Lompat ke isi

Pengguna:Swarabakti/Maraton

Dari Wikipedia bahasa Indonesia, ensiklopedia bebas
Linguistic map representing a tree model of the Romance languages based on the comparative method. Here the family tree has been rendered as an Euler diagram without overlapping subareas. The wave model allows overlapping regions.

In linguistics, the comparative method is a technique for studying the development of languages by performing a feature-by-feature comparison of two or more languages with common descent from a shared ancestor, in order to extrapolate backwards. This is for the purpose of inferring the properties of that ancestor. The comparative method may be contrasted with the method of internal reconstruction, in which the internal development of a single language is inferred by the analysis of features within that language.[1]

Terminologi

Two languages are genetically related if they descended from the same ancestor language.[2] For example, Italian and French both come from Latin and therefore belong to the same family, the Romance languages.[3] Having a large component of vocabulary from a certain origin is not sufficient to establish relatedness: for example, as a result of heavy borrowing from Arabic into Persian, Modern Persian in fact takes more of its vocabulary from Arabic than from its direct ancestor, Proto-Indo-Iranian, but Persian remains a member of the Indo-Iranian family and is not considered "related" to Arabic.[4]

However, it is possible for languages to have different degrees of relatedness. English, for example, is related both to German and to Russian, but is more closely related to the former than to the latter. Although all three languages share a common ancestor, Proto-Indo-European, English and German also share a more recent common ancestor, Proto-Germanic, while Russian does not. Therefore, English and German are considered to belong to a different subgroup, the Germanic languages.[5]

Shared retentions from the parent language are not sufficient evidence of a sub-group. For example, German and Russian both retain from Proto-Indo-European a contrast between the dative case and the accusative case, which English has lost. However, this similarity between German and Russian is not evidence that German is more closely related to Russian than to English; it only means that the innovation in question—the loss of the accusative/dative distinction—happened more recently in English than the divergence of English from German. The division of related languages into sub-groups is more certainly accomplished by finding shared linguistic innovations differentiating them from the parent language, rather than shared features retained from the parent language.

Origin and development of the method

Title page of Sajnovic's 1770 work.

In publications of 1647 and 1654, Marcus van Boxhorn first described a rigid methodology for historical linguistic comparisons[6] and proposed the existence of an Indo-European proto-language (which he called "Scythian") unrelated to Hebrew, but ancestral to Germanic, Greek, Romance, Persian, Sanskrit, Slavic, Celtic and Baltic languages. The Scythian theory was further developed by Andreas Jäger (1686) and William Wotton (1713), who made early forays to reconstruct this primitive common language. In 1710 and 1723 Lambert ten Kate first formulated the regularity of sound laws, introducing among others, the term root vowel.[6]

Another early systematic attempt to prove the relationship between two languages on the basis of similarity of grammar and lexicon was made by the Hungarian János Sajnovics in 1770, when he attempted to demonstrate the relationship between Sami and Hungarian (work that was later extended to the whole Finno-Ugric language family in 1799 by his countryman Samuel Gyarmathi),[7] But the origin of modern historical linguistics is often traced back to Sir William Jones, an English philologist living in India, who in 1786 made his famous observation:[8]

The Sanscrit language, whatever be its antiquity, is of a wonderful structure; more perfect than the Greek, more copious than the Latin, and more exquisitely refined than either, yet bearing to both of them a stronger affinity, both in the roots of verbs and the forms of grammar, than could possibly have been produced by accident; so strong indeed, that no philologer could examine them all three, without believing them to have sprung from some common source, which, perhaps, no longer exists. There is a similar reason, though not quite so forcible, for supposing that both the Gothick and the Celtick, though blended with a very different idiom, had the same origin with the Sanscrit; and the old Persian might be added to the same family.

The comparative method developed out of attempts to reconstruct the proto-language mentioned by Jones, which he did not name, but which subsequent linguists labelled Proto-Indo-European (PIE). The first professional comparison between the Indo-European languages known then was made by the German linguist Franz Bopp in 1816. Though he did not attempt a reconstruction, he demonstrated that Greek, Latin and Sanskrit shared a common structure and a common lexicon.[9] Friedrich Schlegel in 1808 first stated the importance of using the eldest possible form of a language when trying to prove its relationships;[10] in 1818, Rasmus Christian Rask developed the principle of regular sound-changes to explain his observations of similarities between individual words in the Germanic languages and their cognates in Greek and Latin.[11] Jacob Grimm—better known for his Fairy Tales—in Deutsche Grammatik (published 1819–1837 in four volumes) made use of the comparative method in attempting to show the development of the Germanic languages from a common origin, the first systematic study of diachronic language change.[12]

Both Rask and Grimm were unable to explain apparent exceptions to the sound laws that they had discovered. Although Hermann Grassmann explained one of these anomalies with the publication of Grassmann's law in 1862,[13] Karl Verner made a methodological breakthrough in 1875 when he identified a pattern now known as Verner's law, the first sound-law based on comparative evidence showing that a phonological change in one phoneme could depend on other factors within the same word (such as the neighbouring phonemes and the position of the accent[14]), now called conditioning environments.

Similar discoveries made by the Junggrammatiker (usually translated as "Neogrammarians") at the University of Leipzig in the late 19th century led them to conclude that all sound changes were ultimately regular, resulting in the famous statement by Karl Brugmann and Hermann Osthoff in 1878 that "sound laws have no exceptions".[15] This idea is fundamental to the modern comparative method, since the method necessarily assumes regular correspondences between sounds in related languages, and consequently regular sound changes from the proto-language. This Neogrammarian Hypothesis led to application of the comparative method to reconstruct Proto-Indo-European, with Indo-European being at that time by far the most well-studied language family. Linguists working with other families soon followed suit, and the comparative method quickly became the established method for uncovering linguistic relationships.[7]

Referensi

Keterangan

Catatan kaki

  1. ^ Lehmann 1993, hlm. 31 ff.
  2. ^ Lyovin 1997, hlm. 1–2.
  3. ^ Beekes 1995, hlm. 25.
  4. ^ Campbell 2000, hlm. 1341
  5. ^ Beekes 1995, hlm. 22, 27–29.
  6. ^ a b George van Driem The genesis of polyphyletic linguistics Diarsipkan 26 July 2011 di Wayback Machine.
  7. ^ a b Szemerényi 1996, hlm. 6.
  8. ^ Jones, Sir William. Abbattista, Guido, ed. "The Third Anniversary Discourse delivered 2 February 1786 By the President [on the Hindus]". Eliohs Electronic Library of Historiography. Diakses tanggal 18 December 2009. 
  9. ^ Szemerényi 1996, hlm. 5–6
  10. ^ Szemerényi 1996, hlm. 7
  11. ^ Szémerenyi 1996, hlm. 17
  12. ^ Szemerényi 1996, hlm. 7–8.
  13. ^ Szemerényi 1996, hlm. 19.
  14. ^ Szemerényi 1996, hlm. 20.
  15. ^ Szemerényi 1996, hlm. 21.

Bibiliografi

  • Beekes, Robert S. P. (1995). Comparative Indo-European Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 
  • Lehmann, Winfred P. (1993). Theoretical Bases of Indo-European Linguistics. London: Routledge. 
  • Lyovin, Anatole V. (1997). An Introduction to the Languages of the World. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc. ISBN 978-0-19-508116-9. 
  • Szemerényi, Oswald J. L. (1960). Studies in the Indo-European System of Numerals. Heidelberg: C. Winter. 
  • Szemerényi, Oswald J. L. (1996). Introduction to Indo-European Linguistics (edisi ke-4th). Oxford: Oxford University Press. 
Diperoleh dari "https://wiki-indonesia.club/w/index.php?title=Pengguna:Swarabakti/Maraton&oldid=15317244"