together these two lines of research, we have to translate the predictions of generative grammar into a more sophisticated typology in linear terms that can be taken as the point of departure for future typological research. The main cause of this discrepancy is that, whereas generative grammar investigates the hierarchical positions of the verb and its arguments, most typological research is concerned with their relative surface order. Read moreĬurrent generative grammar predicts a larger set of transitive structures than the six types normally mentioned in the typological handbooks (SVO, SOV, VSO, etc). To him, the notion that ‘generative’ has something to do with specifying or characterizing a set of sentences is a notion that never was. Nevertheless, in the recent history of transformationalism, Chomsky insists that ‘generative’ means nothing more than ‘explicit’ and nothing less. Furthermore, it would appear that a rule like move-a has little or no meaning in a non-generative grammar, i.e., one that is merely ‘explicit’, one that does not rely on process type statements as its modus operandi. In other instances, it is difficult to see how ‘explicit’, an adjective, can serve as a synonym for ‘generate’, a verb as this verb has been used throughout the history of transformational generative linguistics.

In some cases, it even seems that ‘to generate’ is a near synonym for ‘to produce’ both in the writings of Chomsky and of other early transformationalists. linguistic theory starting in the writings of Chomsky’s intellectual predecessors and continuing through the writings of Chomsky himself. This understanding of the term ‘generative’ has had a long and interesting history within the confines of. Other commentators have understood that ‘generate’ means ‘specify an infinite set’ and that a ‘generative’ grammar is a grammar which specifies an infinite set of sentences. Chomsky insists that he has always understood a generative grammar to be “nothing more than an explicit grammar”. The 2003 Bhutanese film is entirely in Dzongkha. Dzongkha study is mandatory in all schools in Bhutan, and the language is the in the districts to the south and east where it is not the mother tongue.

Dzongkha was declared as the national language of Bhutan in 1971. There are also some speakers found near the Indian town of, once part of Bhutan but now in.

Browse 582 phrases and 1 ready translation memories. English - Dzongkha dictionary online at Glosbe, free. Usage Dzongkha and its dialects are the native tongue of eight western districts of Bhutan (, and ).ĭefinitions of Dzongkha, synonyms, antonyms, derivatives of Dzongkha, analogical dictionary of Dzongkha (English).

As of 2013, Dzongkha had 171,080 native speakers and about 640,000 total speakers. District-like characterises monasteries, established throughout Bhutan by its unifier, 1st, in the 17th century. The word dzongkha means 'the language of the district' kha is language, and is 'district'. Representative of the distinct from which Dzongkha gets its name Dzongkha, or Bhutanese ( རྫོང་ཁ་ ), is a spoken by over half a million people in Bhutan it is the sole official and national language of the.

Dzongkha english dictionary pdf