DSpace at VNU: An experiment of investigating syntactic behavior of nouns and verbs in Vietnamese in terms of iconicny

VNU

J O U R N A L O F S C IE N C E ,

soc

. S C I . H U M A N ., N 01E. 2002

\ N E X P E R I M E N T O F IN V K S T IÍỈA T IN ÍỈ S Y N T A C T IC B E H A V I O R O F N O U N S A N D

VKRBS IN V IETNAMESE IN TERMS O F I C O N I C n Y
N guyen V an H ie p (’’

Abstract

are because, like d iagram s, they resem ble the
conceptual structures they are used to convey;

This paper deals with syntactic behavior of

or, that linguistic structures resem ble each

nouns and verbs in Vietnamese. Generally, in our

other because the different conceptual dom ains

language nouns differ from verbs in that they are

they represent are thought in the sam e way"

different in compound with such other words as

những, các, này, no... (as for nouns) or đà, dang,

[12, p. 1]. A rm ed with a special concern, some

sẽ, xong, rói... (as for verbs). However, in some

functional

cases, a noun or a verb may lack these abilities.

research on the Iconicity in language. The

prototypically

or

conducting

be resum ed as

- M anv linguistic universals are tendencies

in Vietnamese are determined by the way they
either

been

following:

syntax, the syntactic behavior of nouns and verbs

used

have

result o f this research can

According to the hypothesis of iconicity in

are

linguists

rather than absolute restrictions;

non-

prototypically. The categories of nouns and verbs

- T he universals c a n be explained.

actually

In

manifest

themselves

only

when

the

discourse requires them to: the less a linguistic
element is required

details,

two

types

of

iconicity

in

language are advanced as hypotheses:

by the discourse either to

+ Isom orphism :

report an discrete discourse event or to introduce

the tendency for there to

be a one-to-one corre sp o n d en c e betw een form

a discrete entity participating in the state of

and m eaning.

affairs, the less saliently it will be marked as verbs

+ M otivation: the reflection in linguistic

or nouns

structure o f som e aspect o f the structure o f

l.T h e iconic features in syntax

reality.

The study o f linguistic universals in the

In the s u m m e r o f 1983, a c onference about

60s m ade m any linguists surprised when they

iconicity in syntax took place in Stanford,

realized that natural lan g u a g e s in the world

gathering

resem ble each other in s o m e aspects. This fact

them , Tai d iscussed the tem poral sequence o f

led them to suspect the so-called arbitrariness

c o m pound

o f language. Som e o b servations show ed that

linearity m anifest o f iconicity, recalling Caesar'

"linguistic forms are frequently the way they

s "veni, vidi, vici". Dealing with so m e reduced

m an y

sentences

Assoc Prof Dr Department of Linguistics. College of Social Sciences & Humanities. VNU

55

fam ous

in

linguists.

C hinese

A m ong

as

one


Nguyen Van Hiep

56

e x p ressions, Cỉivón a rg u e d that
reduced

e x p re s s io n s

of

in principle

describe sentence o f such an isolating language

predictable

as V ietnam ese is to use model T h e m e-R h e m e.

m ore

in form ation is a n icon o f the lesser

attention

Sporadically

som e

c o n ic

aspects

of

paid to su ch in form ation. Bybee m a d e the point

Vietnamese syntax were mentioned such as the

that the c lo se n e ss b e tw e e n a verb stem and

s y m m e try o f proverbs, the role o f ord er of

inflectional

words...

c a te g o rie s

tends

to

reflect

the

relevance o f c o n c e p tu a l c lo s e n e s s that these

H ow ever,

in

V ietnam ese

no

one

officially pays attention to iconicity in syntax.

inflectional c a te g o rie s c a rry to su c h verb stem.
She c o n firm e d that the p ro x im ity o f e lem ents
in a clause follow s s o m e iconic principle w hose
result

is

that

e le m e n ts

g o in g

2. The iconicity in sjntactic behavior of
noun and verb in Vietnamese

together

se m antically tend to o c c u r close to g eth e r in the

In this paper, in term o f iconicity we deal

clause. A .W ie rz b ic k a sh ow ed that se em in g ly

w ith syntactic behavior of nouns and verbs, two

arbitrary

singular/

m ost important parts o f speech in Vietnam ese.

w heat are in fact

T herefore, we w ould like to provide data from

m otivated by a set o f co g n itiv e principles...

an isolating language to confirm the iconic

[12]. In France, m a n y rese a rc h papers with the

aspect o f the tw o parts of speech, which has

sam e spirit w ere colle cte d and pu b lish e d in

b een studied a lot by functional gram m arians

"Faits dc L a n g u e s" N o 1/1993.

in inflectional lan g u a g e s (14].

d istinctions

in

term s

plural b e tw e en oats an d

of

In V ie tn a m e s e g ra m m a r, P h a n N g o c has

Nouns and verbs in V ietnam ese as well as

are

in other languages are two m a jo r classes that

co nsidered as a rg u m e n ts for a n e w app ro a c h to

have sem antic correlation with the two most

g ra m m a r

important c oncepts [11, p.320-321]. As for

sh o w n

so m e

iconic

of

phenom ena

V ie tn a m e s e

that

on

sem antic

principles. F o r e x a m p le , in serial verbs the one

nouns

takes

one

prototypicaiiy like "thing" or "object” and is

d e scrib in g the e a rlie r event (M ời ố n g cỉi lên Ị.lập

considered as "tim e-stability". V erbs, on the

ông

o th er hand, are considered to report something

prec e d in g

g iám

m odifiers

đốc)

or

the

o rd e r

be

of

the

attribute

is

something

d e g re e o f a b stra c tn e ss ( Q u y ể n sá ch lịch sử Việt

are used to sym bolize concepts that lack time-

N am bìa vủm> in ch ừ dò). He m a d e the point

stability. T he distinction be tw e en nouns and

that ignoring that rule w ould c re a te long and

verbs is a linguistic

c u m b e rs o m e se n te n c e s [6, p .2 7 1 -3 0 1 ]. W hile

prevailing all over the world. T h at is why in

strongly criticizing the plausibility o f m odel

V ietnam ese as well as in o th er languages, the

Subject “P redicate

"general m eaning" criterium is often used for

Cao

aspect

is d e te rm in e d

it presents

prototypicaily like "actions" o r "events"; they

iconic

V ie tn a m e s e

will

entity

by

sentences,

in

position

the

for d e s c rib in g
X uan
of

Hao

V ie tn a m ese

m e n tio n e d

V ie tn a m e s e

sy n ta x

universal phenom enon

one

distinguishing nouns and verbs: nouns have

by

general n e a n in g about things or objects, verbs

co n firm in g that the o n ly ap p ro p riate w ay to

have general m e a n in g a b out actions or events.

r . v r

Joirnalof Science, Soc., Sci., Human., S o l E, 2002


An experiment of investigating syntactic behavior.

57

been

'T h e m o re a form refers to a discrete

supported from the form al distinction: If in

d isc o u rs e entity o r reports a d isc re te d iscourse

inflectional languages nouns d iffe r from verbs

event, the m o re distinct will he its linguistic

in trappings on gender, n um ber, tense, aspect,

form

m ood, voice...then in such

p a ra d ig m a tic a lly

I'll is

as

c ontent

V ie tn a m ese

distinction

that

has

isolating languages

nouns

and

verbs

are

different in the way ihev are c o m p o u n d e d with

from

Ly, the list o f "evidential w o r d s ” used for
d istin su ish in g nouns and verbs is c o n firm e d in
alm ost

hooks

about

parts

of

speech

as

following:
a)

and

form s,

both

sy n ta g m a tica lly "

[1 4 ,p. 151]. F o llo w in g from

w hat m en tio n e d

above, the hypothesis seem s to be unchallenged.

another parts o f speech have until now been
agreed by m ost linguists. Initiated by Le V an

n e ig h b o rin g

H o w e v er,

fro m

all o f what

m en tio n e d

abo v e it is a ls o e a sy to realize that th ere is an
e x tre m e

te n d e n c y

s e m a n tic

fea tu re s

reg a rd in g th ese

by
of

focu sin g
nouns

inherent

and

verbs,

features as d e c isiv e

factors

w hich d e te r m in e sy n ta c tic b e h a v io r o f nouns

Such

words

as

and verbs. So rese a rc h e rs m u st be con fu se d

such

w h e n they c o n fro n t the c a se s in that n o uns and

determ iners as "này, ấy, nọ, kia" afte r a noun.

verbs lack the o w n c h a ra c te ristic ability o f

For exam ple,

c o m p o u n d in g . S o m e instances c a n be cited as

"những, c á c ” can

for

plural

he put

m a rk e r

b e fo re

and

"Cúc han ấ y nói c h u y ệ n với nhau suốtfollow ing:

-

n s a y ’TITiesc students are always talking in class).
b) Such function w ords for tense, aspect,

-As for nouns:
-L a c k

of

ability

of

c o m p o u n d in g

as

mood, negation
as "đã, d a n s , sè, k h ô n gc , chảng,
Cr
c

m e n tio n e d in (a), e.g. ability to g o a lo n g with

chưa, cứ. còn..." can be located b e fo re and such

" n h ữ n g ’, "các" (put before) a n d "này", "ấy",

words as "xong, ròi" after a verb. F o r ex a m p le:

"nọ", "kia" (put after) and existence o f tendency

-"Hm tôi chưa làm x ong bài tập" (M y

For e x a m p le : "N gười Việt N a m án d ũ a '\

brother hasn't do n e his h o m e w o rk yet).
The distinction

se m a n tic a lly to inco rp o rate in the prior verb.

has be e n s u p p o rte d

by

(T h e

V ie tn a m e s e

cat

w ith

ch o p stic k s)

"Anil ta làm ruộng" He d o e s the fa rm in g ).W e

m any studies on noun phrases and v e rb phrases
can not say:
in

V ietnam ese.

The

fact

that

g e n e ra lly

in

com paring with a n o th e r parts o f s p e e c h nouns
sharply differ from verbs in term o f syntactic
behavior (for an su c h isolating la n g u a g e as
V ietnam ese it m e a n s the ability to c o m p o u n d
with

another

hypothesis

w ord)

about

the

m ee ts

the

iconicity

follow ing
of

lexical

categories principle:

- Người V iệt N am ăn * n h ữ n g /* c á c dũa
*này.
- A n h ta làm *nhĩfng/*các ruộng *dó.
-L a ck

of

m e n tio n e d

in

a bility
(a)

of
w hile

c o m p o u n d in g
e ith e r

as

playing

attributive role in c o p u la s e n te n c e s (Bỏ tôi là
g iáo viên) (M y fath e r is a tea cher) o r playing
the role o f o b ject in su c h s e n te n c e s in w hich

I \(

Journal of Science. Soc , Sci . Human , \ ,11:, 2002


Nguyen Van Hiep

58

transitive verbs are used in a special w ay as

- L a c k o f ability o f com p o u n d in g

as

"Chị làm ỵ tú đà m ấ y n ã m nay"( She has be e n a

m entioned in (b) while playing the ro le o f

nurse for several years). W e c a n not say:

m o d ifie r to predicate in su c h type o f se n te n c e
as "Chiếc d ồ n g hổ này trông rất đẹp" (T his

- Bô tôi là giáo viên *đó.

w atch looks very nice), "Chuối này àn k h ô n g
- C hị làm V tá *ấy d ã m ấy n ăm nay.

ngon”

- N o u n refe rrin g to a n "attac h e d " body

k in d

o f bananas

don't

taste

d e l i c i o u s ) . W e c a n not say:

part lack ability o f c o m p o u n d in g as m en tio n e d
in (a) w hile go in g a lo n g w ith its o w n e r, as in

(This

- C hiếc đ ồ n g hồ này *đã/?đang/*sẽ trông
rất đẹp.

sentence 'T ô i đau đ ầ u " ( I have a headache),
"Tai nạn làm gây tay nó" ( H e broke his arm in

-Chuối này *đã/*đang/*sẽ ân không ngon.

the accident). W e can not say:

Shortly speaking, in the foregoing study
casesx nouns and verbs in V ie tn a m ese lacked

- T ôi đ a u đầu *này.
- Tai nạn làm gãy *những/*các tay (cúa) nó.

the

characteristic

which
As for verbs:
- Lack

would

be

ability
used

of

as

c o m p o u n d in g ,

criteria

to

their

differentiation.

o f ability

of

c o m p o u n d in g

as

m en tio n e d in (b) w hile play in g the role of

H o w w ould these seem ly odd p h e n o m e n a
be e xplained by linguists?

subject in se n tence, for e x a m p le : "Yêu là chết
W e think that these phe n o m e n a s h o w an

ờ trong lòng m ột ít" ( L ove is blue ), "77?/ dua
là yêu nước" (E m u la tio n is patriotisiin). W e

aspect o f the iconicity in syntax in V ietnam ese,
spectacularly perform ed by nouns and verbs.

ca n not say:

Its nature consists in the distinction betw een
- * Đ ã /* d a n g /* s ẽ yêu là c h ế t ở trong lòng
m ột ít.

- L ack

prototypical/non-

o f ability

o f nouns and verbs. C onsequently, only

o f c o m p o u n d in g

as

m en tio n e d in (b) in the s o -c a lle d existential
se n te n c es, for e x a m p le : " Đ á u làng trồng một
cây đ a to" ( T h e re is a tall tree at th e d g e o f the
'T r ê n

tư ờ ng

treo m ộ t

bức

tranh"

- "Đ á u làng * đ ă /* d a n g /* s ẽ trồiìiị m ộ t cây
đ a to.

a

prototypical noun would be m ax im a lly distinct
from a prototypical verb [15, p.30]. Because
those nouns and verbs in the study c ase are
used non-prototypically so their distinction in
term o f syntactic behavior is not clearly shown.

(There is a picture on the wall). W e can not say:

T hen the question is: in what situation will
a noun or a verb be con sid e red being used
prototvpicaily?
A functional point o f view c a n shed light

- T rê n tường * d â /* d a n g /* s ẽ treo m ộ t bức
tranh.

or

prototypical in respect o f the syntactic behavior

- * Đ ã /* đ a n g /* s ẽ thi đ u a là y ê u nước.

village),

central/peripheral

on

that

issue

and

give

an

reasonable

explanation: it is the role o f a n e le m en t in

I'XU. Journal o f Science, Soc., Sci., Human., No IE, 2002


An experiment ol investigating syntactic behavior...

_____ ___ __ ____________ _____________________ 5 9

discourse that d e term ines Its n atu re, and by

They

that de te rm in e s its form. So the subjectivity

function in s e n te n se . T h a t is w hy they lose

and c o m m u n ic a tiv e intention plays a crucial

ch a ra c te ristic

role and if saving in term of functionalism we

c o m p o u n d in g .

can

confirm

that

Pragm atics

are

not

nouns

and

play in g

potential

prototypical

ability o f nou n

d e te rm in e s

T his e x p la in a tio n is a ls o a p p lie d for nouns

S em antics and in its turn, Sem antics d e te rm in e s
that

Syntax [ 10. p. 13],

play

e ith e r

a ttributive

role

in

c o p u la

se n te n c e ("B ỏ tôi là g iá o v iê n ”) o r object role
In

o th er

words,

in

respect

of

prototypically, intrinsic sem antic features are
relevant, but not e n o u g h to a ssign a form to

in s e n te n c e w h o se v e rb -p re d ic a te is used in a
special w a y ("C hị tỏi làm y tá đ ã m ấy năm
n a y ” ).

noun or verb category. W e have to resort to the
ultimate reason: the prototypicality in n o u n s
and

verbs

respective

is ultim ately

derivative

functions

sentence.

in

o f their
A nd

the

A s for s u c h s e n te n c e s as "Tôi đau đầu",
"Tai nạn làm g ã y tav nó" the situation b e c am e
m ore

c o m p lic a te d .

T h e o re tic a lly ,

it

is

not

intrinsic sem antic fe a tu re s o f nouns and verbs

difficult to realize that b o d y -p a rt nou n is used

arc ultim ately derived from their functions in

as referring e x p re s s io n s . H o w e v e r, its referent

sentence. By

will

is not a u to n o m o u s but is treated as dep e n d en t,

explain the syntactic beh a v io r o f n o uns and

unin v id id u ate d en tity in relation w ith its ow ner.

verbs in V ie tn a m ese in turn.

So,

using

this statem ent

As for noun, the

we

prototypical use is to

denote a disc re te entity involving in d isc o u rse
as a participant [14,

p. 156].

D ue to that, the

categorical status o f n o u n s will display in a
scale reflecting the iconic degree h o w they are
used to that aim . In o t h e r words, the m o re a
form is to be used to d e n o te a disc re te entity,
the more a form has ca te g o ric a l status o f nou n

with

all

of

its

ow n

characteristic

in

d e s c r ib in g

fra m e

of

predicate-

participants c o n s tr u c tio n it is n o u n referring the
possessor" that is d is c o u r s e salient entity. In
fact, so m e th in g w h ic h h a p p e n s to a body part is
n o rm a lly d o n e by the b o d y -p a rt possessor, so
the b o d y -p art n o u n s in q u e s tio n really are not
used pro to ty p ic a lly a n d c o n s e q u e n tly they will
lose c h a ra c te ris tic fea tu re s o f n o u n s in respect
o f potential c o m p o u n d in g ability.

form al

features.

A s for verbs, the pro to ty p ic a l use is to
report an actual a c tio n o r event. D ue to that, the

In such se n te n c es a s "Người Việt N am ăn

categorical status o f v erbs will d isplay in a

đũa", "Anh ta làm ru ộ n g " the objects arc non-

scale reflecting the ico n ic d e g re e h o w th ey are

referring nouns, that m e a n s bv using th e m the

used to that aim . In o th e r w o rd s, the m o re a

speaker/w riter has no intention to asso c ia te

form is to be used to report an actual action or

with any discrete, s e p a ra te entity at all. T h u s,

event, the m o re a fo rm h a s c a te g o ric a l status o f

from the functional view point, these n o u n s do

a verb with all o f its o w n c h a ra c te ristic form al

not denote participants in any state o f affairs.

features.

IM

Journal o f Science, Sac., Sci., Human., No IE, 2002


Nguyen Van Hicp

60

In su c h s e n te n c e as "Y êu là c h ế t trong lòng

A n o th e r

distintction

on

c o m p o u n d in g

m ộ t ít”, "Thi dua là y ê u n ư ớ c " , the verbs "yêu",

ability is also obserw ed betw een verbs u se d to

' thi đua" (in the role o f s u b je c t) a re not used to

present a foregroundied action o r event and the

report e ith e r a c tion o r event. So they d o not

sam e used to presentt a ba ckgrounded action or

function

event. L o o k at how tlhe state o f affairs "Cô ấy li

as

p ro to ty p ic a l

verbs;

and

c o n s e q u e n tly th ey lose c o m p o u n d in g potential

dị

m en tio n e d

differently in followiing sentences:

in (b). T h is

e x p la n a tio n

is also

suitable to the verbs th at fu n c tio n as m a n n e r
c o m p le m e n t to p re d ic a te s in s u c h se n te n c es as
"Chiếc đ ồ n g h ổ này trông rất đẹ p ", "C hu ối này

chổng"

(She

hias

divorced)

is

used

+ C ô ấy đã li dị c h ồ n g (foregrounded)
+ C ô ấ y *dà li (dị chổng k h iến m ọi người
kinh ng ạ c (backgrouinded)

ân k h ô n g ngon".
+ V iệ c cô ấy *cđă li dị chồng khiến m ọi
S uch s e n te n c e s as " Đ á u iàng trổng m ột
c â y đa to", "T rên tường treo m ộ t bức tranh"...

người k in h ngạc ( b a c k g ro u n d e d )
T h e distinction

betw een prototypical and

m ay g e n e ra lly be c a lle d e x is te n tia l sentences.

non-prototypical usatge help us to understand

T h e y are c o n s id e re d to be used to c o n firm the

som e c a se s w hen a tform, w hich is not a noun,

e x iste n ce o f identity o f s o m e entity, so the

tem porally has s y n ta c tic behavior o f a noun.

verb-predicate in th e m (trổ n g , treo) is not used

For e x a m p le , adjectdves "rắc rối", "khó khản"

in

function as nou n in f ollow ing sentences:

prototypical

w ay.

In

V ie tn a m e s e ,

one

m e n tio n e d s o m e c o n s tra in ts to v e rb -predicate
in e x istential se n te n c es: the v e rb -p re d ic a te lose

-

N hững

rắc

rối

ấ y k h iến

ông

phát

k h ù n g .(The troubles m a d e him m ad .)

the ability o f c o m p o u n d in g w ith su c h function
[1]. T h e se

- N hững kh ó k h ă n này k h ồ n g dề khắc

constraints, in o u r view , a re c o n s e q u e n c e s o f

phục trong thời giam n g ắ n . (It is not easy to

the fact that the verbs in q u e s tio n w ere not

solve these d iffic u ltie s im short tim e.)

w ords for tense, a sp ec t, result...

prototypically used.

Som e re s e a rc h e rs a rg u e d that there was a
c h a n g e in status o f w o rd classes: "rắc rối",

H o w e v er,

as

we

have

ju st

said,

prototypically is a d e g re e c o n c e p t. T hus, there
are som e c a se s w here n o u n s o r verbs ju st partly
lose their o w n ability o f c o m p o u n d in g . For
instance, stative verbs loses the ability to go
along with s o m e fu n ctio n w o rd s for a spect or
result, but m a in ta in the a b ility to g o a lo n g with

function w ords for tense. C o m p a re :

"khó khăn" w ere n o l o n g e r adjectives, they
b e c am e nouns. A c c o r d in g to o u r view such
interpretation is too m e c h a n ic a l. W e incline to
another interpretation: i n that foregoing cases,
the adjectives t e m p o r a lly fu n ctio n in the way
an prototypical nou n fuinctions, e.g to present
discrete

entities

p a rtic ip a tin g

in

frame

predicate-participants off sentence. Thus, they
+ A n h ta y ê u * x o n g /* đ ư ợ c c ả b a cô.

tem p o rally gain ability o f co m p o u n d in g o f a
prototypical noun.

+ A n h ta đ ã /đ a n g y ê u cả b a cô.

YNU. Journal o f Science, Soic., Sci., Human., No IE, 2002


All experim ent of investigating syntactic behavior...

61

3. C o n c l u d i n g

nouns and verbs lose, at diffe re n t d e g re e , their
ow n ability o f c o m p o u n d in g . W e think that the

F ro m som e foregoing rough e x p e rim e n ts,
foregoing
we

have

reason

to

confirm

that

syntactic

iconic

principle

on

syntactic

behavior o f n o uns a n d verbs w ould criticize

behavior o f nouns a n d verbs in V ie tn a m e s e IS
any
not b e v o n d the general

iconic

a to m ic

view

g ram m aria n s,
nouns and verbs in natural
on

prototypical

nouns

syntactic
and

circle

of

V ie tn a m ese

w h ic h

led

to

m an y

languages. The
m is u n d e rs ta n d in g

distinction

in

principle o f

verbs

b e h a v io r

of

reflects

the

m ea n w h ile

for

w ould

a

long

c o n firm

tim e

and

principles

and

interpreting c a p a c ity o f F u n c tio n a l G r a m m a r
distinction

in

c o m m u n ic a tiv e

intention:

a
that pro fe sso r C a o X u a n H a o firstly represent

prototypical noun inclines to be used to present
in m o n o g ra p h "T iếng V iệt- Sơ thảo N g ữ pháp
a discrete entity in d isc o u rse, a prototypical
chức nàng, q u v ể n I" (V ie tn a m e s e - a sketch o f
verb inclines to be used to report an actual
F unctional

G ram m ar,

v o lu m e

1)

[4]

action o r event in discourse. O th e rw ise , both

REFERENCES
1.

Cao Xuân Hao, Vietnamese- a sketch OÍ Functional Grammar, volume 1, 1991

2.

Diẽp Quang Ban. Some issues on existential sentences in modern Vietnam ese (Ph D Dissertation ,
Teaching training college of Hanoi I, 1980

3.

Nguyền Tài cấn. Vietnamese grammar: Morphem- Compound word- Phrase. Hanoi, Universities and

professional Colleges Press, 1975

4.

Đinh Van Đức, Vietnamese grammar: parts of speech, Hanoi. Universities and professional Colleges
Press, 1986

5.

Cao Xuân Hạo. Tiếng Việt- Some issues on phonology, semantics and grammar, Hanoi, Education
Publisher, 1998

6.

Phan Ngoc, Pham Đức Dương, Linguistic contact in South-East Asia, Hanoi, South-East Asia Institute,
1983

7.

Nguyền Thị Quy. Action verbs in Vietnamese and arguments. HCM city. Social Science Publisher.

1995

8.

Nguyền Kim Thíin. V erbs in Vietnamese, Universities and professional Colleges Press, 1977

9.

Boileau L.D (ed), Faits cie Langues, Motivation et icomcite. Presses umversitaires de France, 1993

10.

Dik S.. The Theory o f Functional Grammar. Part 1 : the Structure of the clause. Dordrecht. Foris, 1989

1 1.

Givón T. . On understanding grammar. New York . Academic Press. 1979

12.

Haiman J (ed).

Iconicily III Syntax. Amsterdam/ Philadenphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

1985
13.

Halliday M.A.K. All Introduction of Functional Grammar. London : Arnold. 1985

14.

Hopper P.J. and Thompson s.A: 'T h e iconicity of the universal categories NOUN and VERB“ In Haiman
J. ( ed). 1985

15.

Rosch E. H and Lloyd ( eds). Cognition and Categorization. Hillsdale. Eribaum Associates,

16.

Rosch E. H . “Princip les o f Categorization*4 In Rosch E. H and Lloyd ( eds), 1978.

rxc Journal o f Science, Sot'.,

S c i, Human . .Vi;//:'. 2002

1978