Filologiya məsələləri, №4, 2017
101
Тарзи Афшар, Малик бей Авджи, Ваиз Газвини, Муртазагулу Шамлу
были выявлены типичные особенности имя прилагательных, созданных
морфологическим путём из имён.
В особенности, были подробно исследованы прилагательное с
суффиксами, моменты их использования, морфологические и семанти-
ческие особенности.
Исследования показывают, что в этом периоде в нашем литера-
турном языке создание слов нашло своё широкое применение.
Arzu Abbasova
Derivative adjective in the xvii century in the azerbaijani literary
language
Summary
In the XVII century Azerbaijani literary language word-building
with morphological way conveyed a specific character and a number of
writers created a lot of notable works in the area of forming new words,
alongside traditional words stabilized historically within the opportunity of
our own native language.
In th article the problems of word-building with morphological way
in the works of well-known representatives of Azerbaijan literature in the
XVII century as Saib Tabrizi, Govsi Tabrizi, Ruknaddin Masihi, Vahid
Gazvini, Murtazagulu khan Zafar, Tarzi Afshar, Malik bey Avji, Vaiz
Gazvini, Murtazagulu Shamlu were investigated according to the samples of
derivative adjectives and defined their characteristic peculiarities.
The usage opportunities of verbs forming from the names, their
semantic and morphological features were analysed in detail. The reseach
shows that the tendency of nationalization at that time got wide scope.
Rəyçi: Qalibə Hacıyeva
filologiya üzrə fəlsəfə doktoru, dosent
Filologiya məsələləri, №4, 2017
102
SUQURƏ MƏHƏRRƏMOVA
Gəncə Dövlət Universteti dosent
sugra_maharramova@yahoo.com
RELATION OF LANGUAGE AND THOUGHT
Key words: mould theory,thought processes,choice of words, conception of
communication, the evolution of language,linguistic communication ,barrier
free communication,
Açar sözlər: mulda nəzəriyyəsi,düşüncə prosesləri,sözlər seçimi,-
kommunikasiya konsepsiyası,dil təkamülü, linqvistik kommunikasiyanın,
baryerdən azad kommunikasiya
Ключевые слова: теория мулды,процессы мышления,выбор
слов,концепция коммуникации,языковая еволюция,лингвистическая
коммуникация,безбарьерная коммуникация
Different linguists and psychologists stand on different views and
continued their argument to define the relation between thought and
language whether they are interdependent or independent. Broad categories
of views are present and converging theories are yet to be gained.
The two extreme thought school concerning the relationship between
language and thought are commonly referred to as 'Mould theories' and
'Cloak theories'. According to the mould theory, language constructs our
thought and they are interwoven in such a way that all people are equally
being affected by the confines of their language. People can be considered as
mental prisoners as they are unable to think in any other way which the
language he speaks does not support.
When language is used in the normal way, the speaker has a thought
with a certain content and chooses words such that on the basis of those
words the hearer will be able to recognize that the speaker has a thought with
that content. For example, suppose that I see you are about to walk out
behind the house and I know that there is poison ivy back there. I ask myself,
"How can I get you to believe that there is poison ivy behind the house?" I
reason that if you believe that I believe that there is poison ivy back there,
then you might believe that too (since you might trust me). I reason, further,
that if I say, "There is poison ivy behind the house", then you will recognize
that I believe that there is poison ivy behind the house. Why? Because I
know that you have the ability to interpret my words, that is, to infer my
thought on the basis of my choice of words.
It is not at all plausible that we are regularly conscious of such
thought processes, and the assumption that they are conscious is no part of
Filologiya məsələləri, №4, 2017
103
the expressivist's thesis. Further, the expressivist does not have to hold that
the expression of thought in this way is the only possible use of words or
even that it is the most common. The expressivist might treat commands,
requests, questions, lies, jokes, and poems quite differently. The idea would
be only that the use of words to express thoughts in this way is normal or
fundamental in the sense that this is what we must look at if we want to
understand such things as: the structure of sentences, broadly speaking; the
possibility of language learning; the possibility of the evolution of language.
In order for a speaker to express a thought in this way, it is necessary
for the speaker and hearer to share an understanding of language. There has
to be a kind of knowledge of language that the hearer will apply in inferring
the content of the speaker's thought from the speaker's choice of words and
that the speaker can count on the hearer to apply. There is a tacit consensus
among expressivists that the process of inferring the content of the speaker's
thought has three aspects or phases: 1. The identification of the meaning of
the words used. 2. The identification of the proposition expressed in light of
the meaning and the rest of the situation in which the utterance takes place.
3. The identification of further implicatures over and above the proposition
expressed.
For example, suppose that a teacher enters a classroom, looks around
and declares, "Everyone is present". Taken out of context, this sentence does
not express any particular proposition, because, taken out of context, there is
no particular domain of discourse relative to which we may interpret
"everyone" and no particular time and place that "present" might refer to.
Nonetheless, the sentence, as a sentence of English, carries a certain
potential for expressing propositions, and this potential is, in one sense, its
meaning. The meaning of this sentence is such that in this particular setting,
an utterance of it might express the proposition that all of the students
enrolled in the course are at the time of utterance located in the classroom
where the utterance takes place; whereas there is no setting in which it might
express the proposition that there will be no lecture on that day. Beyond the
proposition that the utterance literally expresses in light of the meaning of
the sentence and the setting in which it is uttered, there may be certain other
propositions, called implicatures,that the teacher intends to convey by means
of conveying this first proposition. For instance, the teacher might intend to
convey the fact that he will commence lecturing.
Implicit in this conception of communication is a distinction between
sentence expression and speaker expression. Relative to a setting, a sentence
expresses a proposition in virtue of its meaning and certain features of the
setting. Which proposition a sentence expresses relative to a setting is a
matter of the semantic rules of the language that interlocutors must normally
Dostları ilə paylaş: |