Tampilkan postingan dengan label theory. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label theory. Tampilkan semua postingan

Selasa, 17 Mei 2016

CONTOH MAKALAH MS. FOUND IN A BOTTLE BY ALLAN POE

Ms. Found in a Bottle
The narrator, a self-professed man of reason, has been travelling for a long time, and recently started a voyage on a cargo ship to the Archipelago Islands. Soon the sea and sky grow ominous. It gets very humid and the narrator senses a storm coming. Suddenly one night the ship is pulled by a whirlpool and is wrecked. All of the crew, apart from the narrator and his shipmate, are swept overboard.
The two spend days trying not to succumb to the whirlpool. As they struggle, they encounter the biggest vessel they have ever seen, rising in front of them like a wave. The ship crashes over them and the narrator is flung onto its deck. He hides, stowing himself away in the hold. As the days pass, the narrator writes down his thoughts, hoping to send them out to sea in a bottle someday. He explains how the crew, which is strangely aged and foreign, doesn’t seem to sense his presence at all. The ship reminds him of ships he has known, and has something antique about it, just like its crew, but he can’t figure it out. He observes the captain in his cabin, murmuring like the rest of the crew in an unintelligible way, and fiddling with what looks like ancient scientific instruments and charts.
Walls of ice rise up around the ship, which is headed due south. The crew seem to be excited, as if they heading for some huge discovery. The narrator is terrified but his curiosity outweighs his terror. He keeps writing down his experiences, but as he does, the ship starts to be pulled into the whirlpool and he scribbles his last words as the ship is swallowed up.

Edgar Allan Poe and his Ms.Found in a Bottle

Born January 19, 1809, Boston, Massachusetts, U.S. American short-story writer, poet, critic, and editor Edgar Allan Poe's tales of mystery and horror initiated the modern detective story, and the atmosphere in his tales of horror is unrivaled in American fiction.
"MS. Found in a Bottle" is an 1833 short story by American writer Edgar Allan Poe. The plot follows an unnamed narrator at sea who finds himself in a series of harrowing circumstances. As he nears his own disastrous death while his ship drives ever southward, he writes an "MS.", or manuscript, telling of his adventures which he casts into the sea. Some critics believe the story was meant as a satire of typical sea tales.
Poe submitted "MS. Found in a Bottle" as one of many entries to a writing contest offered by the weekly Baltimore Saturday Visiter. Each of the stories was well liked by the judges but they unanimously chose "MS. Found in a Bottle" as the contest's winner, earning Poe a $50 prize. The story was then published in the October 19, 1833, issue of theVisiter.

The Analysis
“Allan Poe and Symmes’ Theory of Earth”

Ø  What is “Symmes’ Theory of earth”?
“I declare the earth is hollow, and habitable within; containing a number of solid concentrick spheres, one within the other, and that it is open at the poles 12 or 16 degrees; I pledge my life in support of this truth, and am ready to explore the hollow, if the world will support and aid me in the undertaking.”
— John Cleves Symmes, Jr., Symmes' Circular No. 1

One concept, and potential bombshell of a game changer, has always stood out. It did so by stealth. Hollow Earth just pretended to be another loony idea that. Some people just seem to get a kick out of. It can only be true or false. There is no middle ground, only hollow ground or solid ground.
The range of the implications of the earth being hollow are important. Hugely, massively important. They go as far as explaining dozens of anomalies that surround us. All freaking kinds of parallel, alternative, weird and conspiratorial ideas. In a word: woowoo ideas. Ideas which are becoming mainstream, and not that it matters what a majority of any kind thinks or what opinions it holds. The masses are dark (doesn't) matter in the larger scheme of things.
This first part about the Ultimate Woowoo intends to synthesize as much as possible what one has to look at and know about to get a basic idea. There is also an emphasis on visual evidence in this introduction to the Hollow Earth.
Several authors have done a thorough job at combing through the evidence. Just as an example, one writer and researcher has a bibliography of some 50 arctic expedition books in his piece of 450 pages, and he gives these most diverse and astounding anomalies a cold and hard look. This author, Marshall B. Gardner, sent a copy of "A Journey to the Earth's Interior, Or Have the Poles Really Been Discovered?" to the US government in 1920 and challenged them to refute it. The Feds haven't gotten around to it yet, and it was a few decades ago.
Ø  Was that related to “Ms.Found in a Bottle”?
Yes, it was. Galileo Galilei, as we know, he found the shape of earth which is round. In the 1818, John Cleves Symmes Jr stated that earth has two holes and those are connected each other. Symmes Jr claimed the holes are whirlpools in North and South Poles. Then, he asked marine of America to do an expedition for proving his theory. He died in 1829 and his son built a monument for remembering him. The monument looks like an earth with tho holes. In 1833, Edgar Allan Poe published his writing “Ms.Found in a Bottle” which tells readers about a man standing in a boat and going down into a hole. Tha man is scared but his curious is bigger than that. Then the man fell down and the story ended there.

We can conclude, Allan Poe’s writing is a critique for Symmes Jr’s theory about hollow earth that.

CONTOH MAKALAH GREENBERG SIX-WAY CLASSIFICATION

INTRODUCTION
There is a long tradition in linguistics that treats the basic word order of the subject, object, and verb as a fundamental typological parameter, that treats the question of whether a language is SOY, SYO, YSO, YOS, OYS, or OSY as one the most important things to know about a language. The term basic word order is used in various ways by different linguists, often without an apparent awareness that it is being applied to different notions. The characterization of basic word order by Hawkins (1983) is representative of criteria assumed by many linguists: he uses a set of different criteria, all of which tend to correlate with each other, though none of them are necessary properties. These include the most frequent order, the order that occurs in the broadest set of syntactic environments, and the order that is unmarked by a variety of other markedness criteria. But apart from the description of particular languages, the notion of basic word order has played its most significant role in identifying the orders of various pairs or sets of elements that provide the empirical basis for the crosslinguistic generalizations originally discussed by Greenberg (1963) and pursued in works by various people (e.g. Lehmann 1973, Vennemann 1976, Hawkins 1983, Dryer 1992). Whatever the merits of the various criteria discussed by Hawkins, the fact remains that the empirical basis for these generalizations has largely been statements in grammatical descriptions which describe one order of some pair or set of elements as the normal order or the most common order. In other words, while criteria other than frequency may typically correlate with the most frequent word order, a large body of descriptive literature provides statements regarding the apparent relative frequency of different orders, but very little evidence regarding other criteria, excepting that for many languages, like English, one order is so clearly basic by all criteria that no questions arise.
GREENBERG’S THEORY
Greenberg was not explicit as to his criteria for assigning a basic order to a language, but it appears that he was motivated primarily by that language’s canonical order. For example, his first universal appealed to declarative sentences with nominal subject and object (1963:77) and he classified German and Chinese as SVO, the most frequent order in those languages in main clause declaratives, despite the facts that those languages also manifest SOV order.
            Many of the typological generalization in the greenberg paper wee based on correlations with these six basic orders, thought the rarity of languages in which the object precedes the subject prevented him from saying much about other typological mproperties of languages with these three orderings. So, for example, he showed that three are robust correlations between basic word order and whwther a language has prepositions, as in table 1.
Table 1 Correlations between word order and
Adopsition order (Greenberg 1963)

VSO
SVO
SOV
Preposition
6
10
0
postposition
0
3
11

Most typologists since Greenberg have, continued to assume the six-way typology and to base it primarily on canonical orde. A typical examples is Tomlin (1986). This work attempted to calculate the percentages of each language in terms of basic (that is canonical) order and went on to propose functional explanations for the statistical break-down (table 2).
Table 2 Proportions of basic con-
stituency orders (Tomlin 1986)
Word order
Languages
Number
%
SOV
180
45
SVO
168
42
VSO
37
9
VOS
12
3
OVS
5
1
OSV
0
0
Total
402

           
Given the apparent usefulness of the notion ‘canonical word order’, one might assume that most uttered sentences in most languages would be canonical. Such is emphatically not the case, however. It has been demonstrated that in the spoken language, sentences with a subject, a verb and an object, where the two arguments are full lexical items, are a minority in all languages and a tiny minority inmany languages. Rather, what one finds is what Du Bois (1985) calls ‘Preferred Arguments Structure’, namely a verb with one full argument, which is typically either the subject of an intransitive verb or the object of a transitive verb.
Consider even English, which is not a null-subject language and is widely considered to be rigdly SVO. A corpus of 20,794 senteces from 2400 telephone converations between unacquainted adults included only 5975 ( 29 per cent ) that were SVO.
The usefulness of canonical order over Preferred Argument Structure for typological purposes can be appreciated by a look at two languages in which object pronouns and full object NPs are in complementary distribution – French and Chichewa. In those language, pronouns precede the main verb, lexical Nps follow it. Given that pronoun-V sequences are more frequent in discourse than V-full NP sequences, one might be tempted to predict that French and Chichewa would manifest OV typological correlations. Such is not the case however; both languages are robustly VO in their correlations. (Willems, Defrancq, Colleman, Noel : 2003).
EXAMPLES
  1. VSO. Examples of languages with VSO word order include Semitic languages (including Arabic, Classical Hebrew, and Ge'ez  (Classical Ethiopic)), and Celtic languages (including Irish, Scottish Gaelic, Manx, Welsh, Cornish and   Breton), and many Mesoamerican languages.
Example of Arabic : يقرأ المدرس الكتا (yaqraʼu l-mudarrisu l-kitāba). Verb-Subject-Object.
  1. SVO. Languages regarded as SVO include Berber, Bulgarian, Chinese, English, Estonian, Filipino, French, Italian, Portuguese, Quiche, Romanian, Rotuman, Spanish, Swahili, Thai, Vietnamese, Yoruba and Zulu.
Example of English : She loves him. Subject-Verb-Object.
  1. SOV. This pattern is used by Adyghe and Basque.
Example of Basque : Enekok sagarra ekarri du. Subject-Object-Verb.
  1. VOS. Commonly cited examples include Austronesian languages (such as Malagasy, Old Javanese, Toba Batak and Fijian) and Mayan languages (such as Tzotzil).
  2. OSV. OSV is used by Korean, Japanese, Arabic, atc.
Example of Japanese : 그사과  었어요 . Object-Subject-Verb.
  1. OVS. This pattern is used by Turkish, Dannish, Finnish, etc.
Example of Turkish : Bardağı kırdı John. Object-Verb-Subject.
CONCLUSION
In linguistics, word order typology is the study of the order of the syntactic constituents of a language, and how different languages can employ different orders. Correlations between orders found in different syntactic sub-domains are also of interest. The primary word orders that are of interest are the constituent order of a clause – the relative order of subject, object, and verb; the order of modifiers (adjectives, numerals, demonstratives, possessives, and adjuncts) in a noun phrase; and the order of adverbials.
Some languages use relatively restrictive word order, often relying on the order of constituents to convey important grammatical information. Others—often those that convey grammatical information through inflection—allow more flexibility, which can be used to encode pragmatic information such as topicalisation or focus. Most languages, however, have a preferred word order.
Most nominative–accusative languages—which have a major word class of nouns and clauses that include subject and object—define constituent word order in terms of the finite verb (V) and its arguments, the subject (S), and object (O).
There are six theoretically possible basic word orders for the transitive sentence: subject–verb–object (SVO), subject–object–verb (SOV), verb–subject–object (VSO), verb–object–subject (VOS), object–subject–verb (OSV) and object–verb–subject (OVS). The overwhelming majority of the world's languages are either SVO or SOV, with a much smaller but still significant portion using VSO word order. The remaining three arrangements are exceptionally rare, with VOS being slightly more common than OSV, and OVS being significantly more rare than the two preceding orders. These six-way classification were developed by Joseph H. Greenberg.
REFERENCES
Dryer, Matthew S. 1989. Discourse-governed word order and word order typology. Belgian Journal of Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Du Bois, John W. 1987. The Discourse Basis of Ergativity. Language 63: 805-855.
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1963. Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. Cambridge. Mass: MIT Press.
Hawkins, John A. 1983. Word order universals. New York: Academic Press.
Lehm Dryer, MatthewS. 1983. Coos word order. Paper delivered at the Western Conference on Language. Eugene: Oregon.
Lehmann, Winfred P. 1973. A structural principle of language and its implications. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Tomlin, Russell. 1986. Basic Word Order: Functional Principles. London: Croom Helm.
Vennemann, Theo. 1976. Categorial grammar and the order of meaningful elements. In: Juilland, A. (ed).  Saratoga, California: Anma Libri.
Willems, Dominique., Defrancq, Bart., Colleman, Timothy., Noel, Dirk. 2003. Contrastive Analysis in Languange. Palgrave: New York.
Winfred P. 1978. The great underlying ground-plans. Austin: University of Texas Press.