Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
General English
Noun
Disusun sebagai tugas kelompok General English
Dosen pengampu Rizal Fauzi, M.Pd
Disusun Oleh :
Muhamad Ramadhan
Hafizh ulumudin wahab
Aria Tri Cahya
Mutiara Sutra
Siti Muawanah
Tahun 2019-2020
A.Pendahuluan
Noun adalah suatu kata yang digunakan untuk menamai orang, benda, hewan, tempat, dan
konsep abstrak. Kata benda bahasa Inggris ini merupakan satu dari delapan part of speech.
UNIT I
INTRODUCTION
A. Background
In linguistics, a noun is a member of a large, open lexical category whose members can
occur as the main word in the subject of a clause, the object of a verb, or the object of a
preposition (or put more simply, a noun is a word used to name a person, animal, place, thing
or abstract idea).
Lexical categories are defined in terms of how their members combine with other kinds
of expressions. The syntactic rules for nouns differ from language to language. In English,
nouns may be defined as those words which can occur with articles and attributive adjectives
and can function as the head of a noun phrase.
B. Formula of problem
1. What the history of noun ?
2. What the different definitions of noun ?
3. How much classification of noun in English ?
C. Purpose
1. In order to tell the history of noun.
2. In order to know about definitions and classifications of noun.
UNIT II
Content
A. History
Noun comes from the Latin nōmen "name", a translation of Ancient Greek ónoma. Word
classes like nouns were first described by Pāṇini in the Sanskrit language and by Ancient
Greek grammarians, and were defined by the grammatical forms that they take. In Greek and
Sanskrit, for example, nouns are categorized by gender and inflected for case and number.
Because nouns and adjectives share these three categories, Dionysius Thrax does not
clearly distinguish between the two, and uses the term ónoma "name" for both, although
some of the words that he describes as paragōgón (pl. paragōgá) "derived" are adjectives.
B. Different definitions of nouns
Expressions of natural language have properties at different levels. They have formal
properties, like what kinds of morphological prefixes or suffixes they take and what kinds of
other expressions they combine with; but they also have semantic properties, i.e. properties
pertaining to their meaning. The definition of a noun at the outset of this article is thus a
formal, traditional grammatical definition. That definition, for the most part, is considered
uncontroversial and furnishes the means for users of certain languages to effectively
distinguish most nouns from non-nouns. However, it has the disadvantage that it does not
apply to nouns in all languages. For example in Russian, there are no definite articles, so one
cannot define nouns as words that are modified by definite articles. There have also been
several attempts to define nouns in terms of their semantic properties. Many of these are
controversial, but some are discussed below.
· Names for things
In traditional school grammars, one often encounters the definition of nouns that they are all
and only those expressions that refer to a person, place, thing, event, substance, quality,
quantity, or idea, etc. This is a semantic definition. It has been criticized by contemporary
linguists as being uninformative.[6] Contemporary linguists generally agree that one cannot
successfully define nouns (or other grammatical categories) in terms of what sort of object in
the world they refer to or signify. Part of the conundrum is that the definition makes use of
relatively general nouns (thing, phenomenon, event) to define what nouns are.
The existence of such general nouns demonstrates that nouns refer to entities that are
organized in taxonomic hierarchies. But other kinds of expressions are also organized into
such structured taxonomic relationships. For example the verbs stroll, saunter, stride, and
tread are more specific words than the more general walk – see Troponymy. Moreover, walk
is more specific than the verb move, which, in turn, is less general than change. But it is
unlikely that such taxonomic relationships can be used to define nouns and verbs. We cannot
define verbs as those words that refer to changes or states, for example, because the nouns
change and state probably refer to such things, but, of course, are not verbs. Similarly, nouns
like invasion, meeting, or collapse refer to things that are done or happen. In fact, an
influential theory has it that verbs like kill or die refer to events,[7][8] one of the categories of
things that nouns are supposed to refer to.
The point being made here is not that this view of verbs is wrong, but rather that this property
of verbs is a poor basis for a definition of this category, just like the property of having
wheels is a poor basis for a definition of cars (some things that have wheels, such as most
suitcases or a jumbo jet, aren't cars). Similarly, adjectives like yellow or difficult might be
thought to refer to qualities, and adverbs like outside or upstairs seem to refer to places,
which are also among the sorts of things nouns can refer to. But verbs, adjectives, and
adverbs are not nouns, and nouns are not verbs, adjectives, or adverbs. One might argue that
definitions of this sort really rely on speakers' prior intuitive knowledge of what nouns, verbs,
and adjectives are, and so do not really add anything. Speakers' intuitive knowledge of such
things might plausibly be based on formal criteria, such as the traditional grammatical
definition of English nouns a forementioned.
There is no English adverb samely. In some other languages, like Czech, however there are
adverbs corresponding to samely. Hence, in Czech, the translation of the last sentence would
be fine; however, it would mean that John and Bill fought in the same way: not that they
participated in the same fight. Geach proposed that we could explain this, if nouns denote
logical predicates with identity criteria. An identity criterion would allow us to conclude, for
example, that person x at time 1 is the same person as person y at time 2. Different nouns can
have different identity criteria. A well known example of this is due to Gupta:
National Airlines transported 2 million passengers in 1979.
National Airlines transported (at least) 2 million persons in 1979.
Given that, in general, all passengers are persons, the last sentence above ought to follow
logically from the first one. But it doesn't. It is easy to imagine, for example, that on average,
every person who travelled with National Airlines in 1979, travelled with them twice. In that
case, one would say that the airline transported 2 million passengers but only 1 million
persons. Thus, the way that we count passengers isn't necessarily the same as the way that we
count persons. Put somewhat differently: At two different times, you may correspond to two
distinct passengers, even though you are one and the same person. For a precise definition of
identity criteria, see Gupta.
UNIT III
Closing
Conclution
Loos, Eugene E., et al. 2003. Glossary of linguistic terms: What is a noun?
nōmen. Charlton T. Lewis and Charles Short. A Latin Dictionary on Perseus
Project.
Jackendoff, Ray. 2002. Foundations of language: brain, meaning, grammar,
evolution. Oxford University Press. Page 124.
Gupta, Anil. 1980, The logic of common nouns. New Haven and London: Yale
University Press.
Baker, Mark. 2003, Lexical Categories: verbs, nouns, and adjectives.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Croft, William. 1993. "A noun is a noun is a noun - or is it? Some reflections
on the universality of semantics". Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual
Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, ed. Joshua S. Guenter,
Barbara A. Kaiser and Cheryl C. Zoll, 369-80. Berkeley: Berkeley
Linguistics Society.