Literary criticism is at rapid development in the second half of XIX century simultaneously with the development of comparative linguistics. In Russia, the representatives of comparative linguistics were P.M. Samarin, V.M. Jirmunskiy, M.P. Alekseev, N.I. Conrad, I.G. Neupokoeva, etc.
The two sciences — Comparative Typology and Literary criticism have a number of similarities:
linguistic comparison deals with identifying universal principles of the comparative description of the systems of national languages. Literary criticism establishes general principles of typological description of national literature;
both sciences deal with identifying systemic features and discover typological isomorphism which can be conditioned structurally, genetically and geographically, etc.
The history of linguistic comparison is an integral part of linguistic science development, which is bound with the history of the nation and cognition. That is why there are no generally accepted criteria for timing this problem yet. We will see Dr. Buranov’s viewpoint. The history of linguistic comparison is an integral part of linguistic science development, which is bound with the history of the nation and cognition. That is why there are no generally accepted criteria for timing this problem yet. We will see Dr. Buranov’s viewpoint.
In his book “Сравнительная типология английского и тюркских языков” he identifies 4 periods in the history of typological studies:
The second period is characterized as a period of establishing the first scientific comparison of languages
The third period is related to development of comparative historical linguistics,
The fourth period is related to establishing of Comparative Typology as a separate science
The first period is characterized as a spontaneous or evolutionary
The science of linguistic comparison was developing quite slowly and a number of factors played an important role to foster that process. They were also suggested by Dr. Buranov.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
