Guskova O.V.

Moscow Institute of Linguistics.

Methodological problems of studies of the word in the

General Theory of Language.

The problem of the word as the generalization of certain scientific views and positions, undoubtedly, is one of the fundamental and traditional for the General Theory of Language. Extensive range of issues that make up this topic, however, still remains open. The most controversial cases are the general principles of the approach to word selection to be in this regard, language facts, methods of their description and comparison. A commonly accepted theoretical (conceptual) definition of the word, satisfying all the linguists, does not exist yet.

The greatest number of differences arises in connection with the criteria for the words selection, as evidenced by the presence of so-called lexical, grammatical, syntactic, phonetic and other words in the conceptual apparatus of General Linguistics. The basis of such terms is one or another aspect of the coverage of words taken as essential.

To define words a number of linguists recourse to the lexical criterian. The word from this point of view is characterized as a lexeme representing a set of word forms differing only in inflection and not in core meaning, such as house (= HOUSE –contains the grammatical meanings of the singular and nominative ), goes ( =GO–implies the grammatical meaning of the third person, singular and active, shows the present tense) etc. In some particular cases a lexeme may consist of only one word form: for example, the lexeme tomorrow has only one grammatical form and, thus, consists of a single word form tomorrow.

As another possible criterion for the words selection can act their relative autonomy (separateness), the most universal manifestations of which are syntactic integrity (mobility and impenetrability). The reseachers adhere to such point of view state that mobility distinguishes a word form from morphemes, impenetrability – from words combination.

In inflectional languages such as Russian scientists sometimes additionally take into account the criterion of morphological, оr formal integrity of the word proposed by Smirnitsky A.I.. For instance, Russian willow herb (ivan-tchajØ –nominative, ivan-tchaj-a genitive, ivan-tchaj-u dative) is interpreted as a single word form – inflection indicates a change in grammatical function of the lexical unit as a whole. Contrariwise city-hero(gorod-gerojØ –nomiinative., gorod-a-geroj-a – genitive, gorod-u geroj-u –dative) is considered to be a combination of two word forms, separated from one another ( both forms are inflected).Thus, the word in accordance with the criterion mentioned above is a combination of morphemes having the same grammatical forms.

Unacceptability of some possible criteria for words selection in General Linguistics has being considered for submission in one or different languages.

Unsuitability , in particular, for the English language of understanding the word as potential minimum of a sentence (utterance) is illustrated by such examples as topsy-turvey ('upside down') and guinea pig. The first is considered to be one word, because as an utterance (e.g. answering to the question 'How? or 'In what way? ) may appear only combination as a whole, but not its components. The combination of guinea pig, despite its idiomatic сharacter(one of the criteria for words selection as well) is nevertheless interpreted not as one, but two words each of which is able to function as a separate utterance in a sentence.

Inconvenience of mobility and impenetrability as other criteria for words selection is proved on Russian and German languages material. It is pointed out for example that Russian pronouns such as nobody, nothing and German verbs with so-called "separable prefixes»: eintreten «enter», auffressen «eat"

can not be treated as one word, but as a combination of two word forms. Between the components of the pronouns can be inserted: no one, nowhere. The case of German verbs admits even a permutation: Er tritt ins Zimmer ein «he enters the room».

It is also impossible as it turns out to select words using different criteria (phonetic or phonological) at the same time. E.g. word forms selection in the Chinese on the basis of accent and tone reduction gives different results, because the tone of unstressed syllables is not always reduced. In some languages (modern French, many incorporating languages) phonetic word form either is not selected or coincides with syntagma or sentence.

The principal weakness of existing theories and concepts of the words , however, seems to lack a clear object of study: the words as language or speech units. In fact, their semantic, syntactic and often formal non-identity do not allow to define each of them as the word. Definition of the word, in our opinion, should be prefaced by labeling this term either to the a) units of language, or b) units of speech. It appears more logical to solve the issue of priority of two mentioned above aspects in favor of the latter. Offering doing this, we focus primarily on language intuition and instincts of native speakers using conventional material signs and symbols in speech communication.

It is common knowledge that in the speech as a complete semiotic act become a fact concrete meanings of language units, often exposed to serious modifications in the levels of phonetics and graphics. Actualized in the speech language units are transformed into units of the speech as well as a language functioning in the form of the speech does not more act as a language, but already the speech. Besides, despite the emergence of certain language units without passing the stage of the speech, the source material for creating them are, anyway, units of speech. No less significant is historical precedence of the speech to the language facts, the presence in the language of all that was once in the speech. The next step in the study of the word must be to identify its inherent characteristics by differentiated analysis of the texts both in written and oral forms of the speech. The objective existence of these forms of the speech cause differences in the ways, means, schemes of combination and transformation of language units functioning in it.