hellogѸ˥֥     ChangeLog ǿ     ƥǿ     ڡ 1 2 3 4 ڡ / page 2 (4)

medium - hellogѸ˥֥

ǽ: 2026-07-15 01:27

2017-05-16 Tue

#2941. ū (2) [communication][linguistics][medium][map]

#1281. ū ([2012-10-29-1]) ˤĤƵ񤤤Х󥹡ܸǤ5ˡūθýǺܤƤ
ǯθˤСūϰƤ¿ϰǼƤ褦ĤƤϿؼԡ붵աιԲȤˤäƸū10㤢ޤȤƤ15ǯ֤θˤꡤ70ۤɤ뤳ȤʬäƤοϤäƤǽ롥ūϡŪˤϸΡʡ (surrogate) Ȥ֤ŤǤϤ뤬Ǿİоʹ֤Υߥ˥˴ؤθ򹭤ƤΤȻפ롥*
ä˶̣ΤƬȤбȤȡߥ˥Υ˴ؤ¦̤ʥꥢΥѤ륷ܡ᡼ȤڥĴˤѤūϡ첻ȻҲ򡤸ūΥԥåʲˤѲ©ǤȤɽηϤƤ롥ƬβηϤΤūǤϡūμȿȿοʤηϤȤȤؤƤ롥鷺ʶȿӰǤ⡤٤Ѥ­ȤΤä٤¤ޤĴѤūξˤϡūΥԥåϸƬˤĴбĴξȤϰۤʤηϤäƤȤפä⤺äʣʥƥबѤƤ褦
ŪˤϡūϸƬ٤ĹΥߥ˥˸Ƥ롥ŷϷʤɤιﲼǤϸūϿkmޤꡤºݤ˻Ϥ俹ӤǤαΥߥ˥ѤƤ뤳Ȥ¿󡤸ƬƱͤˡïˤ⽬ǤΤǤ롥
The World Whistles Research Association ȤΤꡤθūξ󶡤ƤΤǡͤޤǤˡ

J. ᥤָūסХ Scientific American ǡ١2017ǯ560--67.

[ | ѥڡ ]

2017-05-12 Fri

#2937. סѡѸϰ̤θ (2) [reformation][printing][medium][history][religion][latin][german]

[2017-05-02-1]ε˰³ƤꡥαѸ˾ˤϡԤɥĸˤˤ𶷤򸫤ƤΤᤤȤΤϡפѤɥĤˤƻϤޤä׼ԥ륿 (Martin Luther; 1483--1546) ȡΩĻγǰѤȯԥƥ٥륯 (Johannes Gutenberg; 1400?--68) λǤ롥
륿Υɥĸ (1521) ¯ɥĸϰ̤᤿¤ˤĤơ (35--36) β

륿ϡɥĸˤǤפʰ֤Ƥ롥ɥĸˤϡ¿ͤ¸ߤŪʶ̸ϤޤƤʤä륿ϡ˺ݤơ򤳤餷ʣɽǤϤʤäդ¿Ѥάϡ˼ǻȤƤˡΧθդǤʤ̱θ󤷤ˤ˭ɽȴơ¿Ѥ륿θդϡ߽Ф줿ΤǤϤʤƤɥĤΤ٤ƤθŪη󤷤褦Ǥä륿ϡïˤǤ狼ߤΤǤ롥Τ褦˽뤳Ȥˤäƥ륿ϡΤ̱Ω褦ȳƮ륿ϡʤȤƻԾ̤㤵졤̲ɤޤ뤿νʪȤʤäʹߥ륿Υɥĸϡɥĸؤ֤̱ζȤư졤ɥʸؤθΰĤȤʤꡤȤƤΥɥĸΩ˴ͿȤϴְ㤤ʤױư˲äƶŵǤ¯λѤ¥ʤΤǡ̤ȤƤΤȤǤϻŪǤäƥλϰϤᡤ¯ϰ̤뤳Ȥ˷Ҥäޤ륿ϡƥʤɤαˤʱƶͿΤǤ롥


륿ϡ¯ɥĸǽ񤫤뤳ȤˤäơưȻפƤƥθҤ򶼤Ȥˤơɥĸ˾礭ʰյͭƤ롥ˡΤȥåθҤȷӤĤ졤Ūϰ̤³ƥθҤŪ˱Ϥ᤿ΤǤ롥αƶϤ˶ٹؤ⹭ꡤ󥰥ɤˤƤ¯줿Ѹؤ˴褵졤ƤȤˤʤäꤷǰϥƥ٥륯ȯȾФơƻ˾Ϥᡤפ٤붯ϤʿϤȤʤäɥĸƱ͡ѸƥйҤȤɤθȤǧ褦ˤʤäƤ
ʾ (41) θդǤޤȤ褦

ױưͻʺ׼濴Ǥơŵ˰͵򤷤¯ǤȤˤäơ̱ˤȤäľܿ뤳ȤΤǤȶ¸ߤؤƤβḢ¯ͤ˳줿ϡ٤ƤμҲؤ˿ƩǮɤޤϤ᤿ΤǤ롥η̽פϡ衼åѤζˤƥθҤ㲼񤭸դȤƤ¯ϰ̤ᡤɸη˴Ϳƥ٥륯γǰѤȯΤ褦ư岡


 ʡ֥ɥĽ״ˤȶƱΡסƥȤȶƱΡ١ʸԡ2017ǯ29--42.

[ | ѥڡ ]

2017-05-08 Mon

#2933. ǯɽ [timeline][history][medium][writing]

󥹥路ػˡ٤ϡ̺ȤƤλˤ򤿤ɤʤ顤̤ȤʸʸʸˤƱ˵ҤƤ롥̺ˤĤƤϡ#2465. ̺ȤƤλˤ ([2016-01-26-1])#2456. ̺Ƚƻ (1) ([2016-01-17-1])#2457. ̺Ƚƻ (2) ([2016-01-18-1]) ʤɤǰäƤϥ󥹥δǯɽ (466--74) ǤȥƥΥҲưƤȤ褯ʬ뤬󥹥θդڤСּҲ񤬥ƥΥ߽ФƤפȤ٤ʤΤ

38000ǯ̥ڥΥ롦ƥƶ˻Ĥ֤ʹ֤ˤǸŤȤƤ
3500ǯ᥽ݥߥг˺ǸŤʸޤ
3300ǯХӥ˥ʸ饯ˤΥ륯ǴĤʸޤ롥ܸʸλϤޤ
3000ǯǯ夬ꤵƤǸŤΥѥԥ륹ʸפΤʤʪ٥åʯ褫ȯ
3000ǯץȤΥҥվݷʸʿʸˤλϤޤ
2500ǯήǤϤʸ񤫤
2400ǯ¸ǸŤΥץȸʸ
2200ǯήƼҤƫҤʸĦ
2100ǯǯ夬ꤵƤǸŤΥѡҤڥ롼ǽ
1850ǯǯ夬ꤵƤǸŤʸ˽񤫤줿ץȸδʪ
18쥿ǽηϤޤ
1400ǯǽùʸ񤫤
1300ǯƼǿ顤äʸ񤫤
1200ǯȯã
1100ǯץȿͤե˥ͤ˥ѥԥ륹͢ФϤ
1000ǯե˥Υե٥åȤޤ
600ǯᥭǥݥƥߥƥʸޤ
600ǯȥꥷĤĢ񤫤
5̤ͤ˻Ȥ
400ǯ˥ե٥åȤꥷǤɸȤʤ
400ǯ줫Ϥȯ
3쥯ɥꥢ˿޽ۤ¤
255ǯ˴ؤϤƤεҤʤ롥ϤѤǴڤ˲줿
252ǯϰȯ줿ǯΤ餫ʺǸŤλ
250ǯޥʸѤ
220ǯȯ̤ɮƻ˻Ȥ
206ǯβī볫Ǥϴ˻椬ȯ
63ǯꥷؼԥȥܥ󤬡ߤݥȥΥߥȥƥ6βܤ˿뤳Ȥؤζä򵭽
31ǯ¸ǽΥᥫʸ
30ǯ񤬥ץȤѥԥ륹泤˹ޤ
1ޤǰŪʽ̤ϹĤѤ
75ǯܸʸǺǸʸ񤫤
105ǯǤϸ촶ε˻ȤᴱѤȯȤƤ
2ǥʥӥǥ롼ʸΥե٥åȤޤ
250ǯ--300ǯǯ夬ۤꤵƤ椬ȥ륭ǽ
256ǯǺǽλ˽񤫤줿ܡȷС٤
297ǯǽΥޥФĦ
394ǯץȤΥҥվݷʸǺǸʸ񤫤
5ܸȼʸηϤȯ
450ǯǯ夬ꤵƤܣݭդ˽񤫤줿ǽμơռܤҤȯ줿
476ǯǸι륹ȥ륹Ѱ̤ˤĤ
500ǯޥͤޥƤʸ񤭤Ϥ
500ǯ--600ǯޥͤȯã
538ǯīȾɴѤβǺ줿ŵʩܤ
610ǯΤħˡܤ
630ǯϥޥɤå
673ǯηʩŵ̤ϤᡤۤɤʤܤǼ̷Фȯˤʤ
8ǰϤޤ
706ǯֿͤå˻
711ǯֿΨ٥٥ͷå饸֥륿볤ۤƥڥ򿯹
712ǯʸؤκǸŤκʡظŻ٤ʸǽ񤫤
720ǯʩοƩȤȤܤǤλλѤ硹Ū˹ޤ
751ǯޥ륫ɤ椬Ϥޤ
762ǯ--66ǯХɤη
770ǯܤξ뤬Ȥäΰʪµʿꤦɴκ
794ǯۤȤ줬Хɤߤ
800ǯץȤǻ椬ϤƻȤ
832ǯඵ̤ꥢ
848ǯӥǻ˽񤫤줿ʷܤ롥ǯ夬ꤵ줿ҤǤϺǸŤȤƤ
850ǯʪ٤Ϥƽ񤭵줿ȿꤵ
868ǯ¸ǸŤνҡض̼С٤줿
889ǯޥͤ٤ƤεϿФǤϤʤѤϤ
ХɤȤν׵Ȥʤ
900ǯץȤ椬
969ǯͷѥɡʻסˤϤƻȤ줿
1041ǯ--48ǯŴǤȤޤƫǺ롥ǯ夬ꤵǸŤβư
900ǯ--1100ǯޥͤإɥ쥹ǥ󡦥ǥå٤
1140ǯඵ̻۲ΥڥΥϥƥФ椬Ϥޤ
1143ǯإ٤ƥ
1164ǯꥢΥե֥ꥢΤǽεϿ
1308ǯƤؿʡ٤μɮ򳫻
1309ǯ󥰥ɤǻ椬ϤƻѤ
1332ǯǻ椬ϤƻѤ
1353ǯܥåإǥ٤ɮ
1387ǯ硼إ󥿥٥꡼ʪ٤μɮ򳫻
1390ǯɥĤ椬˥٥륯ǻϤޤ
1403ǯīƼ¤
1411ǯ椬Ϥޤ
1423ǯ衼åѤǰϤޤäȤ
1440ǯ--50ǯ衼åѤǺǽܡʥ֥å֥åˤ
1456ǯƥ٥륯ưǽΡ٤ΰ
1462ǯޥĤ˲졤ԤΥ
1463ǯåҡĥ뤬ǰ򶽤
1464ǯ޶٤ΥӥƻꥢǺǽΰȤʤ
1469ǯΡز²ؤνʽ٤ͥĥǰ줿ǽνҤȤʤ
1473ǯ롼֥ǥ塼٥åǰ򶽤
1475ǯޤ1476ǯʹϿ٤ե󥹸ǰ줿ǽνҤȤʤ
1476ǯꥢࡦ㥯ȥ󤬥ꥹǺǽΰ򳫤
1494ǯɥޥ̥ƥͥĥ˥ɰ˼򳫤
1495ǯ󡦥ƥȤϡȥեɥ㡼˥󥰥ɤǺǽ¤
1502ǯ--20ǯƥͤιפʪεϿ˻ͽǺܤƤ롥ǯָ޽λäƤ¼⤢
1515ǯ֥ҥȡǥ塼顼å󥰤Ϥ
1519ǯʥ󡦥ƥ٥饯륹ն˾Φƥʸ˲򳫻Ϥ
1520ǯޥƥ󡦥륿Ρإꥹȶβ˴ؤƥɥĤΥꥹȽ²˰Ƥơ٤졤ǯ֤Ǹۤ
1528ǯե󡦥ǡޥ饬㤬轻̱߸ԤȤƥᥭ夷ܤdz䤹
1539ǯڥͤ轻̱ܤ뤿˥ᥭΰ򳫤
1549ǯޥͤο޽ۤڥͤ˾Ƥ
1575ǯڥͤᥭ˺ǽƤ
1576ǯͤ򳫻
1586ǯĤ᤬ɥȥҥȤȯۤ롥˾ǸŤεϿ
1605ǯХƥΡإɥ󡦥ۡơ٤Ǥ
1609ǯνʹȥ饹֥륯ϴ
1627ǯե󥹤Υ顦뤬ȥåϤϤ졤楰ΡȼԤϥ󥰥ɤƨ
1635ǯǥޡ椬
1638ǯѻϤƥꥫؤ⤿餵
1672ǯá򵡤ȯˤꥪɼ򤤻͢񤫤͢йž
1690ǯꥢࡦåƥϥꥫǺǽΩ
1690ǯꥫǺǽοʹإѥ֥å󥷥ܡե󡦥ɡɥ᥹ƥå٤ܥȥϴ
1690ǯꥫΦο̱ϤǺǽλʾޥ塼åĤȯԤ
1698ǯȥޥ꤬ۻӿŪǺǽξؤ߷פ
1702ǯɥإǥ꡼ȡ٤ϴ
1719ǯ͡ȥ̡ե륷硼ɡ쥪ߥ塼뤬ںफ륹Хμˡ
1728ǯޥ塼åĤ椬Ϥޤ
1744ǯϤƤλƸܡؾʤ襤ݥåȥ֥å٤󥰥ɤǽǤ
1744ǯ˥椬Ϥޤ
1767ǯͥåȤ椬Ϥޤ
1768ǯ٥롦ӥ奨뤬ꥫΦ̱ϤǤϤƳ¤
1769ǯ˥塼إΥåɥȥ뤬ꥹΥꥫΦ̱ϤǤϤư¤
1773ǯ˥塼衼椬Ϥޤ
1774ǯǥ޻ե롦ˤǤȯɺؤƻ򳫤
1785ǯɥΩϿʹإǥ꡼˥롦쥸٤ϴǯ塤إॺ٤˻̾ѹ
1790ǯȥޥӥ奤åꥹǤäȤ͵޳ȤȤʤ
1798ǯ˥-륤١뤬Ϣ³浡õ
1798ǯJMWʡ̲Ǽ¸Ϥ
1799ǯͥեȥդͰ
1800ǯۡ׶Ŵΰȯ
1801ǯ祻-ޥ꡼㥫뤬ѥɤˤ뼫ưȯ
1804ǯ֥饤󡦥ɥ󥭥Ĺ־浡¤
1809ǯ󡦥ǥ󥽥󤬱־浡õ
1811ǯե꡼ɥҡ˥ҤưϤΰȯ
1814ǯɥΡإॺ٤˥Ҥξ
1818ǯ祷奢ԥ󤬥ꥫǤϤϢ³浡¤
1820ǯǯꥹɴʾοʹ
1825ǯ祻ա˥ե롦˥ץϤƼ̿Ƥ
1830ǯɺˡˤ꿧ĤΤܤۤ򤤻ǽȤʤ
1833ǯںȤõꥹϿ
1840ǯꥢࡦإ꡼եåܥåȤ夹̿Ϥƺ
1841ǯӥˡǥ륺ɥɻإѥ٤ϴ
1843ǯꥫΥ㡼ɡMۡưϤžȯ
1863ǯꥫȼԤںѥפλѤϤ
1867ǯꥹκڵѥŸ
1867ǯޥ塼åĽΥȥå֥åǹ罰Ѥںѥפ
1867ǯץ饤ȯ
1872ǯꥫ罰񤬥ꥹȥɥĤȴλˤʤ
1874ǯͭҤ¤򳫻ϡ塤ԡͤϻҤȤ³
1890ǯ罰ιĴ˥ѥɼν׵Ѥ
1899ǯǥõȥ󡦥إǥ󤬡Իԡϰΰȯ桤252ǯλȯˤɤѤ
1931ǯ֥ͥå夬ʥԥ塼ȯ
1945ǯ󡦥ե󡦥ΥޥŻҥץߥ󥰤뤿ʿκѤʸȯɽ
1947ǯȥ󥸥٥븦ȯ
1951ǯߥȥ󡦥ɤ֤Ƚ֤˼ơפкܤUNIVAC1ͽ¤
1959ǯޥåפõд


ޡ󥹥ˡ һҡˡػˡˤͤư줿ѡ١ֽŹ2016ǯ

[ | ѥڡ ]

2017-05-02 Tue

#2927. סѡѸϰ̤θ [reformation][printing][medium][history][religion][latin]

󥹥 (230) ϡػˡ٤10ϡְȽספˤơѤȤǿƥΥפưȤˤĤơΤ褦˽Ҥ٤Ƥ롥

ϽפοҤȤäۤۤɿ¤˶ᤤפάȤưѤϤƤαưäפä餳Ϥλˡξȯ줿ΤĤޤȤ衼åѿͤϰ¤ˡ⡤°Ħ⡤¤⡤Ħ줿˥󥯤Ĥƺˡ⡤֤ޤΤäƤơεˤʤСĤǤưǰϤ줿κ俷ۤѲؤߵ᤬ʨ֤äƤɥĤǰȯ줿Τ϶ǤϤʤץƥȤνױưˤϡοƥΥβǽľŪ򤹤ϤäΤץƥȤϹߤ˰Ȥʤ衤󥿡ͥåȤδޤޤǡϤ뱿ưȿμܤȤƤεǽ̤


ϡۤ򹭤ʤȤСƬⶵ餤ΤΤä͡μΨ夬äƤȡʸ𤬤ŪʼʤȤƬƤ롥פߤƤۤ򹭤᤿Ȥ׵ȿ͡μΨθ塤ưѤȤƥΥŪˤԤä礷ΤǤ롥ơפȰѤϤͻӤǿʤळȤˤʤä
16ƬΥɥĤǻϤޤäͻӤϡ˥󥰥ɤˤäޡȥå䤷ƥ󥰥ɹ񶵲Ωإ꡼8ϡ󥰥ɹ̱λٻդ뤿ˡʸ򡤤ĤޤѤѤΤǤ롥󥹥 (258) ϡˤĤƼΤ褦Ƥʸʸ˵ϲؤƤˡ

󥰥ɹ񶵲ˤ罰λٻɬפǤꡤ󥰥ɤνޤؼ뤳Ȥϵ٤ǤϤʤȤĥʤ罰ζ뤫⤷ʤäʤФʤʤʢȥޥ०ϤάIJȶĤɥĤΥץƥȤΤ褦˰ȼԤѤ罰λٻ򽸤ᤵ०ϡȿĤαѸϢξʸǤѥեåȤ⤽ΤʤƤͤ罰˽ʬ˼ΤäʪʤݤοϤطʤǽϻ夷Τ


०뤬ѤѤƾʸȤʸˤإ꡼8̱˼줵褦ȤפǤ롥ơ޲줬ޡȥåȷӤĤƥǤϤʤǤ줿ѸǤäȤ˽פǤ롥ˤơסѡαѸ3ĤӤĤȤˤʤäפʤСޤޤ¿αѸ줬դƤϰ̤夹뤷Ѹϰ̤夷ư뵡Сפϩ⶯줿츫ӤĤʤ褦͡ʸݤ16Υ󥰥ɼҲ礭ưƤΤǤ롥

ޡ󥹥ˡ һҡˡػˡˤͤư줿ѡ١ֽŹ2016ǯ

[ | ѥڡ ]

2017-04-19 Wed

#2914. ܸ÷ŪʸǤ [grammatology][japanese][kanji][writing][medium][history_of_linguistics]

ε#2913. Chinese character ǤϤʤ Chinese spelling ȸƤ֤٤ ([2017-04-18-1]) Ǽ夲δܸϤ֤äܤʻɷƤ롥⤷ܸϡʸȤդ礤ܤС֤÷θǤ롤ȹ (243) 롥ǰƬˤΤϡֹءסֹۡסֹסָסֹԡפʤɤƱΤȤǤ롥

ܤθؼԤϤ褯ܸϤʤüʸǤϤʤդ줿Ǥ롤ܸ˻ϵˤ⤢롤ȸϡ̾ñʣ̤򤷤ᤵʤȤиΤȤư줬֤ȤäˡΤȤǤ롥Τޤ줿ؤˡܸʬϤ뤫顤ʸˤܤʤؤܤΤϡȸˡỌ̇̄Ǥ롥
̵ϤǤ뤿ˤȤФʸΤŤޤʤа̣ʤȤܤСܸϡǤ餯ĤΡüʸǤ롥
̣ˤʤʤȤΤϡ󡤸ȤƷʻѤǤϤʤܸ÷ŪʸǤ롤ȸ虜ʤ


ǤϡܸΤ褹뤳ȤǤΤϡݡפ롥÷ΤޤĹƤޤäΤǡʻѤˤʤȡܸϡ÷ΤޤƤ椯ۤ¸ˡϤʤ (p. 236) ȹͤƤ롥
ܸˤĤƻξ͡˵뤳ȤǤ䤬⤷Τϡͳβ١θؤ鸫ȡܸϲ̤ʤȤΤʤ̤θʸȤδط򤫤ꤽˤθؤ鸫ȡܸ÷θǤ롤Ȥˡܸ÷⤷Ƥ櫓顤ʸȤδط򤫤ꤽˤθؤΤۤ˸줷Ƥ뤳Ȥˤʤ롥ĤޤꡤǽפȤߤʤήζؤæĤġ椷ʤʸβͤ򿮤Ƥ롤Ȥɤ롥
ʸϲȶӤĤƤϤ뤬ܼŪΩǥǤ롥ؤϡʸƱ褦˽Ż뤹ɤڤɬפΤǤϤʤ񤭸դμΩˤĤƤϡʲε򻲾ȡ

#1829. 񤭸եƥȤ3Ĥεǽ ([2014-04-30-1])
#2339. 񤭸դμΩ˴ؤ Vachek ε (1) ([2015-09-22-1])
#2340. 񤭸դμΩ˴ؤ Vachek ε (2) ([2015-09-23-1])
#2431. 񤭸դμΩ˴ؤ Bolinger ε ([2015-12-23-1])
#2508. 񤭸դμΩ˴ؤ Samuels ε ([2016-03-09-1])
#2819. ä濴æĤĤء ([2017-01-14-1])

ˡشܿ͡١ʸ麽սҡ2001ǯ

Referrer (Inside): [2017-04-24-1]

[ | ѥڡ ]

2017-01-14 Sat

#2819. ä濴æĤĤ [history_of_linguistics][sociolinguistics][medium][writing]

ε#2818. 蘆εǽ ([2017-01-13-1]) Ǽ夲ؤ蘆Ȥϲ٤ɤǤơؤήˤĤƹͤ뵡񤬤ä
ĤˤȡΤ蘆θϤ蘆ơʾˤˤ뷹ä㤨СŵŪʡ֤蘆θפˤȡ蘆ζή (Rumor) ϡԤФνפ (importance) ȤˤĤƤξڵۣ椵 (ambiguity) ȤѤ㤹롤Ĥޤ R?ia Ȥ (23) ۤˤͤ٤¦̤Ϥ롥㤨СΥǥȯ칭뤫ȤǥδιͻɬפĤϤΤ褦ˡ蘆ƤǤϤʤθ뤳Ȥ⤤Ƥ롥ǽҤ٤Ƥ뤳Ȥ⤷̱¯ؤˤ椬Ƭˤ뤢ޤꡤΤ蘆塽ǥޤࡽФƴ󤻤ؿפȤŦƤΤǤ (154)
Ҳ˴ؤǤ⡤19̱¯ؤˤϽ񤭸դλषŻ뤵Ƥ顤ߤϤȰžƺƤӽ񤭸դޤ᤿ƼǥܤȤʤäƤΤȸ
Τ褦Ĭήϸؤˤˤ⸫뤳ȤǤ롥20μήɸؤϡоݤȤƤäѤäդŻ뤷¾ΥǥĤޤ񤭸դڻ뤹ȯŸָƬˤ뤢ޤסȤФָФƴ󤻤ؿפäΤǤ롥Ȥ20Ⱦ21ˤƤϡҲؤʤɡǥ䥳ƥȤŻ뤹뷹ޤäƤؤˤϡषʸ (philology) ȸƤФ񤭸нŤθ츦ΩƤ櫓顤ϤϤꤰȰžƺƤӳƼΥǥ˴ؿäƤȸ
󡤰žäƤȤäƤ⡤ȤƤϰऱ֤äƤȤȤǤꡤñʲؤβ󵢤ǤϤʤϤǤ롥21θؤϡä濴뤤ϡơ濴æơ¾ΥǥˤۤꤹȤạ̈ǤΡַ׽ŻؤɤڤäƤȸ
Ϣơ񤭸դμΩȤˤĤơܥ֥Ǥ#2339. 񤭸դμΩ˴ؤ Vachek ε (1) ([2015-09-22-1])#2340. 񤭸դμΩ˴ؤ Vachek ε (2) ([2015-09-23-1])#2431. 񤭸դμΩ˴ؤ Bolinger ε ([2015-12-23-1])#2508. 񤭸դμΩ˴ؤ Samuels ε ([2016-03-09-1]) ʤɤǵƤΤǡһȤ

ؤ蘆Ȥϲ١ҡӡ2014ǯ

[ | ѥڡ ]

2016-11-12 Sat

#2756. ɤ߽ǽϤϸѲ®٤ˤ뤫 [glottochronology][lexicology][speed_of_change][schedule_of_language_change][language_change][latin][writing][medium][literacy]

Swadesh θǯ (glottochronology) ˤСŪʳǰɽ路ʸˤۤܰ¸ʤȹͤøäϡ֤ȤȤ˰Ψ֤ƤȤǰƬ֤ƤΤϡäդθݤǤꡤ񤭸դȤƤʤȤȤϡɤ߽ǽ (literacy) ϤΡְΨפ̤ʱƶڤܤʤȤȤްդƤ뤳Ȥˤʤ롥ľŪˤϡɤ߽ǽϤȽ񤭸դϸФݼŪ˺ѤĹˤ錄ä¸ʤɤˤ׸ΤǤϤʤȤ⵿롥
Zengel ϤΤ褦ռ顤衼åѻˤ2ǯʾˤ錄Ѿ줿ˡʸˡΧä򽦤ФݻΨĴĴˡΧʸŵΤʤǺǤŤΤϡ450ǯ The Twelve Tables Ǥ롥ˡǯδ֤򤪤Ƶ533ǯ Justinian I ˤ The InstitutesǸˡǯʾλ֤Ф1621ǯ˥ե󥹤ǽǤ줿 The Custom of Brittany Ǥ롥ĴˤơƱδϸ촴٥ǤΰפǤꡤŪѷʤɤϹθƤʤǽǯ "First interval"ǯ "Second interval" ȤƥƥˡΧäݻΨ¬ȤΤ褦ʿͤ줿 (Zengel 137)

 Number of itemsItems retainedRate of retention
First interval685885.1%
Second interval584680.5%


2֤ʿѤ83%ۤɤȤʤ뤬¾θפοͤӤ롥㤨СZengel (138) ˼Ƥ褦ˡ"200 word basic" ݻΨ81%"100 word basic" Ǥ86%Swadesh ΥꥹȤǤ93%ǤʤӤΤᡤ̸äǤ51%Τ̤䵡ǽɽ魯ä68%ˡˤꡤSwadesh ˤϤʤä񤭸դ̩ܤ˷ӤĤˡΧѸȤüʻѰθääۤɹ⤤ݻΨ򼨤Ƥ뤳Ȥ¾ڤ줿Ȥˤʤ롥Zengel (138--39) ϡΤ褦ʸǤ롥

Some new factor must be recognized to account for the astonishing stability disclosed in this study . . . . Since these materials have been selected within an area where total literacy is a primary and integral necessity in the communicative process, it seems reasonable to conclude that it is to be reckoned with in language change through time and may be expected to retard the rate of vocabulary change.


ʤۤɡZengel ϥƥˡΧäȤˤꡤݻФɤ߽ǽϤαƶ¾ڤ褦Ȼߤ櫓ǤϤ롥Ф줿ϡ̣ľŪQŪˤȤɤޤηȤʤʤSwadesh ˤиʸ˰¸äݻΨŪ㤤ϤǤꡤˡΧѸϤʸŪʸäȹͤ뤫顤ޤޤݻΨ㤤ϤȤλǤϤषݻΨϹ⤫äϡäȤ٤ʸŪǤäƤ⡤줬Ĺˤ錄٤ȷӤĤΤǤС˱ƸäĹݤ롤Ȥθݤɽ路ƤˤʤΤǤϤʤξ硤ä٤ϡäݻΨǤϤʤ2ǯˤ錄ä٤ȤƵǽƤˡη³ϤʤΤǤϤʤˡΧѸΤۤѸʳѸʤɡ̤ΤѤȹͤͤʤɤɽäϡβͤ¸³뤢Ϥ¸³ΤǤϤʤ󡤤Τ褦ʼθäϡɤ߽ǽϤ񤭸դ̩ܤ˷ӤĤƤ뤳Ȥ¿Τǡ⤪˴ͿƤȤưפ롥ޤää٤ǤϤʤ
Ѳ® (speed_of_change) ˤĤơȴϢơ#430. Ѳ˳װ ([2010-07-01-1])#753. ʤθϸŤᤫ ([2011-05-20-1])#2417. ʸݼƿ ([2015-12-09-1])#795. 󥿡ͥåȻϸѲβžΨκǤ® ([2011-07-01-1])#1874. ٸθݼ ([2014-06-14-1])#2641. Ѳ®٤ˤĤƺƹ͡ ([2016-07-20-1])#2670. 񤭸դݼˤĤơ ([2016-08-18-1]) ʤɤ⻲Ȥ줿

Zengel, Marjorie S. "Literacy as a Factor in Language Change." American Anthropologist 64 (1962): 132--39.

Referrer (Inside): [2018-05-23-1]

[ | ѥڡ ]

2016-10-23 Sun

#2736. ڤ [writing][braille][sign_language][hiragana][direction_of_writing][medium][history][japanese][distinctiones]

#2717. Ź椫Ϥޤä ([2016-10-04-1]) εǸ褦ˡ֥饤ϡ롦ХӥιͰƤʸפαѤǤ12򡤥֥饤椬6˲ɤȤüȯ롥19ϤˤϡܤԼͳʿ͡ˤȤäƤɤ߽񤭤ϡʸ⤭ФʸפˤΤäؤǿä򤹤ˤ񤷤뤳ȤϤʤäΤ褦ʻˡ֥饤椬ɤߤ䤹򤷤䤹ͰƤȤϡŪʽäڤդä֥饤ϡɽˤɽǽˤ
θ塤19Ⱦ20ˤơ֥饤Ͻ˱Ѥ졤˹äƤ1854ǯ˥եܤǧ줿塤ꥹǤϱѹΩտͶΩȡޥߥơ֥饤ѤɤĤĹ᤿ꥫǤϡ˥塼衼ճعΥꥢࡦȤ餬Ϥ֥饤˴ŤѤ1915ǯɸƹդȡ1932ǯˤϱƤιĤˤѸ춦̤ޤäʤǤϡꥫȥꥹǰۤʤηϤѤƤä֤ƤȤϰ褹롨see #1662. äϸǤ (1) ([2013-11-14-1]
椬Ǥ⡤1887ǯճع˶ФƤȬ֥饤ߡܸؤαѤƻõäơ1890ǯ23ǯ111ҼʡˤΰƤѤ˻äϡ국ǰȤƤ롥
񤯤ƻˡġ구ɮåȤˤʤäספ롥Ĥξ˻Τ֤ǡζ구ѤɮDZ麸ؤǤäƤΤǤ롥̾ʸȰۤʤꡤϻ΢¦ǤäƤɬפꡤäơȯԤν񤭤ȼԤɤߤդȤʤ롥ɤ߽񤭤˴ؤ븲ħȤäƤ褤ޤܸϤʽ񤭤ǽ񤫤뤿ᡤʬ񤭤򤹤ɬפǤ⡤ܸ̾񵭤Ȱۤʤ (see #1112. ʬ (1) ([2012-05-13-1])) ǤϡŪפΤۤץ饤䥳ԥ塼ˤꡤؤ񤯤ȤǤ褦ˤʤäƤ롥
ܤǤȶʤȤ˽в񤦵ƤƤ롥Ųʡ̰ʤӤƴʤɡ¿ξ褦ˤʤä

ⶶ ̦Ĵ٤ؽɴʡ륤֥饤ĤäͤӤȡ١Ź2016ǯ

[ | ѥڡ ]

2016-09-13 Tue

#2696. ʬ񤭡ɽꥹȶΥƥȲؤΤ [punctuation][medium][writing][scribe][distinctiones]

ε#2695. Ѹˤʬ񤭤ζ̡ ([2016-09-12-1]) ˰³ʬ񤭤˴Ϣꡥ
#1903. ʬ񤭤ˡ ([2014-07-13-1]) Ǥߤ褦ˡʬ񤭤δȯˤϡƥȤ륢ɤνƻΤθسؽƥ˥åͿƤʬ񤭤˹׸װϡФǤϤʤCrystal (10--13) ˤС7ޤǤȯãƤɽ䡤St Augustine ˤ륭ꥹȶˡȤʸŪҲŪװͿƤ
ɽȯãȤȤϡ񤭸դäդȤ϶̤ΤȤƵǽ褦ˤʤäȤȤǤꡤɤ߼ͥϺȤȤǤ롥̤δ餤С³񤭤ġɤߤˤפؤδƤƤΤȤϡֶΤߤʤ餺ˡ (punctuation) ̤ȯãˤط

By the seventh century in England, word-spacing had become standard practice, reflecting a radical change that had taken place in reading habits. Silent reading was now the norm. Written texts were being seen not as aids to reading aloud, but as self-contained entities, to be used as a separate source of information and reflection from whatever could be gained from listening and speaking. It is the beginning of a view of language, widely recognized today, in which writing and speech are seen as distinct mediums of expression, with different communicative aims and using different processes of composition. And this view is apparent in the efforts scribes made to make the task of reading easier, with the role of spacing and other methods of punctuation becoming increasingly appreciated. (Crystal 10)


ˡꥹȶȤδطǤСSt Augustine ʤɤνꥹȶζ㤬ŪᤰäƥƥȤ̯ʺۤˤ򼨤Ȥʬ񤭤ޤˡŻ뤹뷹߽ФȤ

The origins of the change are not simply to do with the development of new habits of reading. They are bound up with the emergence of Christianity in the West, and the influential views of writers such as St Augustine. Book 3 of his (Latin) work On Christian Doctrine, published in the end of the fourth century AD, is entitled: 'On interpretation required by the ambiguity of signs', and in its second chapter we are given a 'rule for removing ambiguity by attending to punctuation'. Augustine gives a series of Latin examples where the placing of a punctuation mark in an unpunctuated text makes all the difference between two meanings. The examples are of the kind used today when people want to draw attention to the importance of punctuation, as in the now infamous example of the panda who eats, shoots and leaves vs eats shoots and leaves. But for Augustine, this is no joke, as the location of a mark can distinguish important points of theological interpretation, and in the worst case can make all the difference between orthodoxy and heresy. (Crystal 12--13)


ޤ嵭2ȤŪ˴ؤ뤬ֶʤǤϤȤƤɤ˴ʤΥƥȤ褦ˤʤäȤ⡤ʬ񤭤δ¥ʤ뤳Ȥˤʤä㤨СʸϤǤϤʤñ콸Ȥ٤ glossary तǤ롥μñϤ⤽˺ϿѡѤǤꡤФɤ߾夲ȤϡƳǧӤǻȤ뤳Ȥ¿ȸζ뤳Ȥä׵ᤵƥȤȤäƤ褤 (Crystal 10--11)
Τ褦˸ߤ˴Ϣ뤤ĤʸŪҲŪ̮űѸ7ޤǤ˹ήʬ񤭤δޤδǧʤΤΡ褽̲ȹͤ롤

Crystal, David. Making a Point: The Pernickety Story of English Punctuation. London: Profile Books, 2015.

[ | ѥڡ ]

2016-08-18 Thu

#2670. 񤭸դݼˤĤ [writing][medium]

ɸ˴ؤơ#753. ʤθϸŤᤫ ([2011-05-20-1]) #2417. ʸݼƿ ([2015-12-09-1]) Ϥᡤܥ֥Ǥ¿ˤƤʸηϤݼϤޤǤʤʸѤ԰١ʤ񤭸դΤäդ椷ݼŪǤ뤳ȤϳΤʻ¤Ǥ롥ʤʤΤܼ͡ŪΤꤿ
ε#2669. ѸܸʸˡˤĬή ([2016-08-17-1]) ǻȤ (86) ˡ񤭸դλλäդޤ෹¿ͳƤ뤯꤬ꡤɸͻǤ˥ҥȤˤʤ롥ʸʸεΤϿΤˤʤƤ롥ޤˤ붯ĴϰѼԤˤΡ

ɮϿΤθʸǤ˽θƬ줽ΤޤޤǤϤʤʤۤϤȯ̾˻ƸƬ˶ᤤФƾθʸظƬ줽ΤޤޤǤϤꤨǤʸȤƤΡʤϤθƬǵɮϿΤθʸǵʸ˶ŤϡθƤεҴŪҲŪŪŪΤĻĶŵŪҴɬŪ˷ӤĤǤ롥˰صҴŪҲŪŪŪĸƤʸ졤ʸ줬Ω롥äƤϡ褷ƤλɮϿΤθʸǵϸƬ֤ΤΤǤ褢ꤨʤƱˡʤ餺Ūʸŵޤ̣ˤơ褷ƤƱǤ뤳ȤǤʤȤؤСθʸˤΩ˾ʸˤϤʸʸݤ⤬Ǥ롥ͥ줿ʤȤΤϡɮϿΤθʸǵϸŪ¯ȸŵŪŪʲȤκ¡ǵϸʸΰפˤƤФд줿ϸġΰĿͤȤƤʹȤȤˡİ̤ȤƤΤνμԤ­ƤĿŪˤƼҲŪŪˤƵҴŪʴפΩġ餳ͥ줿̣ˤˤˤΤΤǤ롥


ĴʬȤƤ뤳Ȥϡˤаʲ̤Ǥ롥񤭸դäդ٤ơֵҴŪҲŪŪŪפĤ٤ΤǤꡤݤ³뤿ˤϡǤˤΤ褦ͭ뤳Ȥ̤ƾƤ¸ν񤭸դϤΤȤȤǤ롥äդϾѲ³ƤΤǤ뤫顤夫³Ť󤸤뷹Τ񤭸դϡŪ˸ŤݼŪȤȤˤʤ롥С͡ϡ񤭸դȤƴƤΤȤ³뷹ΤΤ褦ˡ񤭸դݼŪǤͳϡ줬ܼŪˡֵҴŪҲŪŪŪפǤȤΩ뤳Ȥˤꡤ褯Ǥ롥

ҡʸˡˤλʬסعء221955ǯ79--87ǡ

Referrer (Inside): [2018-05-23-1] [2016-11-12-1]

[ | ѥڡ ]

2016-07-09 Sat

#2630. ϼѸˡʵҡˤ礹뤳ȤˤĤ [prescriptivism][historiography][medium][writing][language_change]

Curzan ˤ Fixing English: Prescriptivism and Language History ɤǤ롥ϡѸεϼ (prescriptivism) ˤˤĤƤŪʱѸˤΤ꤫ƤŪȤƤɤ롥
αѸ˵ҤǤϡϼ18ʹߤαѸˤ˼Ҳؤ̣ḁ̈Ūʥѥ餤ΰäƱΤθФ1Ĥ٤ȤƤεϼϡ켫ΤѲεϡ®١˱ƶڤܤװǤ⤢롥ξˡʱѸˤ򵭽Ҥ뤳ȤǤ뤷ɬפΤǤϤʤԤ϶⤯μĥϡȤ櫓2 "Prescriptivism's lessons: scope and 'the history of English'" Dz٤Ȥʤ֤Ƥ롥Τ1սѤ褦

When I began this project, I was not expecting to end up asking one of the most fundamental scholarly questions one can ask in the field of history of English studies. But examining prescriptivism as a real sociolinguistic factor in the history of English raises the question: What does it mean to tell the "linguistic history" of "the English language"? Or, to put it more prescriptively, what should it mean to tell the history of the English language? Attention to prescriptivism in the telling of language history gives significant weight to writing, ideologies, and consciously implemented language change. In so doing, it highlights some inconsistencies within the field about the focus of study, about what falls within the scope of "linguistic" history.
   Re-examining the scope of the linguistic history of English encompasses at least three major issues . . .: the relative importance of language attitudes and ideologies in understanding a language's history; the relative importance of the written and spoken versions of the language in constituting "the English language" whose history is being told; and the relative importance of change above and below speakers' conscious awareness (to use standard terminology in the field) in constituting language change. (42--43)


Curzan (48) ϡ2ˤ3Ĥδ򼡤Τ褦˴ʤ顤Ѹ˵ҤμȤƤƤ롥

The history of the English language encompasses metalinguistic discussions about language, which potentially have real effects on language use.
The history of the English language encompasses the development of both the written and the spoken language, as well as their relationship to each other.
The history of the English language encompasses linguistic developments occurring both below the level of speakers' conscious awareness --- what is sometimes called "naturally" --- and above the level of speakers' conscious awareness.


1ܤΡϼºݤθѲ˱ƶͿȤŦˤĤƤϡΤˤ̤ȻפäƤ롥Ѹ˸ԤϤ˿˸礦ɬפȤĥˤϡ礭ʤǤ롥

Curzan, Anne. Fixing English: Prescriptivism and Language History. Cambridge: CUP, 2014.

[ | ѥڡ ]

2016-07-08 Fri

#2629. Curzan ˤѸν񤭸դäդδط [writing][medium][historiography][language_change][renaissance][standardisation][colloquialisation]

ε#2628. Hockett ˤѸν񤭸դäդδطɽ魯ľ ([2016-07-07-1]) Ǽ褦ˡѸν񤭸դøդδ֤εΥϡޤˡ־梪碪ʡˡפɽǤѥǿܤƤ餿󤹤ȡ̤Ǥ롥
񤭸դäդεΥϡűѸ줫ѸˤƤŪޤޤˤȤɤޤäƤͥ󥹤ζѸȽ񤭸դɸಽ (standardisation) ʤȤ⤢äơξΤЪΥϳƤѸˤʤꡤŪǤ񤭸դˤή褦ˤʤ (= colloquialisation) ξԤεΥϺƤʬŪ˶ޤäƤƤȹͤ뤳ȤǤ롥
ξΤάˤĤƤϡCurzan (54--55) εҤŪΤǤ롥

The fluctuating distance between written and spoken registers provides one fascinating lens through which to tell the history of English. For the Old English and Middle English periods, scholars assume a much closer correspondence between the written and spoken, with the recognition that the record does not preserve very informal registers of the written. While there were some local written standards, these periods predate widespread language standardization, and spelling and morphosyntactic differences by region suggest that scribes saw the written language as in some way capturing their individual or local pronunciation and grammar. The prevalence of coordinated or paratactic clause structures in these periods is more reflective of the spoken language than the highly subordinated clause structures that come to characterize high written prose in the Renaissance. . . . The Renaissance witnesses a growing chasm between the spoken and written, with the rise of language standardization and the spread of English to more scientific, legal, and other genres that had been formerly written in Latin. To this day, written academic, legal, and medical registers are marked by stark differences from spoken language, from the prevalence of nominalization (e.g., when the verb enhance becomes the noun enhancement) to the relative paucity of first-person pronouns to highly subordinated sentence structures.
   At the turn of the millennium something interestingly cyclical appears to be happening online, in journalistic prose, and in other registers, where the written language is creeping back toward patterns more characteristic of the spoken language --- a process referred to as colloquialization . . . . In other words, the distance between the structure and style of spoken and written language that has characterized much of the modern period is narrowing, a least in some registers. Current colloquialization of written prose includes the rise of features such as semi-modals (e.g., have to), contractions, and the progressive.


ϡ񤭸դäդδطȤߤ⤦1ĤθʱѸ˵ҤȻפ

Curzan, Anne. Fixing English: Prescriptivism and Language History. Cambridge: CUP, 2014.

Referrer (Inside): [2016-07-19-1]

[ | ѥڡ ]

2016-07-07 Thu

#2628. Hockett ˤѸν񤭸դäդδطɽ魯ľ [writing][medium][historiography][language_change][colloquialisation][periodisation]

Curzan εϼ˴ؤɤǤơѸˤˤ񤭸դøդεΥˤĤƤ Hockett (1957) ιͻҲ𤵤Ƥ (Hockett, Charles F. "The Terminology of Historical Linguistics." Studies in Linguistics 12 (1957: 3--4): 57--73.) ʲοޤϡCurzan (55) ˷ǺܤƤޤ˼äΤʤΤǡHockett ΥꥸʥȤ¿Ȥۤʤ뤫⤷ʤޤ³ơƱ Curzan (55--56) ¹Hockett դѤ롥

Hockett's Timeline of Written and Spoken English

With Alfred, the 'writing' line begins to slope downwards more gently, becoming further and further removed from the 'speech' line. This is because Alfred's highly prestigious writings set an orthographic and stylistic habit, which tended to persist in the face of changing habits of speech. The Norman Conquest leads rather quickly to an end of this older orthographic practice; the new 'writing' line which begins approximately at this time represents the rather drastically altered orthographic habits developed under the influence of the French-trained scribes. I have begun this line somewhat closer to the 'speech' line at the time, on the assumption --- of which I am not certain --- that the rather radical change in writing habits led, at least at first, to a somewhat closer matching of contemporary speech. From this time until Caxton and printing, the 'writing' line follows more or less inadequately the changing pattern of speech, never getting very close to it, yet constantly being modified in the direction of it. But with Caxton, and the introduction of printing, there soon comes about the real deep-freeze on English spelling-habits which has persisted to our own day. (Hockett 65--66)


οޤȲϡ20ȾФޤǤ򥫥СƤˤʤθ塤20θȾ鸽ߤˤƤϡष񤭸դ colloquialisation (cf. #625. ѸʸˡѲ˸뷹 ([2011-01-12-1])) ФƤȤˤꡤʤȤ⤢ѰˤơξΤεΥϽ̤ޤäƤƤ褦ˤפ롥äơ2ܤ򤽤Τ褦ʼݤDZĹƤߤȤ⤷⤷ʤ
񤭸դäդεΥȤˤĤƤϡ#2292. ֻȯϥפǤĤʤ줿2ۤΥܡȡ ([2015-08-06-1]) #15. Bernard Shaw äɤ "ghotiy" ? ([2009-05-13-1]) οޤ⻲Ȥ줿

Curzan, Anne. Fixing English: Prescriptivism and Language History. Cambridge: CUP, 2014.

[ | ѥڡ ]

2016-06-27 Mon

#2618. ʸ⤿ʤοϡ (2) [world_languages][writing][statistics][language_planning][language_myth][medium]

#1277. ʸ⤿ʤοϡ ([2012-10-25-1]) ǡμפ뤳Ȥ񤷤˿줿ϡ̱²ɴʻŵ٤ˡ̵ʸפȤ򸫤ĤΤǡƤ󤷤
̵ʸ (unwritten language) Ȥϡ֤ʸ˽񤫤뤳ȤʤȤȤǤϤʤԤʤɤˤäƽ񤫤뤳ȤȤƤҲ夷Ƥ餺줬̿䵭ϿΤȤƵǽƤʤפǤ롥̵ʸοˤĤƤϡܹ񤤤Ƥ (186) ΤʤȤϸʤ褦ǡEthnologue ˤθοפ򻲾Ȥʤ顤ȡʸ줿ϡˤ餯%ʤΤǤϤʤºŪΤۤȤɤʸ̵ʸʤΤǤפȽҤ٤Ƥ롥
εǤ⿨줿̵ʸüԤʸΤʤȤɬ⤤ʤȤդǶʸƤǽϤ뤫ºݤˡ¿ο͡Τ褦ʾˤƤ롥դ˸Сǡʤ뤤ǡ˶ȤΤϡʤΤǤ롥
ȥꥢ̵ʸä̱²ʸ̵ʸȤݸ褦Ȥ뱿ưʤɡΤĤϰǾݻλߤʤƤϤ롥Τ褦ʸ (language_planning) ϤޤŪȤϤ¿θ줬ϰζʸ줫ΰϤ亹̤ˤ餵ƤΤ֤
(187) ϡ̵ʸ˴ؤο (language_myth) ˸ڤĤġ̵ʸҲˤߤƬ礭ŦƤ롥

ʸʤɽ̡ˤʤΤǤϤʤȹͤ⤢뤬ϤषդǤ뤳Ȥ¿ʸʤ餳ɽ˰ηͿߥ˥ΤʤΤˤ褦ȤռƯʤ䥢եꥫθ̱äȤꡤޤ2,0003,000⤢ΤͤƤߤ褦㤨иȤΤϡҲαΤ򥳥ѥȤɽΤǤ뤬ˤϱƧжѤȤޤޤʷƳƤ롥
άʸϡޤޤʤΤʸѤ뤳Ȥ롥㤨С̾̾ϽεϿΤȤƵǽ뤳Ȥ¿ϰǤߤ롥㤨СեꥫʤɤǤϡ򼰡פȤ̾ϡ²ӤƤȤޤ줿Ҷפ襤äȤλҶƻפƤʤ˵ޤΤ֤˹鷺ƻǻҶȤäǤ롥̾ϸĿͤ¾θĿͤȶ̤ǤʤƱ̿̾ԡʤϼȤƻҶοơˤˤȤäƽפʽ򡤻Ҷ̾˵ϿƤΤǤ롥ޤٿͤФơ񤯤褦˥åҶ̾Τ¿
Τ褦ˡ̵ʸ줽̵ʸҲˤƤϡʸʤ餳˭ʸʸݤȯãƤΤǤ롥ʸ䤬礭ʤФʤۤɡʸݤषƤȤϺ桹ܤˤƤȤǤ롥


Ϣơ#1685. ƬΤĵϤȰҿ ([2013-12-07-1]) 򻲾ȡ

м̵ʸס̱²ɴʻŵ١Ω̱²ʪۡԡˡǡ2014ǯ186--87ǡ

[ | ѥڡ ]

2016-06-26 Sun

#2617. "colloquial" Ȥ쥸 [register][medium][componential_analysis][prototype]

"colloquial" Ȥ쥸 (register) ˤĤƹͤƤ롥ȤƤϡָ(), äդΡäΡΤΡĥʤפۤɤͿ졤ϢȤƤ "conversational", "spoken", "vulgar", "slangy", "informal" ʤɤ󤲤롥Ū "literary" ȤѸ줬ꤵƤ뤳Ȥ¿̵ʿͤθոɽƻǤϤʤषΤͤäǻȤդȤްդĤγؽԱѱѼ񤫤Ѥ褦

(of words and language) used in conversation but not in formal speech or writing (OALD8)
language or words that are colloquial are used mainly in informal conversations rather than in writing or formal speech (LDOCE5)
(of words and expressions) informal and more suitable for use in speech than in writing (CALD3)
Colloquial words and phrases are informal and are used mainly in conversation (COBUILD)
used in informal conversation rather than in writing or formal language (MED2)


ɽȤƤ a colloquial expression, the colloquial style, a colloquial knowledge of Japanese, colloquial speech ʤɤͤˤʤ롥
嵭顤"colloquial" ŵŪˡ (mode of discourse) ȤƤäաʲˤ° (style (tenor) of discourse) ȤƤϷĥʤΤ°Ȥ (cf. #839. register ([2011-08-14-1])) "colloquial" ϸ§ȤʳŪƻ (gradable adjective) Ǥꡤɽ "colloquial" Ǥ뤫ݤŪ˷ꤹ뤳Ȥ񤷤Τäդ񤭸դȤΤ°ϥǥǤϤ뤬񤭸դؤ "colloquial" ɽ뤳ȤԲǽǤϤʤ (ex. The passage is written in a colloquial way.) ޤˤĤƤϷĥٹ礤ϥʥǤ뤫顤"colloquial" "uncolloquial" ζϤȤ꺤Ǥ롥ɭ"colloquial" ΰ̣ΤΤȥȤ2°Ȥ߹碌ˤäʬʬ (componential_analysis) ŪȤϡץȥ (prototype) ȤΤդ路褦˻פ롥
ץȥפȤƤβ᤬Ǥ뤳Ȥϡ#611. Murray θ ([2010-12-29-1])#1958. Hughes θ ([2014-09-06-1]) Ǽʡ֥쥸פɤؤƤ褵ˤˤäƤ⼨롥˵󤲤Ƥ "colloquial" ۤ "dialectal", "literary", "formal" ʤɤΥ쥸Ѹΰ̣⡤٤ƥץȥŪˤȤ館ƤΤ褵

[ | ѥڡ ]

2016-04-06 Wed

#2536. Hobo signs [medium][writing][etymology]

#2534. (sign) μ --- Ūˤʬ ([2016-04-04-1]) ȡ#2535. (sign) μ --- ʤˤʬ ([2016-04-05-1]) εǰѡȤ¼ۤɤǤơʸ餷ʸȤƥۥܥ (Hobo signs) ȤΤ¸ߤ뤳ȤΤä¼ (50) ˤȡ20ä衼åѤǤϡư̱²ϲԤδ֤ǡ֥ۥܥפȤ볨ʸΤ褦˻ȤƤޤʽƻ˥硼ǽ񤫤줿ʸ͡ʾ򴹤ä褦Ǥס
Ĵ٤Ƥߤȡhobo ϤϫƯԡˤ Hobo signs ⡤ŵŪˤϥ衼åѤǤϤʤꥫˤ¸ߤǤ롥LAAD2 ˤȡhobo ιˤ "someone who travels around and has no home or regular job" Ȥ롥19ޤǡä1929ǯ˻Ϥޤ網λˡȤ꿦⤿ʤϤϫƯԤϤ⤤ϤϫƯԤɤԤ衹ȴξ򴹤礦Τˡγʸ򤢤ٴŪ˻ȤФΤΤ褦ǽȤƤϡʤƤ٤ϷȤƤˡܤǺΥԥȥ˶ᤤۥܥϡʲΥ֥ڡʤɤǸ뤳ȤǤ롥

"Hobo signs" by Google Images
hobosigns
CyberHobo's Signs
Hobo Signs
Hobo signs (symbols) from Wikipedia

ʸԥȥˤĤƤϡ#2244. ԥȥβǽ ([2015-06-19-1])#2389. ʸηϤεȯã (1)([2015-11-11-1])#2399. ݷʸǯɽ ([2015-11-21-1])#2400. ԥȥβǽ (2) ([2015-11-22-1])#2420. ʸʤɤˤˤȳ ([2015-12-12-1]) 򻲾Ȥ줿
ʤhobo ϸ츻ԾܤθȤΤƤ롥ϤϫƯԤߤ ho! beau! Ȥ路Ȥ188ǯƹŴƻ͹ؼ谷͹ʪϤȤ ho, boy ȳݤ򤫤Ȥ͡⤬Ƥ롥OED ˤȽϡ"1889 Ellensburgh (Washington) Capital 28 Nov. 2/2 The tramp has changed his name, or rather had it changed for him, and now he is a 'Hobo'." Ȥ롥

¼ سɽդ١̿ʹҡ2014ǯ

[ | ѥڡ ]

2016-04-05 Tue

#2535. (sign) μ --- ʤˤʬ [writing][medium][sign][semiotics][communication]

ε#2534. (sign) μ --- Ūˤʬ ([2016-04-04-1]) ³¼ (15) 국ʥˤΡʤˤʬפοޤ򼨤

Classification of Signs by Medium

μФʤ륵μ¿Ȥ狼뤬¤˥86ѡȤȤ¼ (16--17) ˤȡ

ͳϡФΤˤƤ뤳Ȥ軰ԤϤ󤬡¾δдﴱʤᤤȤȤʤΤǤʸ®®30ˡᤤֻФǡפˡİФǡפȤ®300᡼ȥȤäȡΤۤȤɤ٤Ƥּפ뤳Ȥˤʤޤᤵ˼Ȥ顤տޤȤ軰Ԥ褦Ȥ־פϡμʤȤơּפλİФʤ뤳ȤˤʤΤǤ


ʤֻФǡפΡַפΡֲפŪˤäƤ˲ʬहȡŪɽסݳ衤ݳ衤ݽѼ̿ˤȡּŪɽפʬ롥ԤϤˡо¨ŪפʤΡʼ̡̿Ͽޡޡˡ־ħŪפʤΡʥܥ롤ޡԥȥࡤʥˡŪפʤΡʥա䥰ࡤɽˤ˶ʬȤ¼ۡpp. 17--19ˡ
ϢơҥȤδдﴱȥߥ˥ʤδطˤĤƤιͻϡ#1063. ʹ֤θϤʤ˰¸ƤΤ (1) ([2012-03-25-1])#1064. ʹ֤θϤʤ˰¸ƤΤ (2) ([2012-03-26-1]) ε׻ȡ

¼ سɽդ١̿ʹҡ2014ǯ

[ | ѥڡ ]

2016-04-04 Mon

#2534. (sign) μ --- Ūˤʬ [writing][medium][grammatology][sign][semiotics][kotodama]

(sing) ͡ʬव뤬¼ (14) ˵ΡŪˤʬפοޤǺܤƤΤǡѤΤʲ˼Ǥϡ֥פȤɽ򡤵ɽŪѸȤѤƤ롥

Classification of Signs by Purpose

Ṳ̄ʬˤȡ䤿ʸդɽʸѤƤȤˤϡ֥פΤΡ֤뤷פΤΡָʬפȤѤƤ뤳Ȥˤʤʸϡֽ̾פΤΡֵ̾פˤѤ뤳ȤǤ뤷֤뤷פ¾ŪˤѤǤ롥㤨СΡȡפ֡פϡ־פṲ̄˿ʩ̾򵭤Ȥˤϡ־ħפȤʤ뤷ˤСְ̡פȤȤ館롥
ոƤСǤϵȤɬͰŪǤɬפϤʤʹ֤餫μʤγФ뤳ȤǤСݤʤɤǤäƤ⡤ϵȤʤꡤ̣뤫Ǥ롥
Ȥ¼ۤϡԥȥ˴ؤܤǤ롥2020ǯԥå˸ܤǺοʤԥȥˤĤƤϡ#2244. ԥȥβǽ ([2015-06-19-1])#2400. ԥȥβǽ (2) ([2015-11-22-1])#2420. ʸʤɤˤˤȳ ([2015-12-12-1]) 򻲾Ȥ줿

¼ سɽդ١̿ʹҡ2014ǯ

Referrer (Inside): [2016-04-06-1] [2016-04-05-1]

[ | ѥڡ ]

2016-03-09 Wed

#2508. 񤭸դμΩ˴ؤ Samuels ε [writing][medium][grammatology]

#2339. 񤭸դμΩ˴ؤ Vachek ε (1) ([2015-09-22-1]) Ȥĥäε#2340. 񤭸դμΩ˴ؤ Vachek ε (2) ([2015-09-23-1])#2431. 񤭸դμΩ˴ؤ Bolinger ε ([2015-12-23-1]) ǰäƤǤ롥Samuels 񤭸դμΩȤͤ׻뤷ƤꡤѲ˴ؤŵŪǼΤ褦˽Ҥ٤Ƥ롥

The substance of language, from a descriptive point of view, exists in two equally valid and autonomous shapes --- spoken and written. As a code, each exists in its own right, and there has been justifiable insistence, in recent decades, that graphetics and graphemics must in the first instance be studied separately before their relationship with phonetics and phonemics can be considered. This according of equal status to the written language is not to deny that it is ultimately derived from, and dependent on, the spoken language; but it is necessary, if only to disprove the naive speaker's notion that the written language is a mirror-image of what he speaks (or vice versa), or that it is based on contemporary spoken language, and not the spoken language of various periods in the past. (Samuels 4)


Samuels (5) Ͻ񤭸դäդߴطˤĤơΤ褦ˤҤ٤Ƥ롥

Though there are many differences of convention, the two media both expound what is essentially 'the same language'; and although, for the purpose of describing them at a given point of time they must be kept separate, it may be that for studying their development over a period of time, the interactions between the two media are just as important as their developments as entities.


񤭸դμΩȤˤĤƤϡǶʸΤʤǰƤΤǡ (188--92) 򻲾Ȥ줿

Samuels, M. L. Linguistic Evolution with Special Reference to English. London: CUP, 1972.
δ졡ֱѸηϤɽŪȯãסʸˡҤν?ؿʸʳظԡˡ2016ǯ183--216ǡ

[ | ѥڡ ]

2016-02-16 Tue

#2486. ʸɤ [review][toc][writing][medium][history_of_linguistics][grammatology]

#2427. ̤ʸ ([2015-12-19-1]) εǿ줿褦ˡ̤ʸβɤˤϥޥ󤬤롥ԤβɥץҲ𤹤ϰΥߥƥ꡼ȤäƤ褯ºݤ˿¿ǤƤ롥¿ʸηϤ򰷤äƤɤߤ䤹ȤǤϡˤǤ롥ܼ󤲤ȡʷϵĤ

åФɤ
ڥ륷ܸʸ
٥ҥȥɤιʸ
ܸʸǽ񤫤줿֥Υ
᡼ʸκȯ
ҥåȤʸ
ʥʸȥե٥åȤε
ȥꥢ
泤θʸ
쥿ߥʸȯ
ʸBȷ۲ȥȥꥹ
٥ꥢǸĤäȥ륳ʸ
ùʸʸ
ۥȰפʸ
奤ǥνʸ
ʸȥʸ
եȥαפʸA
롼ʸȥʸ
εȥѥʸ
ǸŤʸϤɤޤǤɤ뤫
ʸϤ˲ɤ뤫

(234) ϡǽϡָʸϤ˲ɤ뤫פǡߤޤǤʸɤˤ4ʳʬƤ롥

(1) ꤵλʰȬ
(2) ޥλʰ
(3) λȾ
(4) ʳŪõλȾ


褯ħȤ館ʬǤ롥ʸɤޥͶΤϡ줬ݱʤ۹ȽŤʤ뤫(2) Ρ֥ޥλפطʤˤϡ֥衼åؤλüŪˤп̱ϼ (239) äȤϵʤJean-François Champollion (1790--1832) Υå (Rosetta stone) βɤˤʩѤ褤ؤäƤ뤷ܸʸɤ˹׸ Sir Henry Creswicke Rawlinson (1810--95) βַͤä
(3) λϡŪ˹͸ųŪȯ꼡Ȥȴط롥쥿硤ҥåȡХӥ˥ץȡơҤȯˤꡤ³ȿʸȯƤϲɤλߤդƤä
³ (4) λϡλΤ褦˸ĿͤγؼԤ֤ȲɤĩȤϡԽĤ׵Ѥ䥳ԥ塼ȤưŹ򤯤Τ褦ˤ̤ʸ˸Ǥ롥ء׳ءŹɤμˡѤʤĴʤƤˤʤäϤʸɤΡ֥ޥפλȤϸȤ⡤Ȥƥޥ󤽤ΤΤϻĤäƤΤǤ롥

ʸסزɡʸ١˼1999

Referrer (Inside): [2018-11-26-1] [2016-09-16-1]

[ | ѥڡ ]

Powered by WinChalow1.0rc4 based on chalow