond the scope of this paper.

More books from GRIN Publishing

Cover of the book Effect of maternal employment on children's home and emotional adjustment by Eva Forster
Cover of the book Modernity, Capitalism and the Pathologies of Jewish Health: Anti-Semitic Elements of Fin-De-Siècle Medical Discourse by Eva Forster
Cover of the book The Baltic Sea Region by Eva Forster
Cover of the book Tolerance of Non-Smokers to Smokers by Eva Forster
Cover of the book History and characteristics of US-sitcoms by Eva Forster
Cover of the book The role of viral advertising in brand equity building by Eva Forster
Cover of the book Food Business and the Global Water Challenge by Eva Forster
Cover of the book Foreign Aid-Corruption Nexus in Cambodia: Its Consequences on the Propensity of Civil War by Eva Forster
Cover of the book How important were spirituals & folk songs for the life of enslaved African Americans in the antebellum South? by Eva Forster
Cover of the book Luhmanns 'Systemtheorie' and his understanding of the environment at the example of Goethes 'Faust II, act 5' by Eva Forster
Cover of the book Unemployment in Ireland in the 80's - Reasons and consequences by Eva Forster
Cover of the book How 'Vote or Die!' Lured Youths to Vote in the 2004 American Presidential Elections by Eva Forster
Cover of the book Case Study: Rubbermaid Inc. by Eva Forster
Cover of the book Entscheidungsunterstützung bei Zielkonflikten am Beispiel der PKW Entwicklung by Eva Forster
Cover of the book Service Marketing - an introduction by Eva Forster
We use our own "cookies" and third party cookies to improve services and to see statistical information. By using this website, you agree to our Privacy Policy