ენობრივ ფორმათა ფუნქციური „კლასტერები“ სხვადასხვა ლინგვისტიკურ დონეზე ქართულში

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorასათიანი/ Asatiani, რუსუდან/ Rusudan
dc.date.accessioned2022-07-05T07:54:12Z
dc.date.available2022-07-05T07:54:12Z
dc.date.issued2022-04-27
dc.descriptionივანე ჯავახიშვილის დაბადებიდან 146-ე წლისთავისადმი მიძღვნილი სამეცნიერო კონფერენციაen_US
dc.description.abstractThe main task of structural linguistics is to identify and describe the relationship between the “signifier” and the “signified” of the “sign”. The study of these relations is effective if all three aspects of the sign are taken into account, both syntactic or semantic, and pragmatic. Foregrounding of the pragmatic aspect implies a shift in emphasis from the meaning of the sign to its functions: in the functional approach, the sign is analyzed not only from the point of view of its meaning and form but also from the point of view of its functions in the language system. From a functional point of view, it becomes clear that sometimes a one-to-one correspondence between the signifier (res. value) and the signifier (res. form) cannot be established, since it may be that 1. the form of one linguistic sign expresses several meanings at the same time; And, vice versa, 2. different forms of various linguistic signs refer to one function, and these signs function as one unit in the language system. Patterns of such morphemes are common in so-called fusion languages, where one morpheme expresses several meanings at the same time; For example, in the Georgian language, a morpheme denoting III-Person of a Subject simultaneously expresses a set of meanings: either {S, III, Active Verb, Present}, or {S, III, Subjunctive Mood}. Such cases of fusion (one form ßà several meanings) are quite common in the grammatical system of the Georgian language and are even properly analyzed. However, the second case: {one meaning/function ßà several forms} – is less identified and studied in Georgian. At the level of phonology, the so-called Harmonic Complexes identified and studied by Akhvlediani are an example of such clusters. The article reveals and analyzes examples of such “Functional Clusters” in Georgian at the level of morphology and/or syntax.en_US
dc.identifier.citationივანე ჯავახიშვილის სახელობის თბილისის სახელმწიფო უნივერსიტეტის ჰუმანიტარულ მეცნიერებათა ფაკულტეტი, ჰუმანიტარულ მეცნიერებათა აქტუალური პრობლემები, თეზისები, თბილისი, 2022, გვ.: 11-14en_US
dc.identifier.issn1987–9970
dc.identifier.urihttps://dspace.tsu.ge/handle/123456789/1741
dc.language.isogeen_US
dc.subjectფუნქციური გრამატიკაen_US
dc.subjectჰარმონიული კომპლექსებიen_US
dc.subjectმორფემული კლასტერებიen_US
dc.subjectზმნური კლასტერებიen_US
dc.subjectfunctional grammaren_US
dc.subjectharmonic complexesen_US
dc.subjectmorphemic clustersen_US
dc.subjectverb clustersen_US
dc.titleენობრივ ფორმათა ფუნქციური „კლასტერები“ სხვადასხვა ლინგვისტიკურ დონეზე ქართულშიen_US
dc.title.alternativeTHE FUNCTIONAL “CLUSTERS” OF LINGUISTIC FORMS AT THE DIFFERENT LINGUISTIC LEVELS IN GEORGIANen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
2.Rusudan Asatiani-ივანე ჯავახიშვილი - 146 (2)-11-14.pdf
Size:
58.25 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
Article