In typography, a glyph is an elemental symbol within an agreed set of symbols, intended to represent a readable character for the purposes of writing. Glyphs are considered to be unique marks that collectively add up to the spelling of a word or contribute to a specific meaning of what is written, with that meaning dependent on cultural and social usage. In most languages written in any variety of the Latin alphabet, the dot on a lower-case i is not a glyph because it does not convey any distinction, an i in which the dot has been accidentally omitted is still to be recognized correctly. However, in Turkish it is a glyph because that language has two distinct versions of the letter i, with and without a dot. In Japanese syllabaries, a number of the characters are made up of more than one separate mark, but in general these separate marks are not glyphs because they have no meaning by themselves. However, in some cases, additional marks fulfill the role of diacritics, to differentiate distinct characters.
Such additional marks constitute glyphs. In general, a diacritic is a glyph if it is contiguous with the rest of the character like a cedilla in French, the ogonek in several languages, or the stroke on a Polish "Ł"; some characters such as "æ" in Icelandic and the "ß" in German may be regarded as glyphs. They were ligatures, but over time have become characters in their own right. However, a ligature such as "ſi", treated in some typefaces as a single unit, is arguably not a glyph as this is just a quirk of the typeface an allographic feature, includes more than one grapheme. In normal handwriting long words are written "joined up", without the pen leaving the paper, the form of each written letter will vary depending on which letters precede and follow it, but that does not make the whole word into a single glyph. Two or more glyphs which have the same significance, whether used interchangeably or chosen depending on context, are called allographs of each other; the term has been used in English since 1727, borrowed from glyphe, from the Greek γλυφή, glyphē, "carving," and the verb γλύφειν, glýphein, "to hollow out, carve".
The word hieroglyph has a longer history in English, dating from an early use in an English to Italian dictionary published by John Florio in 1598, referencing the complex and mysterious characters of the Egyptian alphabet. The word glyph first came to widespread European attention with the engravings and lithographs from Frederick Catherwood's drawings of undeciphered glyphs of the Maya civilization in the early 1840s. In graphonomics, the term glyph is used for a noncharacter, i.e. either a subcharacter or multicharacter pattern. Most typographic glyphs originate from the characters of a typeface. In a typeface each character corresponds to a single glyph, but there are exceptions, such as a font used for a language with a large alphabet or complex writing system, where one character may correspond to several glyphs, or several characters to one glyph. In archaeology, a glyph is a inscribed symbol, it may be part of a writing system such as a syllable, or a logogram. A glyph is "the specific shape, design, or representation of a character".
It is a particular graphical representation, in a particular typeface, of an element of written language, which could be a grapheme, or part of a grapheme, or sometimes several graphemes in combination. If there is more than one allograph of a unit of writing, the choice between them depends on context or on the preference of the author, they now have to be treated as separate glyphs, because mechanical arrangements have to be available to differentiate between them and to print whichever of them is required; the same is true in computing. In computing as well as typography, the term "character" refers to a grapheme or grapheme-like unit of text, as found in natural language writing systems. In typography and computing, the range of graphemes is broader than in a written language in other ways too: a typographical font has to cope with a range of different languages each of which contribute their own graphemes, it may be required to print other symbols such as dingbats; the range of glyphs required increases correspondingly.
In summary, in typography and computing, a glyph is a graphical unit. Character encoding Complex text layout HTML decimal character rendering Letterform Palaeography, the study of ancient writing Punchcutting The dictionary definition of glyph at Wiktionary Media related to Glyphs at Wikimedia Commons
In linguistics, morphology is the study of words, how they are formed, their relationship to other words in the same language. It analyzes the structure of words and parts of words, such as stems, root words and suffixes. Morphology looks at parts of speech and stress, the ways context can change a word's pronunciation and meaning. Morphology differs from morphological typology, the classification of languages based on their use of words, lexicology, the study of words and how they make up a language's vocabulary. While words, along with clitics, are accepted as being the smallest units of syntax, in most languages, if not all, many words can be related to other words by rules that collectively describe the grammar for that language. For example, English speakers recognize that the words dog and dogs are related, differentiated only by the plurality morpheme "-s", only found bound to noun phrases. Speakers of English, a fusional language, recognize these relations from their innate knowledge of English's rules of word formation.
They infer intuitively. By contrast, Classical Chinese has little morphology, using exclusively unbound morphemes and depending on word order to convey meaning; these are understood as grammars. The rules understood by a speaker reflect specific patterns or regularities in the way words are formed from smaller units in the language they are using, how those smaller units interact in speech. In this way, morphology is the branch of linguistics that studies patterns of word formation within and across languages and attempts to formulate rules that model the knowledge of the speakers of those languages. Phonological and orthographic modifications between a base word and its origin may be partial to literacy skills. Studies have indicated that the presence of modification in phonology and orthography makes morphologically complex words harder to understand and that the absence of modification between a base word and its origin makes morphologically complex words easier to understand. Morphologically complex words are easier to comprehend.
Polysynthetic languages, such as Chukchi, have words composed of many morphemes. The Chukchi word "təmeyŋəlevtpəγtərkən", for example, meaning "I have a fierce headache", is composed of eight morphemes t-ə-meyŋ-ə-levt-pəγt-ə-rkən that may be glossed; the morphology of such languages allows for each consonant and vowel to be understood as morphemes, while the grammar of the language indicates the usage and understanding of each morpheme. The discipline that deals with the sound changes occurring within morphemes is morphophonology; the history of morphological analysis dates back to the ancient Indian linguist Pāṇini, who formulated the 3,959 rules of Sanskrit morphology in the text Aṣṭādhyāyī by using a constituency grammar. The Greco-Roman grammatical tradition engaged in morphological analysis. Studies in Arabic morphology, conducted by Marāḥ al-arwāḥ and Aḥmad b. ‘alī Mas‘ūd, date back to at least 1200 CE. The linguistic term "morphology" was coined by August Schleicher in 1859; the term "word" has no well-defined meaning.
Instead, two related terms are used in morphology: word-form. A lexeme is a set of inflected word-forms, represented with the citation form in small capitals. For instance, the lexeme eat contains the word-forms eat, eats and ate. Eat and eats are thus considered. Eat and Eater, on the other hand, are different lexemes. Thus, there are three rather different notions of ‘word’. Here are examples from other languages of the failure of a single phonological word to coincide with a single morphological word form. In Latin, one way to express the concept of'NOUN-PHRASE1 and NOUN-PHRASE2' is to suffix'-que' to the second noun phrase: "apples oranges-and", as it were. An extreme level of this theoretical quandary posed by some phonological words is provided by the Kwak'wala language. In Kwak'wala, as in a great many other languages, meaning relations between nouns, including possession and "semantic case", are formulated by affixes instead of by independent "words"; the three-word English phrase, "with his club", where'with' identifies its dependent noun phrase as an instrument and'his' denotes a possession relation, would consist of two words or just one word in many languages.
Unlike most languages, Kwak'wala semantic affixes phonologically attach not to the lexeme they pertain to semantically, but to the preceding lexeme. Consider the following example:kwixʔid-i-da bəgwanəmai-χ-a q'asa-s-isi t'alwagwayu Morpheme by morpheme translation: kwixʔid-i-da = clubbed-PIVOT-DETERMINERbəgwanəma-χ-a = man-ACCUSATIVE-DETERMINERq'asa-s-is = otter-INSTRUMENTAL-3SG-POSSESSIVEt'alwagwayu = club"the man clubbed the otter with his club."That is, to the speaker of Kwak'wala, the sentence does not contain the "words"'him-the-otter' or'with-his-club' Instead, the markers -i-da, referring to "man", attaches not to the noun bəgwanəma but to the verb.
In linguistics, a word is the smallest element that can be uttered in isolation with objective or practical meaning. This contrasts with a morpheme, the smallest unit of meaning but will not stand on its own. A word may consist of a single morpheme, or several, whereas a morpheme may not be able to stand on its own as a word. A complex word will include a root and one or more affixes, or more than one root in a compound. Words can be put together to build larger elements of language, such as phrases and sentences; the term word may refer to a spoken word or to a written word, or sometimes to the abstract concept behind either. Spoken words are made up of units of sound called phonemes, written words of symbols called graphemes, such as the letters of the English alphabet; the difficulty of deciphering a word depends on the language. Dictionaries categorize a language's lexicon into lemmas; these can be taken as an indication of what constitutes a "word" in the opinion of the writers of that language.
The most appropriate means of measuring the length of a word is by counting its syllables or morphemes. When a word has multiple definitions or multiple senses, it may result in confusion in a debate or discussion. Leonard Bloomfield introduced the concept of "Minimal Free Forms" in 1926. Words are thought of as the smallest meaningful unit of speech; this correlates phonemes to lexemes. However, some written words are not minimal free forms; some semanticists have put forward a theory of so-called semantic primitives or semantic primes, indefinable words representing fundamental concepts that are intuitively meaningful. According to this theory, semantic primes serve as the basis for describing the meaning, without circularity, of other words and their associated conceptual denotations. In the Minimalist school of theoretical syntax, words are construed as "bundles" of linguistic features that are united into a structure with form and meaning. For example, the word "koalas" has semantic features, category features, number features, phonological features, etc.
The task of defining what constitutes a "word" involves determining where one word ends and another word begins—in other words, identifying word boundaries. There are several ways to determine where the word boundaries of spoken language should be placed: Potential pause: A speaker is told to repeat a given sentence allowing for pauses; the speaker will tend to insert pauses at the word boundaries. However, this method is not foolproof: the speaker could break up polysyllabic words, or fail to separate two or more linked words. Indivisibility: A speaker is told to say a sentence out loud, is told to say the sentence again with extra words added to it. Thus, I have lived in this village for ten years might become My family and I have lived in this little village for about ten or so years; these extra words will tend to be added in the word boundaries of the original sentence. However, some languages have infixes; some have separable affixes. Phonetic boundaries: Some languages have particular rules of pronunciation that make it easy to spot where a word boundary should be.
For example, in a language that stresses the last syllable of a word, a word boundary is to fall after each stressed syllable. Another example can be seen in a language that has vowel harmony: the vowels within a given word share the same quality, so a word boundary is to occur whenever the vowel quality changes. Not all languages have such convenient phonetic rules, those that do present the occasional exceptions. Orthographic boundaries: See below. In languages with a literary tradition, there is interrelation between orthography and the question of what is considered a single word. Word separators are common in modern orthography of languages using alphabetic scripts, but these are a modern development. In English orthography, compound expressions may contain spaces. For example, ice cream, air raid shelter and get up each are considered to consist of more than one word. Not all languages delimit words expressly. Mandarin Chinese is a analytic language, making it unnecessary to delimit words orthographically.
However, there are many multiple-morpheme compounds in Mandarin, as well as a variety of bound morphemes that make it difficult to determine what constitutes a word. Sometimes, languages which are close grammatically will consider the same order of words in different ways. For example, reflexive verbs in the French infinitive are separate from their respective particle, e.g. se laver, whereas in Portuguese they are hyphenated, e.g. lavar-se, in Spanish they are joined, e.g. lavarse. Japanese uses orthographic cues to delim
A reference work is a book or periodical to which one can refer for information. The information is intended to be found when needed. Reference works are referred to for particular pieces of information, rather than read beginning to end; the writing style used in these works is informative. Many reference works are compiled by a team of contributors whose work is coordinated by one or more editors rather than by an individual author. Indices are provided in many types of reference work. Updated editions are published as needed, in some cases annually. Reference works include dictionaries, encyclopedias, almanacs and catalogs. Many reference works are available in electronic form and can be obtained as application software, CD-ROMs, DVDs, or online through the Internet. A reference work is useful to its users. In comparison, a reference book or reference-only book in a library is one that may only be used in the library and may not be borrowed from the library. Many such books are reference works, which are used or photocopied from, therefore, do not need to be borrowed.
Keeping reference books in the library assures that they will always be available for use on demand. Some reference-only books are too valuable to permit borrowers to take them out. Reference-only items may be shelved in a reference collection located separately from circulating items; some libraries consist or to a large extent, of books which may not be borrowed. An electronic resource is a piece of information, stored electronically, found on a computer, including information, available on the internet. Libraries offer numerous types of electronic resources, such as subject research guides, electronic books and texts, electronic journals, library catalogs, reference sources, statistical sources, sound recordings, image databases. Plagiarism GeneralAmerican Reference Books Annual: ARBA. Littleton, Col.: Libraries Unlimited, 1970- Bergenholtz, H. Nielsen, S. Tarp, S.: Lexicography at a Crossroads: Dictionaries and Encyclopedias Today, Lexicographical Tools Tomorrow. Peter Lang 2009. ISBN 978-3-03911-799-4 Higgens, G. ed.
Printed Reference Material London: Library Association Katz, W. A. Introduction to Reference Work. New York: McGraw-Hill Nielsen, Sandro "The Effect of Lexicographical Information Costs on Dictionary Making and Use". In: Lexikos 18, 170-189. Guides to reference worksSheehy's Guide is less international in its scope than Walford: "It seems that Walford is a somewhat better balanced work than Winchell, is much more comprehensive"--American Reference Books Annual, quoted in Walford, A. J. Walford's Concise Guide to Reference Material. London: Library Association ISBN 0-85365-882-X. Heeks, P. comp. Books of Reference for School Libraries: an annotated list. Les sources du travail bibligraphique. 3 vols. in 4. Geneva: Droz, 1950-58 Sheehy, E. P. et al. comps. Guide to Reference Books. Aufl. hrg. von W. Totok, K.-H. Weimann, R. Weitzel. Frankfurt am Main: Klostermann Day, Alan. Walford's Guide to Reference Material. London: Library Association Publishing. CS1 maint: Extra text: authors list Walford, A. J.. Walford's Guide to Reference Material.
London: Library Association
Lexical semantics, is a subfield of linguistic semantics. The units of analysis in lexical semantics are lexical units which include not only words but sub-words or sub-units such as affixes and compound words and phrases. Lexical units make up the catalogue of words in the lexicon. Lexical semantics looks at how the meaning of the lexical units correlates with the structure of the language or syntax; this is referred to as syntax-semantic interface. The study of lexical semantics looks at: the classification and decomposition of lexical items the differences and similarities in lexical semantic structure cross-linguistically the relationship of lexical meaning to sentence meaning and syntax. Lexical units referred to as syntactic atoms, can stand alone such as in the case of root words or parts of compound words or they attach to other units such as prefixes and suffixes do; the former are called the latter bound morphemes. They can combine with each other to generate new meanings. Lexical items contain information about category and meaning.
The semantics related to these categories relate to each lexical item in the lexicon. Lexical items can be semantically classified based on whether their meanings are derived from single lexical units or from their surrounding environment. Lexical items participate in regular patterns of association with each other; some relations between lexical items include hyponymy, hypernymy and antonymy, as well as homonymy. Hyponymy and hypernymy refers to a relationship between a general term and the more specific terms that fall under the category of the general term. For example, the colors red, green and yellow are hyponyms, they fall under the general term of color, the hypernym. Hyponyms and hypernyms can be described by using a taxonomy. Synonymy refers to words that contain the same meaning. Antonymy refers to words. There are three types of antonyms: graded antonyms, complementary antonyms, relational antonyms. Homonymy refers to the relationship between words that are spelled or pronounced the same way but hold different meanings.
Lexical semantics explores whether the meaning of a lexical unit is established by looking at its neighbourhood in the semantic net, or whether the meaning is locally contained in the lexical unit. In English, WordNet is an example of a semantic network, it contains English words. Some semantic relations between these synsets are meronymy, hyponymy and antonymy. First proposed by Trier in the 1930s, semantic field theory proposes that a group of words with interrelated meanings can be categorized under a larger conceptual domain; this entire entity is thereby known as a semantic field. The words boil, bake and roast, for example, would fall under the larger semantic category of cooking. Semantic field theory asserts that lexical meaning cannot be understood by looking at a word in isolation, but by looking at a group of semantically related words. Semantic relations can refer to any relationship in meaning between lexemes, including synonymy, antonymy and hyponymy, incompatibility. Semantic field theory does not have concrete guidelines that determine the extent of semantic relations between lexemes.
The abstract validity of the theory is a subject of debate. Knowing the meaning of a lexical item therefore means knowing the semantic entailments the word brings with it. However, it is possible to understand only one word of a semantic field without understanding other related words. Take, for example, a taxonomy of plants and animals: it is possible to understand the words rose and rabbit without knowing what a marigold or a muskrat is; this is applicable to colors as well, such as understanding the word red without knowing the meaning of scarlet, but understanding scarlet without knowing the meaning of red may be less likely. A semantic field can thus be large or small, depending on the level of contrast being made between lexical items. While cat and dog both fall under the larger semantic field of animal, including the breed of dog, like German shepherd, would require contrasts between other breeds of dog, thus expanding the semantic field further. Event structure is defined as the semantic relation of its syntactic properties.
Event structure has three primary components: primitive event type of the lexical item event composition rules mapping rules to lexical structureVerbs can belong to one of three types: states, processes, or transitions. Defines the state of the door being closed. Gives the intransitive use of the verb close, with no explicit mention of the causer, but makes explicit mention of the agent involved in the action; the analysis of these different lexical units had a decisive role in the field of "generative linguistics" during the 1960s. The term generative was proposed by Noam Chomsky in his book Syntactic Structures published in 1957; the term generative linguistics was based on Chomsky's generative grammar, a linguistic theory that states systematic sets of rules can predict grammatical phrases within a natural language. Generative Linguistics is known as Government-Binding Theory. Generative linguists of the 1960s, includin
An idiom is a phrase or an expression that has a figurative, or sometimes literal, meaning. Categorized as formulaic language, an idiom's figurative meaning is different from the literal meaning. There are thousands of idioms, occurring in all languages, it is estimated that there are at least twenty-five thousand idiomatic expressions in the English language. Many idiomatic expressions, in their original use, had literal meaning. Sometimes the attribution of a literal meaning can change as the phrase becomes disconnected from its original roots, leading to a folk etymology. For instance, spill the beans has been said to originate from an ancient method of democratic voting, wherein a voter would put a bean into one of several cups to indicate which candidate he wanted to cast his vote for. If the jars were spilled before the counting of votes was complete, anyone would be able to see which jar had more beans, therefore which candidate was the winner. Over time, the practice was discontinued and the idiom became figurative.
However, this etymology for spill the beans has been questioned by linguists. The earliest known written accounts come from the USA and involve horse racing around 1902–1903, the one who "spilled the beans" was an unlikely horse who won a race, thus causing the favorites to lose. By 1907 the term was being used in baseball, but the subject who "spilled the beans" shifted to players who made mistakes, allowing the other team to win. By 1908 the term was starting to be applied to politics, in the sense that crossing the floor in a vote was "spilling the beans". However, in all these early usages the term "spill" was used in the sense of "upset" rather than "divulge". A Stack Exchange discussion provided a large number of links to historic newspapers covering the usage of the term from 1902 onwards. Other idioms are deliberately figurative. Break a leg, used as an ironic way of wishing good luck in a performance or presentation, may have arisen from the belief that one ought not to utter the words "good luck" to an actor.
By wishing someone bad luck, it is supposed. In linguistics, idioms are presumed to be figures of speech contradicting the principle of compositionality; that compositionality is the key notion for the analysis of idioms is emphasized in most accounts of idioms. This principle states that the meaning of a whole should be constructed from the meanings of the parts that make up the whole. In other words, one should be in a position to understand the whole if one understands the meanings of each of the parts that make up the whole; the following example is employed to illustrate the point: Fred kicked the bucket. Understood compositionally, Fred has kicked an actual, physical bucket; the much more idiomatic reading, however, is non-compositional: Fred is understood to have died. Arriving at the idiomatic reading from the literal reading is unlikely for most speakers. What this means is that the idiomatic reading is, stored as a single lexical item, now independent of the literal reading. In phraseology, idioms are defined as a sub-type of phraseme, the meaning of, not the regular sum of the meanings of its component parts.
John Saeed defines an idiom as collocated words that became affixed to each other until metamorphosing into a fossilised term. This collocation of words redefines each component word in the word-group and becomes an idiomatic expression. Idioms do not translate well; when two or three words are used together in a particular sequence, the words are said to be irreversible binomials, or Siamese twins. Usage will prevent the words from being rearranged. For example, a person may be left "high and dry" but never "dry and high"; this idiom in turn means that the person is left in their former condition rather than being assisted so that their condition improves. Not all Siamese twins are idioms, however. "Chips and dip" is an irreversible binomial, but it refers to literal food items, not idiomatic ones. Idioms possess varying degrees of mobility. While some idioms are used only in a routine form, others can undergo syntactic modifications such as passivization, raising constructions, clefting, demonstrating separable constituencies within the idiom.
Mobile idioms, allowing such movement, maintain their idiomatic meaning where fixed idioms do not: Mobile I spilled the beans on our project. → The beans were spilled on our project. Fixed The old man kicked the bucket. → The bucket was kicked. Many fixed idioms lack semantic composition, meaning that the idiom contains the semantic role of a verb, but not of any object; this is true of kick the bucket. By contrast, the semantically composite idiom spill the beans, meaning reveal a secret, contains both a semantic verb and object and secret. Semantically composite idioms have a syntactic similarity between their semantic forms; the types of movement allowed for certain idiom relate to the degree to which the literal reading of the idiom has a connection to its idiomatic meaning. This is referred to as transparency. While most idioms that do not display semantic composition do not allow non-adjectival modification, those that are motivated allow lexical substitution. For example, oil the wheels and grease the wheels allow variation for nouns that elicit a similar literal meaning.
These types of changes can occur only when speakers c
A referent is a person or thing to which a name – a linguistic expression or other symbol – refers. For example, in the sentence Mary saw me, the referent of the word Mary is the particular person called Mary, being spoken of, while the referent of the word me is the person uttering the sentence. Two expressions which have the same referent are said to be co-referential. In the sentence John had his dog with him, for instance, the noun John and the pronoun him are co-referential, since they both refer to the same person; the word'referent' may be considered to derive from the Latin referentem, the present participle of the verb referre. It is defined in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary as "one, referred to. A subsequent meaning is "a word referring to another"; the next meaning, which appears to stand in opposition to the previous meaning, as well as to the meaning implied by the etymology, is nonetheless the one which has gained currency: "that to which something has reference". This sense is first recorded in Richards' The Meaning of Meaning.
In logic, the word referent is sometimes used to denote one of the two objects participating in a relation, the other being called the relatum. In fields such as semantics and the theory of reference, a distinction is made between a referent and a reference. Reference is a relationship in which a sign signifies something; the referent may be an actual person or object, or may be something more abstract, such as a set of actions. Reference and referents were considered at length in the 1923 book The Meaning of Meaning by the Cambridge scholars C. K. Ogden and I. A. Richards. Ogden has pointed out that reference is a psychological process, that referents themselves may be psychological – existing in the imagination of the referrer, not in the real world. For further ideas related to this observation, see failure to refer. Considerations of the possible arrangement of expressions which may be co-referential – having the same referent – have been undertaken by linguists engaged in the study of syntax since Noam Chomsky's launch of Government and Binding Theory in the 1980s.
The subject of binding is concerned with the possible syntactic positions of co-referential noun phrases and pronouns. Attempts are made to explain phenomena such as that illustrated by the following pair of sentences: Before she dried off, Mary was wet, she dried off. In the first sentence and Mary may have the same referent, but in the second they cannot. More details of these considerations can be found in the articles on GBT and binding linked to above. Considerations of references and their referents are sometimes of importance in computing and programming. References play a role in the Perl programming language, for example, the ref function is used to obtain the type of the referent of an object. Referring expression Language-game Private language argument The dictionary definition of referent at Wiktionary