Thesis (Ph. D.)--Open University. BLDSC no. DXN117736.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Texas at Arlington, 2009.

No description available.

A study has been made on the infant, Sarah, from age 1 month up to 18 months. The main interest of the study was concerned with her phonetic and phonological development in the stages of: Crying, Babbling and First Words. As to the first stage, Crying, I intended to give as much coverage as possible to my subject's crying in the first six months of her life, attempting to analyze and explain it, making clear any differences in structure and content. According to the contextual situations in which they were produced, cries were categorized as: 1) Call Cries, 2) Protest Cries, and 3) Non-call Cries. Vocalizations included in the above categories were tested according to their manner of phonation, temporal patterning and melodic patterning. As to the Babbling stage, Sarah's babblings were tested against the following issues: - Variety of sounds produced, - Relation between babbling and speech, - Are babblings meaningless and playful?, and - Function. Finally, the child's first words were tested against the following issues: - Appearance of the first word, - Holophrases, and - Overextension.

This study is concerned, as its title suggests, with the syntactic order of adverbials in Standard English and Modern Standard Arabic. It is motivated by the fact that the area of adverbials is an extremely intractable area of English and Arabic grammars. Hence, it is a good candidate for an investigation. It is hypothesized that the particular problems which adverbials pose lie in the relative distributional freedom they enjoy in both languages. Semantic generalization will be related to the syntactic order of adverbials where necessary. Chapter one gives a brief survey of related work on adverbials. The scope of the study will delimit the relevant sections to be dealt with by drawing up lines for the major or minor points. The introduction presents a section of the rationale of the study and defines the data sources that constitute the corpus of the work. Chapter two is devoted to the factors influencing adverbial placement in English. Chapter three presents different views held towards the adverbial category, focusing on the work of those who have dealt with this class extensively. It also presents the different classifications given by grammarians concerned with the problem of adverbials. The classification adopted in this study is presented here. Chapter four is devoted to English adverbial positions with emphasis on the normal positions that each exponent of the three classes occupies. Other possible positions are investigated as well. Adverbials are classified on the grounds of function and position. Positions elicited from grammar books will be attested by citation from the material found in the newspapers which make up, in part, the corpus of the study. Still, it is questionable whether one can draw a clear-cut demarcation between the semantic/ syntactic orientation of adverbials since the crucial relationship remains indivisible between these two levels. Thus, this chapter manifests some semantic aspects, particularly those which are germane to the distributional properties of adverbials. In essence, chapter four can be considered an outgrowth of the foregoing chapters as it approaches the core of the problem. Chapter five involves a questionnaire comprising different types of structures which assist in the identification of English adverbial positions. This chapter can be considered as an attestation to what has been explored in the previous chapters. Thus far the study can be deemed as a practically-oriented one. Chapter six is an attempt to set out accounts of adverbial positions in Arabic. The topic of 'Arabic adverbial positions' is a virgin subject and needs extensive research work. No real consensus among grammarians exists on such linguistic explorations. Therefore, no comprehensive and reliable studies are available in the published literature. So the main contribution of this study is the presentation of data which categorise Arabic adverbials as a separate word class. Approximately the same procedure of classification adopted in chapter four will be followed. Chapter seven contains a questionnaire which can serve as a productive basis for testing Arabic adverbial positions investigated in the previous chapter. Chapter eight intends to give a contrastive study of the adverbial positions in the two languages under study on the basis of the data so far accumulated in this study. The three sources of data can be compared to show whether there is any affinity and/or disparity among adverbial positions. With this variety of data, we are in a position to distinguish the positions which adverbials are liable to occupy. Finally, the study ends with a pedagogy, which constitutes chapter nine, suggesting techniques for teaching such positions, after they have been refined and made easier to detect, to learners of both languages. It is hoped that the findings of the study will be utilised by language teachers and by textbook writers for materials preparation in this specific area of syntax.

No description available.

<p> This thesis aims to advance the idea that prosody is fundamentally about creating <i>cohesion,</i> that is, signaling the &ldquo;relations of meaning that exist within the text&rdquo; (Halliday &amp; Hasan 1976:4). Building on research on the cohesive function of prosody by Wichmann (2000) and Wennerstrom (2001), I show how each of the features generally referred to as prosodic are used by speakers to lend cohesion to their discourse by signaling the transitions from one unit of discourse to the next, the relations that hold between those units, and their relative prominence. To accomplish this, I look at six prosodic cues in &Eacute;kegusi&iacute;, a Great Lakes Bantu language of southwestern Kenya with lexical and grammatical tone (Cammenga 2002; Nash 2011). Those cues are pause, vowel elision, prosodic accent, pitch reset, isotony (intonational parallelism), and intonational contour. For each feature, I exemplify the ways in which it demarcates conceptually cohesive units of discourse, and/or signals the relations between one unit of speech and another. I show that when these prosodic cues appear, they create cohesive ties between one segment of discourse and another by signaling where one discourse topic ends and another begins, and indicating how &ndash; and how closely &ndash; the new discourse topic relates to the old (Couper-Kuhlen 2004; Swerts &amp; Geluykens 1994). Together with morphosyntactic devices for cohesion, such as anaphoric pronouns and reference, the cohesive ties created by prosody are what give coherence to the text, thus distinguishing it from a random assortment of unrelated utterances (Halliday &amp; Hasan 1976). I conclude by discussing how an understanding of prosody as a means for signaling discourse cohesion complements more interactional approaches to prosody (Barth-Weingarten 2013; Barth-Weingarten &amp; Reber 2010; Couper-Kuhlen &amp; Ford 2004), and provides a language-independent means of examining prosody crosslinguistically, thus laying a foundation for future typological studies. </p>

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.