

Grammar


Tenses


Present

Present Simple

Present Continuous

Present Perfect

Present Perfect Continuous


Past

Past Simple

Past Continuous

Past Perfect

Past Perfect Continuous


Future

Future Simple

Future Continuous

Future Perfect

Future Perfect Continuous


Parts Of Speech


Nouns

Countable and uncountable nouns

Verbal nouns

Singular and Plural nouns

Proper nouns

Nouns gender

Nouns definition

Concrete nouns

Abstract nouns

Common nouns

Collective nouns

Definition Of Nouns

Animate and Inanimate nouns

Nouns


Verbs

Stative and dynamic verbs

Finite and nonfinite verbs

To be verbs

Transitive and intransitive verbs

Auxiliary verbs

Modal verbs

Regular and irregular verbs

Action verbs

Verbs


Adverbs

Relative adverbs

Interrogative adverbs

Adverbs of time

Adverbs of place

Adverbs of reason

Adverbs of quantity

Adverbs of manner

Adverbs of frequency

Adverbs of affirmation

Adverbs


Adjectives

Quantitative adjective

Proper adjective

Possessive adjective

Numeral adjective

Interrogative adjective

Distributive adjective

Descriptive adjective

Demonstrative adjective


Pronouns

Subject pronoun

Relative pronoun

Reflexive pronoun

Reciprocal pronoun

Possessive pronoun

Personal pronoun

Interrogative pronoun

Indefinite pronoun

Emphatic pronoun

Distributive pronoun

Demonstrative pronoun

Pronouns


Pre Position


Preposition by function

Time preposition

Reason preposition

Possession preposition

Place preposition

Phrases preposition

Origin preposition

Measure preposition

Direction preposition

Contrast preposition

Agent preposition


Preposition by construction

Simple preposition

Phrase preposition

Double preposition

Compound preposition

prepositions


Conjunctions

Subordinating conjunction

Correlative conjunction

Coordinating conjunction

Conjunctive adverbs

conjunctions


Interjections

Express calling interjection

Phrases

Sentences


Grammar Rules

Passive and Active

Preference

Requests and offers

wishes

Be used to

Some and any

Could have done

Describing people

Giving advices

Possession

Comparative and superlative

Giving Reason

Making Suggestions

Apologizing

Forming questions

Since and for

Directions

Obligation

Adverbials

invitation

Articles

Imaginary condition

Zero conditional

First conditional

Second conditional

Third conditional

Reported speech

Demonstratives

Determiners


Linguistics

Phonetics

Phonology

Linguistics fields

Syntax

Morphology

Semantics

pragmatics

History

Writing

Grammar

Phonetics and Phonology

Semiotics


Reading Comprehension

Elementary

Intermediate

Advanced


Teaching Methods

Teaching Strategies

Assessment
acceptability (n.)
المؤلف:
David Crystal
المصدر:
A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics
الجزء والصفحة:
4-1
2023-05-04
2324
acceptability (n.)
The extent to which linguistic DATA would be judged by NATIVE-SPEAKERS to be possible in their language. An acceptable UTTERANCE is one whose use would be considered permissible or normal. In practice, deciding on the acceptability of an utterance may be full of difficulties. Native-speakers often disagree as to whether an utterance is normal, or even possible. One reason for this is that INTUITIONS differ because of variations in regional and social backgrounds, age, personal preferences, and so on. An utterance may be normal in one DIALECT, but unacceptable in another, e.g. I ain’t, I be, I am. Much also depends on the extent to which people have been brought up to believe that certain forms of LANGUAGE are ‘correct’ and others are ‘wrong’: many do not accept as desirable those sentences which the PRESCRIPTIVE approach to GRAMMAR would criticize, such as I will go tomorrow (for I shall go . . .), or This is the man I spoke to (for . . . to whom I spoke). To a LINGUIST, all such utterances are acceptable, in so far as a section of the community uses them consistently in speech or writing. The analytic problem is to determine which sections of the community use which utterances on which occasions. Within a DIALECT, an utterance may be acceptable in one CONTEXT but unacceptable in another.
Linguistics has devised several techniques for investigating the acceptability of linguistic data. These usually take the form of experiments in which native-speakers are asked to evaluate sets of utterances containing those language features over whose acceptability there is some doubt (acceptability tests). It is necessary to have some such agreed techniques for judging acceptability as, especially in speech, very many utterances are produced whose status as sentences is open to question. In one sample of data, someone said, I think it’s the money they’re charging is one thing. The job of the linguist is to determine whether this was a mistake on the speaker’s part, or whether this is a regular feature of a speech SYSTEM; if the latter, then whether this feature is idiosyncratic, or characteristic of some social group; and so on. Such investigations by their nature are inevitably large-scale, involving many INFORMANTS and sentence patterns; they are therefore very time-consuming, and are not often carried out. An utterance which is considered unacceptable is marked by an asterisk; if marginally acceptable, usually by a question mark, as follows:
*the wall was arrived before
?the wall was arrived before by the army sent by the king
These conventions are also used to indicate ungrammatical or marginally grammatical sentences. In linguistic theory, though, the difference between the acceptability and the GRAMMATICALITY of a sentence is important. A sentence may be grammatically correct, according to the RULES of the grammar of a language, but none the less unacceptable, for a variety of other reasons. For example, owing to the repeated application of a rule, the internal structure of a sentence may become too complex, exceeding the processing abilities of the speaker: these PERFORMANCE limitations are illustrated in such cases of multiple EMBEDDING as This is the malt that the rat that the cat killed ate, which is much less acceptable than This is the malt that the rat ate, despite the fact that the same grammatical operations have been used. In GENERATIVE linguistic theory, variations in acceptability are analyzed in terms of performance; grammaticality, by contrast, is a matter of COMPETENCE.
الاكثر قراءة في Phonetics
اخر الاخبار
اخبار العتبة العباسية المقدسة
الآخبار الصحية

قسم الشؤون الفكرية يصدر كتاباً يوثق تاريخ السدانة في العتبة العباسية المقدسة
"المهمة".. إصدار قصصي يوثّق القصص الفائزة في مسابقة فتوى الدفاع المقدسة للقصة القصيرة
(نوافذ).. إصدار أدبي يوثق القصص الفائزة في مسابقة الإمام العسكري (عليه السلام)