NotesFAQContact Us
Search Tips
ERIC Number: ED141769
Record Type: RIE
Publication Date: 1976
Pages: 125
Abstractor: N/A
Reference Count: N/A
Linguistics in Reading.
Arrington, James Michael
This study presents an argument against the identification of speech as the sole source of data for linguistic research. Specifically, the issue addressed is whether speech and reading and writing can be considered expressions of one language or whether the obvious differences in the terminal symbol strings in the two types of expression are sufficient to warrant their consideration as two separate languages. The following conclusions are drawn: Speech is not language, nor is language speech. Reading is not a codification of speech. If speech and reading and writing are expressions of the same language, then that language must be defined abstractly. The phonological component of a transformational-generative grammar is not sufficiently abstract to provide such a definition. The set of abstract terminal symbols used in both forms of expression is stored in the lexicon of the syntactic component of a transformational-generative grammar. Abstract language, as expressed by both speech and reading and writing in English, can be defined as the output of the syntactic component, or surface structures. (Author/KS)
University Microfilms, P.O. Box 1764, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 (Order No. 77-3857, MF $7.50, Xerography $15.00)
Publication Type: Dissertations/Theses
Education Level: N/A
Audience: N/A
Language: N/A
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Note: Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin