The notion of norm. Relativity of norm

Norm may be defined as a set of language rules which are considered to be most standard and correct in a certain epoch and in a certain society. It is next to impossible to work out universal language norms because each functional style has its own regularities.

Norm implies pre-established and conventionally excepted parameters of what is evaluated, obligatory realization of some property. Norms may differ. Special kinds of norms exists: stylistic norms: the norms of a spoken versus, written language etc. The notion of norm is relative.

The existence of norm is based on the possibility of choice of speech units from the variety of elements. The principles of this choice are historically variable. The notion of norm can be defined as a style having an obligatory character among other styles. The notion of norm is applicable to language units of different degree of complexity. The broadest notion is the notion of a literary (standard or received norm of a national language) which can be defined as a totality of pre-established rules and habits of language usage in a given society and at a given period of time)

According to I.V. Arnold, norm is what is actually used, accepted and understood in the given language community depending on concrete conditions of communication.

Literary norm is defined with the help of works of literature, scientific and publicistic prose, as I.R. Galperin noted as well. As I.V. Arnold says, speech is defined by the type and conditions of communication, that is why its correctness is relative. That is why when the character in a work of literature violates the grammar rules it does not necessarily mean that he /she is low-educated, because we should take into consideration the setting, the mood of the character and the situation of communication.

In the narrow meaning of the word, norm is the general standard of literary language. One of the most characteristic and essential properties of the norm is its flexibility. A too rigorous following to the norm brands the human language as pedantic, no matter whether it is oral or written speech. But on the other hand, neglect of the norm will always be regarded as an attempt to violate the norm of the language and to slow down the process of communication. At the same time, a free handling of the norms may be regarded as a permissible application of the flexibility of the norm. The extremes are apparent, but border cases are blurred. Thus, “footsteps on the sand of war” (E.E.Cummings) or “below a time” are clearly violations of the accepted norms of word-building or word-combinations.But “silent thunder”, “the ors and ifs” and the like may from one point of view be regarded as a practical application of the principle of flexibility of the norm and from another – as a violation of the semantic and morphological norms of the English language.

The norm is the invariant of the phonemic, morphological, lexical and syntactical patterns circulating in language-in-action at a given period of time.

Variants of these patterns may sometimes diverge from invariant, but they never exceed the limits set by the invariant lest it should become unrecognizable or misleading.

Norm is a set of rules and restraints. Norm is a psychological and social phenomenon (not only a system of signs) A.E.Darbyshire: “The norm is a linguistic abstraction, an idea thought up by linguists and existing only in their minds”.

Norm can become less rigid. The notion of norm always presupposes a recognized or received standard. There is no universally accepted norm of the standard literary language. There are different norms.

The norm is regarded by some linguists as “a regulator which controls a set of variants, the border of variations and also admissible and inadmissible variants” (E.A.Makayev)

Дата добавления: 2015-11-14