Sabtu, 29 Mei 2010

Wind

Wind

Wind .....
Fresh my mind
Blow to my body
Fly my heart like kite

Wind...
Clean all my demon in soul
Destroy this body from bad evil and
Broke my bad manners

Wind...
Flow and wash all worst become pure
Make perfect and sure
Until l conscious from dark life

Wind...
You know what l meant
Please help me for all
You’re a wisdom that l pray

Wind...
Take and clutch my soul
Torture me cause sin
And bring me to the heaven

Contrastive Analysis in what position

Is Contrastive Analysis Generalist or Particularist? Immanence or Comparison? Diachronic or Synchronic?
1. Generalist vs. Particularist
James (1980: 1) explains generalist is linguists consider the general phenomenon of human language.
James (1980: 1) explains particularist is linguists consider the individual languages: French, English, Indonesian language, etc
2. Immanence vs. Comparison
Immanence: study one language in isolation, discover particular language permanently different to any other language by James (1980: 1).
Comparison: even every language has its individuality, all languages have in common to be compared by James (1980: 2).
3. Diachronic vs. synchronic
Diachronic: everything that has to do with evolution, that is changing within the human individual and historical sense by De Saussure (1959: 81).
Synchronic: everything that relates to the static side of science, of a language-state, that is languages are typologically grouped according to their present-day characteristics (belong to the same grouping), not according to histories of the languages by De Saussure (1959: 81)
The data are taken by slide of lecturer (Mr Masduki)
Diachronic Linguistics
The historical linguistics primarily study about language that looks real related to similarities like vocabulary, word-formation and syntax. The historical linguistics purposes to classify all languages in the world by their affiliation genetic and to trace the historic development of language. The study focuses to lot of area from Indo-European language.
Language always changes over time. Every period there are no similarities with the origin language and perhaps the origin is not use in next time. Sometimes, people confuses with the origin language and never find the origin language although this language from the same area. It shows that every time, language changes by user. For example: if a group of Americans were sent to a distant galaxy, after 10,000 years they would be speaking a language that would be no more similar to English than to Chinese or Arabic.
The historical linguists develop assumption and one idea pioneered by linguist August Schleicher. The basis of the term is comparative: languages presumed to be related to compare with others, and bases to general known about how language can change. Linguist reconstructs the best hypothesis about the nature of the common ancestor language from which the attested languages are descended.
Use of the comparative method is ratified by this application for whose the common ancestor language is known. The comparative method allows us to distinguish true linguistic descent (that is, the passing of a language from parents to children, down through the generations) from accidental resemblance due to cultural contact. For example, the majority of the vocabulary of Persian (Farsi) is taken from Arabic, as a result of the Arab conquest of Iran in the 8th century and much subsequent cultural contact. Yet Persian is Indo-European, being a member of the Indo-Iranian branch that also includes Sanskrit and many of the languages of modern India. The clue that Persian is Indo-European is that its core vocabulary generally has Indo-European cognates (as in madar 'mother'), and its essential grammatical elements are likewise Indo-European (as in bud 'was', which includes elements related to English "be" and the English past tense ending "-ed".)
The comparative method has been successfully used to reconstruct some very large language families, notably Austronesian (which includes Hawaiian, Tagalog, Indonesian, and Malagasy) and Niger-Congo (the majority of the languages of modern Africa). Once the various changes in the daughter branches have been worked out, and a fair amount of the core vocabulary and grammar of the protolanguage are understood, then scholars will quite generally agree that a relationship of genetic relatedness has been proven.
http://www.knowledgerush.com/kr/encyclopedia/Diachronic_linguistics/ downloaded 3th April 2010
Saussure’s Concept
Saussure distinguishes between synchronic (static) linguistics and diachronic (evolutionary) linguistics. Synchronic linguistics is the study of language at a particular point in time. Diachronic linguistics is the study of the history or evolution of language.
According to Saussure, diachronic change originates in the social activity of speech. Changes occur in individual patterns of speaking before becoming more widely accepted as a part of language. Speaking is an activity which involves oral and auditory communication between individuals. Language is the set of rules by which individuals are able to understand each other.
Saussure says that nothing comes in written language without having been tested in spoken language. Language is changed by the rearranging and reinterpreting of its units. A unit is a segment of the spoken chain that corresponds to a particular concept. Saussure explains that the units of language can have a synchronic or diachronic arrangement.
http://www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/saussure.html downloaded 3th April 2010
The result of these questions are contrastive analysis can be as particularistic and also generalist. Somewhere, contrastive analysis intermediate on a scale between these terms (James 1980: 2). There are also possible that contrastive analysis as immanence and comparison. James (1980: 168) explains “...a sufficient basis for comparison that each language makes use of small class of function word…” and also (1980: 169) “…make sure that we are comparing like this with like this: this means that the two (or more) entities to be compared…”. It seems that contrastive analysis can be called comparison. If we see above, each of diachronic and synchronic is contrastive analysis (James 1980: 2).