Gesetzmäßigkeiten
English translation: language regularities
| 11:25 Oct 31, 2010 |
| German to English translations [PRO] Social Sciences - Linguistics / Sprachliche Kategorien | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
|  Selected response from: moser.ilja Local time: 11:54 | ||||||
Grading comment
| |||||||
| Summary of answers provided | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 +2 | codes |
| ||
| 5 | language regularities |
| ||
| 4 | patterns |
| ||
| 3 | norms (of usage) |
| ||
| 3 | standard language use |
|
| Discussion entries: 18 | |
|---|---|
Answers
9 mins confidence: 
patterns Explanation: I think I would tend more toward linguistic patterns than regularities. |
| ||
Notes to answerer
| |||
| Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) | |||
27 mins confidence:
norms (of usage) Explanation: http://tinyurl.com/3xkc6ws |
| ||
Notes to answerer
| |||
| Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) | |||
1 hr confidence:
standard language use Explanation: for examaple ..... as opposed to "dialect". prescriptive standard language |
| ||
Notes to answerer
| |||
| Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) | |||
2 hrs confidence:
language regularities Explanation: Source: Noam Chomsky, Syntactic Structures |
| |
Grading comment
| ||
| Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) | ||
42 mins confidence: peer agreement (net): +2
peer agreement (net): +2codes Explanation: http://las.sagepub.com/content/5/1/31.short?rss=1&ssource=mf... Lee Thayer argues that 'what we learn is not the world, but particular codes into which it has been structured so that we may "share" our experiences of it' (Thayer 1982, 30; cf. Lee 1960). Constructivist theorists argue that linguistic codes play a key role in the construction and maintenance of social realities. The Whorfian hypothesis or Sapir-Whorf theory is named after the American linguists Edward Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf. In its most extreme version the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis can be described as relating two associated principles: linguistic determinism and linguistic relativism. Applying these two principles, the Whorfian thesis is that people who speak languages with very different phonological, grammatical and semantic distinctions perceive and think about the world quite differently, their worldviews being shaped or determined by their language. http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/S4B/sem08.html -------------------------------------------------- Note added at 44 mins (2010-10-31 12:10:32 GMT) -------------------------------------------------- This is the from the same paper referenced in my first link: In a previous paper (Bernstein, 1962) two general types of linguistic code, elaborated and restricted, were proposed. These codes were regarded as functions of different forms of social relationships. The codes were thought to entail qualitatively different verbal planning orientations which control different modes of self-regulation and levels of cognitive behaviour. Social class differences in the use of these codes were expected. Speech samples were obtained and the hesitation phenomena analysed, from a discussion situation involving small groups of middle and working class subjects with varying I.Q. profiles. It was found that the middle-class groups used a shorter phrase length and a longer pause interval than the working-class group. These differences in the hesitation phenomena were sharper when working-class and middle-class groups, matched for intelligence on a group verbal and non-verbal test, were compared. It was considered that the members of the two class groups were oriented to qualitatively different levels of verbal planning which control lexicon and structural selections. The working-class groups were thought to be making selections from a lower level of the linguistic hierarchy; whilst the middle-class subjects irrespective of verbal I.Q. were oriented to making selections from a higher level of the hierarchy. This paper will report the analysis of the speech. http://las.sagepub.com/content/5/4/221.abstract -------------------------------------------------- Note added at 3 hrs (2010-10-31 14:33:25 GMT) -------------------------------------------------- Codes are rule-driven systems which suggest the choice of signifiers and their collocation to transmit the intended meanings in the most effective way. To that extent, codes represent a broad interpretative framework used by both addressers and their addressees to encode and decode the messages. Self-evidently, the most effective communications will result when both creator and interpreter use exactly the same code. Since signs may have many levels of meaning from the denotational to the connotational, the addresser's strategy is to select and combine the signs in ways that limit the range of possible meanings likely to be generated when the message is interpreted. This will be achieved by including metalingual contextual clues, e.g. the nature of the medium, the modality of the medium, the style, e.g. academic, literary, genre fiction, etc., and references to, or invocations of, other codes, e.g. a reader may initially interpret a set of signifiers as a literal representation, but clues may indicate a transformation into a metaphorical or allegorical interpretation. For native speakers, the dominant symbolic code will be their language which is divided into spoken and written forms. The language will reflect (if not construct — see lexical words) the cultural reality and social codes diachronically. Distinctions of class or memberships of groups will be determined by the social identity each individual constructs through the way the language is spoken (i.e. with an accent or as a dialect) or written (i.e. in sentences or in SMS format), the place of residence (see Americanisms), the nature of any employment undertaken, the style of dress, and nonverbal behaviour (e.g. through differentiating customs as to the extent of private space, whether and where people may touch or stare at each other, etc.). The process of socialisation is learning to understand the prevailing codes and then deciding which to apply at any given time, i.e. acknowledging that there is sometimes an ideological quality to the coding system, determining levels of social acceptability, reflecting current attitudes and beliefs. This includes regulatory codes that are intended to control behaviour and the use of some signifying codes. The human body is a means of using presentational codes through facial expressions, gestures, and dress. So words spoken may change their connotation to unacceptable if accompanied by inappropriate nonverbal signs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_(semiotics) -------------------------------------------------- Note added at 5 days (2010-11-05 11:33:27 GMT) Post-grading -------------------------------------------------- No need to apologise, Diana, it is your choice. I don't agree with it because it don't think the source you base it on is appropriate to your context (from what we have seen of it), but that, too, is life! |
| ||
Notes to answerer
| |||
Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question. You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy. KudoZ™ translation helpThe KudoZ network provides a framework for translators and others to assist each other with translations or explanations of terms and short phrases.
See also: Search millions of term translations Your current localization setting
English
Select a language Close search
| |||
