post amrit linguitecture wfp1

7/24/2019 Post Amrit Linguitecture WFP1

1/112

Sri: Krishnam Vande: JagadgurumSvabha:vastu Pravartate:Indeed it is Nature that Acts


2/112

Na kartrutvam na karma:Ni lo:kasya srujati Prabhuh|Na karmaphalasamyo:gamsvabha:vastu pravartate:The Lord creates neither agency nor objects for the world; norcontact with the fruits of works; ratherthe nature of things

operates.(Sri: Krshna Parama:tma : Sri:mad Bhagavad Gi:ta 5: 14)

Neither agency the Lord, i.e., the Self, impels not the world to do

the work; nor does He create objects that are sought after, viz.,chariots, pots, mansions, etc., with the objects made.

Doubt:If nothing whatsoever the embodied self does or causes to bedone, who then operates, both as direct agent and causative agent?

Answer:Nature, prakrti as nescience, Ma:ya:, operates as will be

affirmed in Bhabavadgi:ta 7: 14: Indeed this divine Ma:ya:consisting of the consistituents

(Sri:mad Bhagavad Gi:ta 5: 14, Sri: Samkara Bha:shyam)

Translation by Dr. A. G. Krishna Warrier


3/112

Prakrtye:va cha karma:Ni kriyama:Na:ni sarvasah|Yahpasyati tatha:tma:namakarta:ram sa pasyati He alone sees who, on all sides, sees actions (as) solelyperformed by Prakrti and sees, also, the Self as a non-agent

(Sri: Krshna Parama:tma : Sri:mad Bhagavad Gi:ta 13: 29)


4/112

Sri: A:di Samkara Bhagavatpu:jyapa:da:hFOUNDER,Ka:rmik Linguistic Theory

taya: prakrtya: e:va cha - na anye:na mahada:dika:ryakaraNa:ka:rapariNataya: karma:Ni va:ngmanahka:yarabhya:Ni kriyama:Na:ni nirvartyama:na:ni sarvasahsarvapraka:raih (yah pasyati upalabhate:)..(Sri:mad Bhagavad Gi:ta 13: 29, Sri: Samkara Bha:shyam)


5/112

Sri: A:di Samkara Bhagavatpu:jyapa:da:hFOUNDER,Ka:rmik Linguistic Theory

by thatprakrti,solely, that has transformed itself into effects and instruments such asmahat,etc., are the activities of speech, mind, and body performed, on allsides in all manner of ways(Sri:mad Bhagavad Gita 13: 29, Sri: Samkara Bha:shyam)


6/112

spos t ona reat v ty nEnglish

Word-formation Processes:Evidence for Ka:rmik LinguisticTheoryBy

Chilukuri Bhuvaneswar

Pioneer ofKa:rmik Linguistic Theory

Ka:rmik Literary Theory

Ka:rmik Language Teaching Approach


7/112

ims and !"#ectives $

Aim:

To Provide a Ka:rmik LinguisticMotivation for

Word-formation in English

in theKa:rmik Linguistic Paradigm


8/112

ims and !"#ectives % Objectives

1. To Discover Empirical Evidence forThe Principles of Exploration of

Variables

(PEV

E!V PEV !"V !"V(DEC& Exploration of Contextual Variables

PE& Productive Extension of Variables

C'& Creation of New Variables

CNV(D) Deletion of Variables


9/112

ims and !"#ectives (

2. To reveal the

Computational Designin theLinguitecture

ofEnglish Word-formation

as a

Ka:rmikopoeitic Sub-System


10/112

)ypothesisThe linguitecture of English Word-

formation is D!P"!T"#$LL%

&'E$TED( M"D)ED( T'$#!)"'MED

and esta"lished "y

#ndivid$al%!ollective%!ontext$al%

!onj$nction%and%&tandardi'ationof in)$al Action

*+CCC,*L


11/112

era ure ev e/: esearc0ap

1. #n the in)$istic Anal*sis ofEn)lish +ord%formation

Processes, the foc$s is onl* onthe individ$al -ord%formation

processes and their descriptionand motivation and

orpheme/+ord%0ased

orpholo)*.. The in)$itect$re of En)lish+ord%formation Processes is not

motivated as a +2OE% %


12/112

KLT Procedure

1. 2. K! Procedure

"t consists of t#ree divisions$ 1. Pre%an&ua&e' 2. t an&ua&e' *. Post%an&ua&e

+n practice2 KLT is applied "y starting /ith %3 t 4 Language ,tage /ith a small revie/ ofpproaches to Living as follo/s in 5 stages and then Post-language at the 6 th,tage3 Within the 6th,tage2 the 7rst stage Pre-Language is discussed3

4. Approaches to ivin): 1. Di5erent Approaches6 . 7A:8#7 #V#"9 APP8OA!2: 1.7a:rmi3 ivin) Pro)ramme6 . The 9ame of 7armaphalabho:)am (97P0

1. +rst2 "y data collection :

(/hich gives us the W)T of language in 8uestion for analysis9

2. second,patternin) and str$ct$rin)the data into clearly identi7a"le categories2 types2 andclasses */hich gives the )!W of language in terms of its !rganiation9

*. t#ird2 discovering concepts and principlesfrom the patterned and structured data

*/hich gives the )!W of language in terms of its Principles for !rganiation9

-. fourt#2 developing s*stemic choice net-or3sfor the system

*/hich gives the )!W of language in terms of its Dispositional Conceptualiation9 and

. +ft#,motivating systemic choices from disposition and "uilding up the lan)$a)e as adispositional socioco)nitive lin)$istic s*stem

created and used for the constr$ction of 3a:rmi3 realit* via dispositional realit* via

actional realit*.


13/112

pproach to Language fromLiving

Trait Theory

;ehaviouralCognitive pproach

Personality Psychodynamicpproach

Theories )umanistic pproach

,ocioculturalpproach


14/112

+n trait theory2 the diicts2 and desires9

in the humanistic approach2 they are e=plained via ho/ peopleachieve selfhood2 and realie their potential2

and in the sociocultural approach2 they are e=plained in termsof ho/ a particular culture is descri"ed in terms of another

culture?s *Western Culture conceptions of human individuality

and the self3 ll these theories are atomic and take into consideration only

one or more aspects of living "ut not all into consideration9 thatis /hy each is true in its o/n limited /ay "ut not true as a

/hole3

The 7a:rmi3 ivin) theor* ta3es all of them intoconsideration and develops the theor* of lan)$a)e. This


15/112

Game of Karmaphalabho:gam (GKPB)1

In Ka:rmik Living Theory, living systems (especially,human beings) are programmed in

aUniversalKa:rmik Living Programme where each individual has his own

ParticularCombination and Permutation(as Variation) of KLP as IKLP these variations can beintrinsically

GCSDMed from the veryconstitutionof the rules withmultiplevariables (not asbinary choices) in

US [Action Living- Lingual Action].

The basis of the IKLP is UKLP but it is fashioned out according toones individualKarma(as disposition) in the

[Supra-Macro-Micro]Cosmic Network

from US [Action-Living-Lingual Action]

for the construction of his/her own ka:rmik reality in aholarchy.

It is done through theka:rmik principles of action and its experience

0KP; %


16/112

0KP; % +n 0ame Theory2 there are constitutiverules /hich

are 7=ed "ut the performativerules are not3

In KLT, there areexperiential (ka:rmik), choice (dispositional), andaction (KDA) rules vis a vistheConstitutiveandPerformativerulesand are independently I-I-Ied throughDispositionin a language forconstructingKa:rmik Reality.

The KDA rules of language are SEMIOTIC;

arecreated-modified-transformedby dispositional- [socioculturalspiritual-contextual actional]-cognition

oflingual action

in the construction of

ka:rmik realityin aholarchybyICCCSA.

This is a ka:rmik process with its own principles and concepts

such as Principles of Creation of Action [eg. PEV, Creation OA;P.Choice OA, P.Cognition OA, PO Symbolization of Action]; ICCCSA;

N-w-N; A-W-F;


17/112

GKPB through Languageing

In a game, there are players, playing instruments (means), and play(for scoring points on a competitive basis), a field (base), and rules

bound by SPACE-TIME-MATTER.

In theGame of Living (GKPB), the STM limitations are different: NoSTM limits across the board inprinciple

The Game of Languageing is a game (languageing)-within-a-game

(of living)-as-a-double (ie., semiotic) game;It is played by the principle of dispositional, discrete permutation

It is played as a tool as a system as a resource all as means in abigger game of living played in the still bigger game of creation.

a rm ons u ve an t


18/112

a:rm ons u ve an erormatve.ules

In ordinary games such as football, cricket, etc., the games are fixed asthis and that to be so and so in such and such manner in terms of

theconstitutive rules and all the players have to follow them. Forexample, scoring goals in football. However, the players can have anoption in their performance to score the goals by different,

permissible combinations and permutations of the moves in scoringthe goals. But they should not switch from one game to anothergame within the same game. They have to follow the fixed rules.

In thegames of ka:rmaphalabho:gam (through languageing), theconstitutive rulesare dispositionally GCSDMed by each individualunlike in ordinary games, ie.,each individual designs his own gamefreely. For example, an individual may like to play the game of adoctor and then mix it with farming and play the game as he likes.

There isflexibilityin the performative as well as the constitutiverules; and language gaming isa game within a game.

It is only at the US [Action-Living-LA], the rules are fixed as Design(Linguitecture) and Construction (Languageering) Rules whichform the basis for constitutive and performative rules.


19/112

0KP; % Contd3

This is the point of departure fromGenerative Grammar, where theconstitutive rules are taken to be FIXED in the UG along with theParameters through binary (parametric) choices;

InSFG, the choice of the constitutive (paradigmatic) rules gives us the

performative (syntagmatic) structures in a system as analyticalsteps in the grammars construal of meaning (Halliday andMatthiessen:Introduction to Functional Grammar 2004: 24)

NOconscious choice is suggested

[In KLT, it is the collectivized conscious choices that determine both the

paradigm and the individual choice the syntagm.]

InCognitive Linguistics, grammar is conceptualization in terms ofcertain principles.


20/112

Paradigm-Syntagm-Ka:rmagm

Paradigmis what goes instead of what;Syntagmis what goes together with what

Ka:rmagmis whybecomeswhatashow

the ka:rmik (experiential) choice of both the paradigm and syntagm [para-syngm] as this andthat to be so and so in such and such manner.

Ka:rmagm is dispositionallycreatedbya flash of insightful behaviour (at the pasyanticonceptualization level)along the diagonal axis andresolvesitself into the vertical

(paradigmatic) and horizontal (syntagmatic) axes in open-endedgradual evolution (atthe madhyama (P&S) level).The ka:rmik axis is thecauseof the other two axes.

Paradigmatic Axis Ka:rmatic Axis

Syntagmatic Axis

Finally, it is realized as the concerned word at thevaikhari (Material Form)level. All these three phases are

dispositionally GCSDMed by CAUSALLY experiential (KA:RMIK) processing for the construction ofKa:rmik Reality. Here, the cause decides thesystemas well as thestructure.


21/112

QLB as an Example In the case of QLB, along theparadigmaticaxis, aQUOTEFIX()goes

instead of a Prefix, Suffix, etc. in theQLB Affixationprocess.

Prefix

Affixation Suffix

Quotefix (the paradigmatic choice)

Along thesyntagmaticaxis, the initial, medial, and final positions of thequotefix are the choices:

1. Initial Quotefix:alana:Ti smrutulu

2. Medial Quotefix:rebelsmo:ta

3. Final Quotefix: da:ruNabandhamulu

Theka:rmikaxis is the fountain spring of theDisposition-qualified-Consciousness (D-q-C)which by aflash of insightful behavioursees, asit were, the QLB process owing to itsdispositional creativityand

resolvesit into the paradigmatic axis of QLB as a choice and into thesyntagmatic axis of QLB in an order (in terms of initial, medial,

final). Finally, it is realized as the concerned word used in its context.Such usage becomesa posterioria rule in word-formation processes

by ICCCSA.


22/112

0KP; (

ll the non-ka:rmik linguistic theoriessuch as

T02 ,@L2 Cog3 0rammar can include

Disposition into their frame/ork

and make them

CA,L *W)B 4 1E', 4E@@ECT

instead of merely

1E', *)!W-

eory o anguage


23/112

eory o anguageCreation in KLT from a

Theory of Living $: 1PCEEaterial Plane of !reationEvol$tion E$ation:

A-areness

Ener)*

&$pra%cosmic evelacrocosmic evel

icrocosmic evel

; 7no-s6 as apparentl*transformin) into base s+ectacle?a@x -ed

here the "ase is identical /ith the stem2 "ut although the /ordspectacle e=ists in English it is only the stem of the plural spectaclesthat constitutes the "ase in spectacled

*see Juirk et al $M: $6$-$


32/112

Principle of nalogy

+n addition to these three "asic constituents2 /e can include

the principle of analo)*

as a cognitive constituent

in the formation of /ords "y derivation3

(C x%otherap*treatment "y means of = on the analogy *"oth formal

and semantic of a pattern of /ords such as psych-o-therapy9 physi-o-therapy: a pattern or paradigm ofsimilar items "ecomes esta"lished2 and ne/ coinings aremade conforming to this pattern "y derivation.

,TE1 *.!!T ;,E *;,E


33/112

,TE1 *.!!T2 ;,E *;,E1!.P)E1E 'D W!.D:

.ELT+!' The relationship "et/een stem *root2 "ase *"asemorpheme and /ord can "e captured "y the follo/inge8uation:

(C &tem/+ord 0ase +ordA@xation/Analo)*

apparentl0 transfor/s into ' &raduall0evolves into ' t#rou t#e process of

This is /ith reference to /ords formed from ste/s asbases*rootsin morphology and bases*base

/orp#e/esaccording to Juirk et al $M: $6%N3


34/112

Dispositionaliation of W@PE8uation


35/112

The Linguitecture of English W@Ps:Ase of Language


36/112

The Linguitecture of English W@Ps:Creation of Language


37/112

E'0L+,) W!.D-@!.1T+!'P.!CE,,E,

$3 H=ation

%3 Conversion2

(3 ;ack-formation2 53 ;ack/ords

English 63 .eduplication2 M3 Compounding2W@Ps O3 ;lending

3 Clipping2 3 Dimunitives

$N3 cronym2 $$3 +nitialism $%3 ;orro/ing2 $(3 Cal8ue


38/112

H=ation

A@xationis the formation of /ords"y adding derivational aH=es todi


39/112

Degrees of Derivation

$3 Qero - degree of derivation is ascri"ed to simple/ords2 i3e3 /ords /hose stem is homonymous/ith a /ord-form and often /ith a root-morpheme2 e3g3 ato/, #aste, devote,etc3

%3 @irst - derived /ords /hose "ases are "uilt onsimple stems and thus are formed "y theapplication of one derivational aH=2 e3g3ato/ic, #ast0, devotion, etc3

(3 ,econd - derived /ords formed "y t/oconsecutive stages of coining2 e3g3 ato/ical,#astil0, devotional,etc3


40/112

'et/ork of Derivation

Qero

Degree of Derivation @irst

,econd


41/112

Categories of H=es $


42/112

Categories of H=es %


43/112

,ystem 'et/ork for H=es

ddition:

H=ation Transformation:

Deletion:


44/112

Types of ,uH=es

%3 ccording to the part of speech formed suH=es fall intoseveral groups:

a no$n%formin) s$@xes: -age(breaa&e, bonda&e)' -ance-ence(assistance, reference)' -dom(freedo/, in&do/)' -er(teac#er, baer)' -ess(actress, #ostess)' -ing(buildin&, wasin&)'

b adjective%formin) s$@xes: -a"le-i"le-u"le(favourable,incredible, soluble)' %al(for/al, ocial)' -ic(d0na/ic)' -ant-ent(repentant, dependent)'

c n$meral%formin) s$@xes: -fold(twofold)' -teen(fourteen)'-th(sixt#)' -ty(t#irt0)9

d verb%formin) s$@xes: -ate(activate)' -er(&li//er)' -fy-ify(terrif0, specif0)' %ie(/ini/i3e)' -ish(establis#)'

e adverb%formin) s$@xes: -ly(4uicl0, coldl0)' -/ard-/ards(bacward, nort#wards)' -/ise(liewise3

, ti C t i ti f


45/112

,emantic Categoriation of,uH=es(3 ,emantically suH=es fall into:

a onosemantic:t#e sux -esshas onlyone meaning 5fe/ale6 ti&ress, tailoress9

aPol*semantic:the suH= -hood hast/o meanings:

$Rcondition or 8uality? 4 false#ood,wo/an#ood9

%Rcollection or group? 4 brot#er#ood.


46/112

,uH=ation according toDenotational 1eaning

53 ccording to their generaliing denotationalmeaning suH=es may fall into several groups3E3g32 noun-suH=es fall into those denoting:

a the agent of the action: -er (baer)' -ant(accountant)9

" appurtenance: -an-ian(Victorian, 7ussian)' -ese(C#inese)9

c collectivity: -dom(ocialdo/)' -ry(pleasantr0)9d Diminutiveness:-ie(birdie)' -let(cloudlet)' -ling

(wol8in&)3


47/112

Compounding

'oun-noun compound: note "ook S note"ook

ad#ective-nouncompound: "lue "erry S "lue"erry

&er"-nouncompound: /ork room S /orkroom

'oun-ver"compound: "reast feed S "reastfeed

&er"-ver" compound: stir fry S stir -fry

d#ective-ver"compound: high light S highlight

&er"- preposition compound: "reak up S "reakup

preposition-ver"compound: out run S outrun

d#ective-ad#ectivecompound: "itter s/eet S"itters/eet

preposition- preposition compound: in to S into


48/112

Conversion

Conversion is the derivational process /here"y an itemchanges its /ord-class /ithout the addition of an aH=*Juirk2 .andolph and 0reen"aum2 $O: 55$3 Thus2 /henthe noun UsignU *$ shifts to the ver"Usign*edU*% /ithoutany change in the /ord form /e can say this is a case of

conversion$3 )o/ever2 it does not mean that this processtakes place in all the cases of homophones *1archand2$O%: %%63 ,ometimes2 the connection has to do /ithcoincidences or old etymological ties that have "een lost33@or e=ample2 UmindU *( and 5 and UmatterU *6 and M are

cases of this grammatical sameness /ithout connection "yconversionVthe ver"s have nothing to do today /ith theirrespective noun forms in terms of semantics *i"id3: %5(3
http://translationjournal.net/journal/31conversion.htmhttp://translationjournal.net/journal/31conversion.htm


49/112

Types of Conversion

*.1 Conversion fro/ verb to noun

the nouns Ue=perienceR

UfearR

UfeelR or

UhopeR


50/112

Conversion %

2. Conversion fro/ noun to verb

They can e=press the action of putting in or on thenoun:

such as in

pocket*ed *to put into the pocket2 U7lm*ingU *toput into a 7lm and

UpracticeU *(%3

These ver"s can also have the meaning of to

provide /ith *the noun or to give *the noun2 likeUnameU *(( *to give a name to some"ody2 UshapeU*(5 *to give shape to something or Ufuel*sU *(63


51/112

Conversion (

* Conversion fro/ ad:ective to verb

d#ectives can also go through the process ofconversion2 especially to ver"s3

De-ad#ectival ver"s get the meaning of to make

*ad#ective. +t can "e easily seen "y means of e=amples like

U"lack*edU *56 *to make "lack2 UopenU *5M2Uslo/*ingU *5O333

+n some cases2 /hen these transitive ver"s are usedintransitively2 a secondary conversion may happen*Juirk2 $O: $6M$-$6M%2 as it /ill "e e=plained lateron3


52/112

Conversion 5 - Conversion fro/ a closed cate&or0 to an0 ot#er cate&or0

Closed-class categories can also undergo conversion3 lthough their fre8uency ismuch less common2 the process is not ungrammatical3 ll morphologic categorieshave e=amples of this kind *Cannon2 $6:5%6-5%M3

Prepositions are pro"a"ly the most productive ones3 They can easily "ecomeadver"s2 nouns and ver"s3 This is the case of UupU *5 and 5 and UoutU *(O and 6N3

Conversion to noun may as /ell occur in adver"s like in UoutsideU *6$ and UinsideU*6$9 con#unctions2 as regarded in UifsU *6% and U"utsU *6%9

inter#ections and non-le=ical items2 like Uho ho hoUsU *6( and Uha ha haU *659 aH=essuch as Umini-U *66 can appear as noun *6M and proper noun *663333

Conversion to ver" is fre8uent in onomatopoeic e=pressions like U"uU *6O2 U"eepU*6O or U/oo*ingU *63 @inally2 phrase compounds can appear as ad#ectives2 suchas in U"orro/-the-mo/erU *62 Udo/n-to-earthU *MN or Uno/-it-can-"e-toldU *M$3


53/112


54/112

Partial Conversion

1 Conversion fro/ noun to ad:ective

U1ahogany music "o=U can "e used inan attri"utive /ay2 the music "o= is

mahogany3 This implies UmahoganyUis a denominal ad#ective3


55/112

Partial Conversion %

2 Conversion fro/ ad:ective to noun

d#ectives can also shift into nouns2though it is not very fre8uent3 +t

mainly happens in /ell-esta"lishedpatterns of ad#ective plus nounphrase3 'ominalisation occurs /hen

the noun is elided and the ad#ectiveis /idely used as a synonym of ane=isting set pattern3

This could "e the case of Ua Chinese


56/112

.eduplication

.eduplication is a linguistic form /hichcontains systematic non-recursive repetitionof phonological material for morphological orle=ical purposes3

$3$ @orm$3$3$ @ull and partial reduplication

$3$3% .eduplicant position

$3$3( Copying direction

$3$35 .eduplication and other morphologicalprocesses

$3$36 Phonological processes2 environment2 and

reduplicant-"ase relations

. d li i i E li h
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplication


57/112

.eduplication in English English has several types of reduplication2 ranging from informal e=pressive voca"ulary *the 7rst four forms "elo/ to grammatically meaningful

forms *the last t/o "elo/3

8h*min) red$plication: hokey-pokey2 rale-dale2 super-duper2 "oogie-/oogie2 teenie-/eenie2 /alkie-talkie2 hoity-toity2 /ingding2 ragtag3 lthoughat 7rst glance G

Exact red$plications*"a"y-talk-like: "ye-"ye2 choo-choo2 night-night2 no-no2 pee-pee2 poo-poo3 Couscous is not an English e=ample for reduplication2since it is taken from a @rench /ord /hich has a 1aghre"iorigin3

Abla$tred$plications: "ric-a-"rac2 chit-chat2 criss-cross2 ding-dong2 #i""er-#a""er2 kitty-cat2 knick-knack2 pitter-patter2 splish-splash2 ig-ag2 >im>am3+n the a"laut reduplications2 the 7rst vo/el is almost al/ays a high vo/el

and the reduplicated a"laut variant of the vo/el is a lo/ vo/el3

&hm%red$plicationcan "e used /ith most any /ord9 e3g3 bab0%s#/ab02 cancer%sc#/ancerand fanc0%sc#/anc03
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maghrebihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ablauthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_vowelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_vowelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shm-reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shm-reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shm-reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shm-reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_vowelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_vowelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ablauthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maghrebi


58/112

.eduplication %

!omparativered$plication:

+n the sentence ohnUs apple looked redder and redder2 the reduplication ofthe comparativeindicates that the comparative is "ecoming more true over

time2 meaning roughly ohnUs apple looked progressively redder as time /enton3 +n particular2 this construction does notmean that ohnUs apple is redderthan some other apple2 /hich /ould "e a possi"le interpretation in thea"sence of reduplication2 e3g3 in ohnUs apple looked redder3

!ontrastive foc$s red$plication:

E=act reduplication can "e used /ith contrastive focus *generally /here the7rst noun is stressed to indicate a literal2 as opposed to 7gurative2 e=ampleof a noun2 or perhaps a sort of Platonic idealof the noun2 as in

+s that carrot cheesecake or carrot CKE-cakeX3(This is similar to the@innish use mentioned "elo/3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparativehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparativehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrastive_focus_reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stress_(linguistics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platonic_idealismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platonic_idealismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stress_(linguistics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrastive_focus_reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparativehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative


59/112

8ed$plicant Position =

8ed$plicant position

.eduplication may "e initial*i3e3 pre7=al2 +nal*i3e3 suH=al2or internal*i3e3 in7=al2 e3g3

#nitialreduplication in gta(CV% pre+x):

YuZa"UafternoonUSYuYuZa"Ulate afternoonU*;u-YuZa" [a[a#Ua longtimeUS[a[a[a#Ua long time *in yearsU*?@)

inalreduplication in Dakota(%CCV sux):

h\skaUtall *singularUSh\skaskaUtall *pluralU*h\ska-sa /a]teUgood*singularUS/a]te]teUgood *pluralU*/a]te-Ate(B#aw 1>@, arant3 1>2,lbrit 2@@2)

#nternalreduplication in ,amoan(%CV% in+x):

savaliUheshe /alksU *singularSsavavaliUthey /alkU *plural*sa-va-vali alofaUheshe lovesU *singularSalolofaUthey loveU *plural*a-lo-lofa(oravcsi 1>, Froselow and cCart#0 1>-) le ta/aloaUthe manU*singular$Sta/aloloaUmenU *plural*tama-lo-loa+nternal reduplication ismuch less common than the initial and 7nal types3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prefix_(linguistics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffixhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infixhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeta_peopleshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakota_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samoan_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplicationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samoan_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakota_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeta_peopleshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infixhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffixhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prefix_(linguistics)


60/112

,)!.TE'+'0 *Dimunitives

01 shorteningis the formation of a /ord"y cutting o< a part of the /ord3a initial*or aphesis:fend (v) G defend,

p#one G telep#one9

b medial*orsyncope: specs G spectacles,fanc0 G fantas0'

c Fnal*or apocope: lab laborator0, exa/ exa/ination9

d both initial and Fnal:8u G in8uen3a,frid&e G refri&erator'3

1 ti ti i 0 ti 0


61/112

1otivation in 0enerative 0rammar$

$3 0enetic +nheritance

!nly the )ard/are "ut not the ,oft/are

^ the &ocal !rgan ^ nalyticity

^ Disposition at ;irth

'ot^ .ALE, !@

L'0A0E

1 ti ti i 0 ti 0


62/112

1otivation in 0enerative 0rammar%

%3 AT!'!1B and L'0A0E,PEC+@+C+TB

^ .ules are Products of 0eneralCognitive

"ilities

^ They are P!,TE.+!.+

'ot

1otivation in 0enerative 0rammar


63/112

1otivation in 0enerative 0rammar(

(3 +nternal Linguistic Evidence

^ JL; in Telugu

^ ;ack/ords in English

^ .eduplication

^ ;lends

1otivation in @unctional Linguistics


64/112

1otivation in @unctional Linguistics$

$3 Language is as it is "ecause of /hatit does

*in the functional sense*X)alliday

%3 Language is as it is '!T "ecause of/hat it does

;AT

"ecause of /hat it is +'TE'DED to do/hat it does *in all senses:

;huvanes/ar

1otivation in @unctional Linguistics


65/112

1otivation in @unctional Linguistics%

$3 lternative Ways of ,aying the,ame Thing

*'ot

clear

%3 ,ynonymy

,end gain &s.esend


66/112

1otivation in Cognitive Linguistics $

$3 C)!+CE in Cognition *'otmotivated

%3 Cognition is !'LB +nstrumental

(3 Cognition is '!T gential

K ik[C ti Lii L ]


67/112

Ka:rmik [Creation-Living-Language]:Universal Sciences of Action-Living-Lingual Action

Ka:rmik Creation Programme : A, ction

Ka:rmik Living Programme: A, Living

1anifest

Ka:rmik Language Programme: A, Lingual ction Anmanifest

@undamental Types of Language


68/112

@undamental Types of Language

"at$ral orm GOriented an)$a)e:

"//anent "ntelli&ence in Nature is t#e Creator

!+eech "at$ral

"ame%Oriented : 8oot an)s. &i)n

an)$a)es

"//anent "ntelli&ence in ArtiFcial

Disposition is t#e Creator

Transformed : Parent G Da$)hterH. an)s. an)$a)e amilies

Di5$sion of in).Patterns

:

'ature of Language


69/112

'ature of Language@ormation

Creation: Cause: D@P

1odi7cation: Causes:

'ature of +nternal: Novelt0, Has#ion

Language Disposition

@ormation Change E=ternal:nalo&0,Forrowin&

Transformation: Causes:

;iological Drift

Dispositional:

,hift

'et/orks 4 /ithin 4


70/112

'et/orks 4 /ithin 4'et/orks

'et/ork $

,u"-'et/ork i_33n

`

'et/ork ( 'et/ork %

,u"-'et/ork i_33n ,u"-'et/ork i_33n


71/112

PE&

The Principles of Exploration ofVariables

(PEV

E!V PEV !"V !"V(D

EC& Exploration of Contextual Variables

PE& Productive Extension of Variables C'& Creation of New Variables

CNV(D) Deletion of Variables

English W@P Principles


72/112

English W@P Principles


73/112

3/1/16

)olarchy of Ka:rmik .eality

Dispositional .eality *K3 .

Cognitive .eality D3.3 * K3 .

,ocioculturalspiritual.eality

C3 .3 * D3 .3 * K3.3

Ka:rmik .eality Conte=tual ctional .3

,C,3 . * C3 .3 *D3.3 * K3 .3

1ental ction ctional .eality

&ocal ction

Construction of Ka:rmik .eality viaDi iti l . lit


74/112

Dispositional .eality

Ka:rmik .eality is constructed in a Pentastratal '-/-'

@rame/ork3K3.3 D3 .3 Cog3 . ,C, . C3 .3 3 .

;ut Dispositional .eality 0C,D1s Cognitive -,C,-C-.ealities3 +n other /ords2

ction is dispositional-cognitive- socioculturalspiritual-

conte=tual actional- action !. ction is dispositionally cognied as socioculturalspiritual-

conte=tual actional-action3

2ence( D!P"!T"#$L &"3#T"# +lays the criticalrole in the &'E$T"#( M"D)&$T"#( $#D

T'$#!)"'M$T"# ") L$#34$3E # T! 5$'ET%-'$#3E-DEPT21 Each and every as+ect of language is

6uali7ed 8y

Dis+osition that colours cognition and rules su+reme1

Disposition and Language C-P--T-.-PD-D or


75/112

for short CPT

ccording to KLT2 language is 0C,D1ed "yDisposition3 +f this is true2 then the role ofdisposition should "e evident in the

Creation

Production pplication

Transmission

.etention Perpetuation

Decay leading to Death

of Language


76/112

CPT of W@P

Words can "e analyed in terms of

Process

,ylla"le ,tructure

;ase 4 ,tem 4 Wordas t#e0 are created

modi7ed

varietytransformed

in t#eir range

depth of linguistic operations

KLT 1otivation $ of Creation of W@Ps


77/112

KLT 1otivation $ of Creation of W@Ps

When a /ord is created2 it is created

"y aParticular Process

in a

Particular ,ylla"le ,tructure

#avin& a

Particular ;ase-,tem-Word "y

dispositional c#oices

of the ndividual9&ollective

Creation of W@Ps: KLT 1otivation


78/112

Creation of W@Ps: KLT 1otivation

;y o"serving ho/ /ords are formed

"y direct evidence w#en it is available in

t#e for/ of interviews,

4uestionnaires, written records Ie will be able to now t#e role of

disposition

J7 w#en suc# direct evidence is notavailable

Ie can +nd t#e role of disposition b0

Eect%to%eans%to%Cause o&ic and Levels of .easoning$ ti l . lit . i t t t f i t th l l l f


79/112

$3 ctional .eality .easoning: /e get t/o types of reasoning at the lo/er level ofaction as the

e5ect(W2$T:aterial orm:

$3 $3 +ndividual action-oriented .easoning: "duction

$3 %3 Collective action-oriented .easoning: !omprehensive#nd$ction6

LMettin& t#e /axi/u/ nu/ber of cate&ories, t0pesclassesO

&orollary: W)Ps are o+en-ended 8ut limited1

Deduction *for checking

%3 Dispositional .eality .easoning: /e get one type of reasoning at the middle level

of choiceof action as themeans(2"W:Pattern and &tr$ct$re: Transd$ction

L"nferrin& a #ier level abstraction of subtle PBs fro/ an overview of t#e &rosst0pes and patterns networ reali3ed in /aterial for/, i.e., discoverin& principlesand concepts fro/ t#e PB data and developin& s0ste/ic c#oice networs for t#es0ste/O

(3 Ka:rmik .eality .easoning: We get one type of reasoning at the higher level of

e=perienceof action as the

ca$se(W2%: !oncept for orm or $nction/

Experience of the 8es$lts of Action : 7a:rmi3%o%d$ction

;otivatin) s*stemic choices from disposition and motivatin) lan)$a)e asa dispositional socio%co)nitive lin)$istic s*stem (i.e., a 3a:rmi3 s*stem

Actional Reality Reasoning:1. Induction - 2. Deduction - 3. Abduction

Induction 1: Example from Non-Linguistic Reality


80/112

allo/s inferring from 2 /here does not follo/necessarily from 9 might give us very good

reason to accept 2 "ut it does not ensure truth3

@or e=ample2 if all s/ans that /e haveo"served so far are /hite2 /e may

induce that the possi"ility that all s/ans

are /hite is reasona"le3 We have goodreason to "elieve the conclusion fromthe premise2 "ut the truth of the

conclusion is not guaranteed3

*+ndeed2 itturns out

that

somes/ans

are

Induction-Deduction-Abduction -Transduction VsKa:rmik-o-duction

Induction 2 : Example from Word-formation Processes


81/112


reason to accept 2 "ut it does not ensure truth3

For example, if all the English affixationprocesses that we have observed so far arepre-fixation and suffixation processes, wemay induce that the possibility that allwords are formed by pre-fixation and

suffixation is reasonable. We have goodreason to believe the conclusion from thepremise, but the truth of the conclusion isnot guaranteed. Moreover, induction cannotmotivate WFPs since they are open ended

and dispositionally creative.

+ndeed2 itturns out

that inEnglish

some

aH=es

Induction-Deduction-Abduction -Transduction Vs Ka:rmik-o-ductionComprehensive Induction 3 : Example from WFPs


82/112


reason to accept "ecause of the comprehensivedata2 "ut it does not ensure truth3 +t is "etter

than simple induction3

For example, if all the English affixesthat we have observed so far are 8:pre-fix, suffix, suffixoid, circumfix,interfix, duplifix, simulfix, suprafix,

we may induce that the possibility that allwords are formed by these affixes isreasonable. We have good reason to believethe conclusion from the premise, but thetruth of the conclusion is not guaranteedsince they are open ended and

dispositionally creative; henceinduction cannot motivate WFPs

+ndeed2 it

turns out

that inEnglish

some aH=es

Actional Reality Reasoning II: Deduction


83/112

y g

Deduction $ : E=ample from

'on-Linguistic World

allo/s

deriving from only/here is a formal

logical conse8uenceof 3+n other /ords2

deduction derives theconse8uences of the

assumed3 0iven thetruth of the

assumptions2 a validdeduction guarantees

the truth of

the conclusion3

Hor exa/ple, &ivent#at all bac#elors

are un/arried/ales, and &iven

t#at t#is person is abac#elor, one candeduce t#at t#is

person is an

un/arried /ale3

Induction-Deduction-Abduction -Transduction VsKa:rmik-o-duction
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_consequencehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_consequence


84/112

Ka:rmik-o-duction

Deduction %: E=ample from Language

allo/sderiving from only/here is a formal

logical conse8uenceof 3 +n other /ords2

deduction derives theconse8uences of the

assumed3 0iven thetruth of theassumptions2 a valid

deduction guarantees

the truth of

the conclusion3

For example, given that indimunitiona part of the

word is cut, and given that thewordphoneis formed by

cutting a part of the wordtele-fromtelephone,one candeduce that this word is adimunitive.However,

deduction is of little use in

motivating word-formationprocesses but it can be usedto test how a word is

formed according to thealready known

WFPs.

ActionalRealityReasoningIII:"duction
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_consequencehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_consequence


85/112

Actional Reality Reasoning III:"duction

The American philosopherCharles Sanders Peirce(18391914) firstintroduced the term as "guessing".[7]Peirce said that toabducea hypotheticalexplanation from an observed circumstance is to surmise that may be true

because then would be a matter of course.[8]Thus, to abduce from involves

determining that issufficient, but not necessary, for .

For example, suppose we observe thatthe lawn is wet. Ifit rained last night, then it wouldbe unsurprising thatthe lawn is wet. Therefore, by abductive reasoning, the possibilitythatit rained last nightis reasonable (but note that Peirce did not remain convinced that asingle logical form covers all abduction);[9]however, some other process may have also

resulted in a wet lawn, e.g. dew or lawn sprinklers. Moreover, abducing thatit rained lastnightfrom the observation of a wet lawn can lead to false conclusion(s).

Peirce argues that good abductive reasoning fromPtoQinvolves not simply adetermination thatQis sufficient forP, but also thatQis among the

most economical explanationsforP. Simplification and economy both call for that "leap"of abduction.[$N

"duction: E=ample from W@P
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Sanders_Peircehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoninghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoninghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessary_and_sufficient_conditionshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoninghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razorhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoninghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoninghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoninghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoninghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoninghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoninghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razorhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoninghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessary_and_sufficient_conditionshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoninghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoninghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Sanders_Peirce


86/112

For example, suppose we hear words such assyringe- syringes; edit editor, etc. Wealready know that most of the plural forms or noun-forms of words in English areformed from their singular counter parts or verb counter parts. So, it would beunsurprising to know that words such asdogs and playerare formed likewise.Therefore, by abductive reasoning, the possibility that syringes and editor are alsoformed like that is reasonable (but note that Peirce did not remain convinced that asingle logical form covers all abduction);[9]however, some other process may have also

resulted in syringes and editor, e.g. borrowing. Moreover, abducing thatsyringes andeditorfrom the observation of dogs and player, etc. leads to false conclusion(s).

Peirce argues that good abductive reasoning fromPtoQinvolves not simply adetermination thatQis sufficient forP, but also thatQis among the

most economical explanationsforP. Simplification and economy both call for that "leap"of abduction. However, simplification and economy in the case of these words may not beof use because the process is not economic:dog-to-dogsandplay-to-playeris not

economical since it involves addition of a suffixs/-er.What is required is the inclusionof dispositionalsuffixal additivecognition of these words and the resulting WFP byICCCSA. In the case ofeditor/ syringes, it is thesuffixal clippingcognition. Hence

abduction fails in providing a principled account of WFPs.[$N

%3 Dispositional .eality .easoningTransduction
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoninghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razorhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoninghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoninghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoninghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoninghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoninghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoninghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razorhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoning


87/112

!ransduction % a ter/ coined b0 /e % is a process of reasonin&

t#at leads to t#e inference of choices and dis+osition in

patterns$

!#ere is disposition, if t#ere is c#oice Jr

!#ere is c#oice, if t#ere is disposition.

1 a. !#ere is c#oice (in patternin&), if t#ere are dierent

patterns (N, if B) or

1 b. !#ere are dierent patterns, if t#ere is c#oice.

(B, if N)

2 a. !#ere is disposition, if t#ere is dispositional bias and

t#ere is dispositional bias, if t#ere is response bias'

2 b. !#ere is c#oice , if t#ere is response bias' and t#ere is

response bias, if t#ere is c#oice.



88/112

Patterns are interpreted at a /ore a8stractlevel b0 t#eir anal0sis as

means 2"W;atthe middle level or level around1

2

overview$ "denti+cation 1 *

!op View $ Jbservation

n -

Bide View$ nal0sis

Fotto/ View$ "nterpretation ?

L1Qn are IHPs or sub%IHPs' C%4%D as t#e cause' circu/ference ast#e lin&uistic reali3ation

Ltrans R across' ducere duct R lead' leadin& across dierent structures to t0pesof patterns to dierent processes to arrive at an inference:

%3 Dispositional .eality .easoning


89/112


01 f the +atterns of a W)P are varia8le( thenthey can 8e created 8y +ermutations of

varia8les1


90/112

Transduction of English W@P Principles

Transduction


91/112

$3 +n /ord-formation processes2 there aredi


92/112

Dis+ositional Discrete Permutation Princi+leof Bhuvanes=ar;

SI#en we live, we lan&ua&e t#eworld (in its experience) b0

i/ited Tses of i/ited eans

wit#in(Tn)li/ited (open%ended)Per/utations.U

Jr si/pl0

>limited uses of limited means inunlimited +ermutations?

Chilukuri ;huvanes/ar

Ka:rmikoduction

Ka:rmikoduction is a kind of reasoning that leads to the inference of KP; through language


93/112

Ka:rmikoduction is a kind of reasoning that leads to the inference of KP; through language3Comprehensive induction2 and transduction esta"lish choice and disposition in the formation of language3Ka9rmikoduction esta"lishes the function of language3

$3 +f there is CC!2 then there is language

!r There is language2 if there is C *C !3

%3 +f there is action2 then there are results3 !r +f there are results2 then there is action3

(3 +f there are .!2 then there is e=perience3 !r There are .!2 if there is e=perience3 E=cept ,aints

G+f there is CC! *"y language2 then there is the e=perience of the .!3 )ence2 language is used as a toolas a system as a resource as a means for KP; for ordinary humans "y humans or saints3

!r2 There is KP;2 if there is CC! *"y language3

Therefore2 language and living are +-+-+3 this is in creation itself as a principle3 This indirectly o


94/112

Ka:rmik-o-duceis to multiply induce from empirical experience assertions

[which are refined by logical andscientific experienceof the defects of under-extension,

over-extension, and impossibility and whet them against, if necessary,spiritual(introspective) experiences ]

to arrive atcausalexplanations in terms of process (WHY: CAUSE), pattern (HOW:TIME-PLACE-MANNER) and structure (WHAT: MATERIAL FORM) at the

highest level, to show that the linguistic realizations are constructed and used in acontext to CCOA for constructing ka:rmik reality via dispositional reality via

actional reality.

Ka:rmikoduction

is causal, radialreasoning:

looking from multipleangles, such as sensoryperceptive evidence,inference, analogy, presence

and absence of a quality anddifferent types of reasoningsuch as abduction,

induction, deduction, andtransduction(

ande@+erien

ce toascertaina fact1

Ka:rmikoducing W@P Creation


95/112

Ka:rmikoducing W@P CreationKa:rmikoduction

leading through cause-e


96/112

+llustration of KLT in W@Ps

+n the ne=t section2 aH=ation is takenas an e=ample to illustrate ho/disposition 0C,D1s this su"-/ord-

formation process3

Affixation as Evidence for KLT ProcedureforKLTAnalysisofAffixation


97/112

Procedure for KLT Analysis of Affixation

1. Data Collection:A number of words from different languages such asEnglish, Telugu, Hebrew, Philippines, Arabic, Maltese, and Alabama have been

collected. 2. Patterning and Structuring:The data has been analyzed (see slides 35-36),and from the analysis, we find that there are many affixation processes (11)available across languages: 1. Prefixation; 2. Suffixation; 3. Semi-Suffixation; 4.Infixation; 5. Circumfixation; 6. Interfixation; 7. Duplifixation; 8. Transfixation;9. Simulfixation; 10. Suprafixation; 11. Disfixation. 12. Quotefixation (Recently,

this new affixation process by quotefix in written Telugu journalism has beenformed). In all 12 Affixation Sub-WFPs are observed.

3. Concepts and Principles:From an abstraction of concepts and principlesfrom these affixation processes, we find three important principles involved inthese processes:

1. addition; Concepts & 2. transformation;

Principles 3. deletion;

4. bifurcation by quotes

Affixation as Evidence for KLT 2


98/112

53 ,ystemic 'et/ork for H=ation

Prefixation Suffixation Suffixation

Circumfixation Semi-Suffixation

Addition

(Infixation)Systemic Network Infixation Interfixation

for Affixation (English) (Transfixation)

Simulfixation

Transformation

Suprafixation

Disfixation Deletion

Quotefixation Truncation

Dispositional Conceptualization of the System as aNetwork


99/112

NetworkIn KLT, ka:rmik reality isa:nushangikally (the effect inheriting the cause in addition to itsown property)constructed through dispositional reality through actional reality:

Ka:rmik Reality Dispositional Reality (+K.R)

Actional Reality (+D.R. +K.R.)

The actional realitythat is construed is dispositionally construed as

dispositional actional realitywhich is further construed as

ka:rmik dispositional actional reality.

In the case ofAffixation in English, the mathematical principles ofaddition, andtransformationonlyare chosen for affixation by dispositional cognition. Whatit means is that the English people have not cognized other principles but only

these two and hence only these two principles are usedso farfrom the US Actionvia US Lingual Action.

5. Motivation of Affixation as a Ka:rmik Linguistic System

51ChoiceofAffixationasaWFP


100/112

5. 1. Choice of Affixation as a WFP

Historically, Old, Middle, and Modern Englishes have been influencedby French, Latin and Greek which opted for affixation as a WFP. Hence,

English might have thesuper-stratum effectof those languages.5. 2. PEV in Modern EnglishIf we observe how the affixation process in Mod. English hasexpanded, we see direct evidence for dispositional creativity in thecognition of these processes.

Many of these processes have been added to the main principle ofaffixation by the Principle of Exploration of Variables. For example,infixationis still not very productive;duplifixationentered English

recently via Hebrew;

Ka:rmikopoeisis $:


101/112

Disposition

Ka:rmikopoeisis %: E8uations of


102/112

ction

*$ Disposition DesireE


103/112

Conduct of ction

+ntuitive Anderstanding of a Phenomenon

Trou"leshooting

Pro"lem ,olving ,trategies

+nnovative ction 0o

to E&

,olution

W@P C!0'E1E C!0'+T+!' 'ETW!.K


104/112

W@P C!0'E1E C!0'+T+!' 'ETW!.K

"et-or3 =. Experiential eanin) !ha3ram:a O$ter !ha3ram6 b Titled #nner !ha3ram


105/112

a. O$ter !ha3ram6 b. Titled #nner !ha3ram

+CCC, 'et/ork


106/112

+CCC, 'et/ork

'-/-' Diagram of Ka:rmik


107/112

.eality

3 .

C3 .

,C,3 .

D3 .

Co .



108/112

3/1/16


Dispositional .eality *K3 .

Cognitive .eality D3.3 * K3 .

,ocioculturalspiritual

.eality C3 .3 * D3 .3 * K3

.3 Ka:rmik .eality Conte=tual ctional .3 ,C,3 . * C3 .3 *D3

.3 * K3 .3

1ental ction ctional .eality

&ocal ction


109/112

[backwordsis a new process in English;

blendingis a recent phenomenon and isproductive;reductionprocesses such asabbreviation, clipping, acronomy, and

initialismare all recent developments.Let us take the case ofbackwords,

acronomy, duplifixation, and portmanteaus

to illustrate how language is created,modified, and transformed by dispositionalGCSDM of these processes and their

instantiation in words

6 C!'CLA,+!'


110/112

63 C!'CLA,+!'

$3 We have provided a linguistic motivation ofW@Ps in English in the @ormal2 @unctional2

Cognitive2 and Ka:rmik Linguistic 1odels3

%3 The nalysis sho/s evidence forE=ploration of &aria"les2 'et/orks-/ithin-'et/orks3

(3 W@P are created in an Ka:rmikopoeitic,tructure3

Thank you


111/112

Thank you

T2A"7 IOJ VE8I J!2 O8 IOJ8

7#"D ATTE"T#O"K

KLT Procedure


112/112

1. 2. K! Procedure

"t consists of t#ree divisions$ 1. Pre%an&ua&e' 2. t an&ua&e' *. Post%an&ua&e

+n practice2 KLT is applied "y starting /ith %3 t 4 Language ,tage /ith a small revie/ ofpproaches to Living as follo/s in 5 stages and then Post-language at the 6 th,tage3 Within the 6th

,tage2 the 7rst stage Pre-Language is discussed3

4. Approaches to ivin): 1. Di5erent Approaches6 . 7A:8#7 #V#"9 APP8OA!2: 1.7a:rmi3 ivin) Pro)ramme6 . The 9ame of 7armaphalabho:)am (97P0

1. +rst2 "y data collection :

(/hich gives us the W)T of language in 8uestion for analysis9

2. second,patternin) and str$ct$rin)the data into clearly identi7a"le categories2 types2 andclasses */hich gives the )!W of language in terms of its !rganiation9

*. t#ird2 discovering concepts and principlesfrom the patterned and structured data

*/hich gives the )!W of language in terms of its Principles for !rganiation9

-. fourt#2 developing s*stemic choice net-or3sfor the system

*/hich gives the )!W of language in terms of its Dispositional Conceptualiation9 and

. +ft#,motivating systemic choices from disposition and "uilding up the lan)$a)e as adispositional socioco)nitive lin)$istic s*stem

post amrit linguitecture wfp1

Documents