Structural typology

Comparative typology and its major distinctive features

Plan:

1.Quantitative limitation of compared languages;
2.Deep and Surface identity;
3.Indifference to Genetic identity;
4.Content approach to comparison.
Structural typology
The Structural typology is the major branch of Linguistic typology and aims to identify structural language types. The Structural typology has 4 branches: a) lin­guistic universals: b) typological classification; c) etalon language; d) typological theory.
Some scholars consider Structural typology an independent branch of General Linguistics. It is connected with Comparative Linguistics and a Theory of Linguistic Methods".
The ultimate goal of Structural typology is to identify universal features of lan­guages. Major scholars who contributed to the development of structural typology are B. Uspenskiy, V.P. Nedyalkov, Ch. Hockette, Yu.Rojdestvenskiy.
Major parameters of Structural typology are:

• 
  Indifference to system identity;
  
• 
  Indifference to genetic identity;
  
• 
  Open list of compared languages/quantitative non-limitation
  
• 
  Areal non-limitation;
  
• 
  Possibility of deep and surface identity.
  
• 
  Indifference to etic -emic identity
  

• 
  Mostly one level approach to comparison; Relatively unlimited etalon language;
  
• 
  Complete typological operation in case of linguistic universals
  

A. Linguistic Universal* are bound to unification of language facts, identifying common/similar features specific to systems of all or separate language groups.
The notion of Linguistic Universals appeared in 1961 at the Congress of Linguists in New York where J. Greenburg, J. Jenkins and I. Osgood proposed a Memoran­dum on Language/Linguistic Universals". They defined it as follows: "A Linguistic Universal is a certain feature specific to all languages of the world or the language per se."
The universals may be classified according to various principles. For example, according to the statistic principle there are unrestricted (absolute or full) universals opposed to restricted (relative, partial) universals (some scholars prefer the term "tendency" instead of "universal"). According to language hierarchy there are pho­netic, morphological, lexical and syntactic universals. Other types include deduc­tive and inductive; synchronic and diachronic universals; universals of speech and universals of language.
For example, universals related to the levels of language hierarchy: