FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107  
108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   124   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   >>   >|  
defining ideas that are irrelevant to the proposition as a whole but that give a radical element a particular increment of significance and that are thus inherently related in a specific way to concepts of type I[65] III. _Concrete Relational Concepts_ (still more abstract, yet not entirely devoid of a measure of concreteness): normally expressed by affixing non-radical elements to radical elements, but generally at a greater remove from these than is the case with elements of type II, or by inner modification of radical elements; differ fundamentally from type II in indicating or implying relations that transcend the particular word to which they are immediately attached, thus leading over to IV. _Pure Relational Concepts_ (purely abstract): normally expressed by affixing non-radical elements to radical elements (in which case these concepts are frequently intertwined with those of type III) or by their inner modification, by independent words, or by position; serve to relate the concrete elements of the proposition to each other, thus giving it definite syntactic form. [Footnote 64: Except, of course, the fundamental selection and contrast necessarily implied in defining one concept as against another. "Man" and "white" possess an inherent relation to "woman" and "black," but it is a relation of conceptual content only and is of no direct interest to grammar.] [Footnote 65: Thus, the _-er_ of _farmer_ may he defined as indicating that particular substantive concept (object or thing) that serves as the habitual subject of the particular verb to which it is affixed. This relation of "subject" (_a farmer farms_) is inherent in and specific to the word; it does not exist for the sentence as a whole. In the same way the _-ling_ of _duckling_ defines a specific relation of attribution that concerns only the radical element, not the sentence.] The nature of these four classes of concepts as regards their concreteness or their power to express syntactic relations may be thus symbolized: _ Material _/ I. Basic Concepts Content \_ II. Derivational Concepts _ Relation _/ III. Concrete Relational Concepts \_ IV. Pure Relational Concepts These schemes must not be worshipped as fetiches. In the actual work of analysis difficult problems frequently arise and we may well be in doubt as to how to gro
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107  
108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   124   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

elements

 

radical

 
Concepts
 

Relational

 

relation

 
concepts
 

specific

 

modification

 

syntactic

 

indicating


Footnote

 

subject

 
farmer
 

concept

 
frequently
 
inherent
 
sentence
 

relations

 

proposition

 

concreteness


element

 

Concrete

 
abstract
 

affixing

 

expressed

 

defining

 
affixed
 

direct

 

interest

 

grammar


habitual

 

defined

 

substantive

 

object

 

serves

 

defines

 

fetiches

 
Material
 

actual

 

symbolized


Content

 

worshipped

 
schemes
 
Relation
 

Derivational

 

analysis

 

express

 
attribution
 

concerns

 

duckling