2408-932XResearch Result. Social Studies and Humanities2408-932X10.18413/2408-932X-2016-2-2-69-73650RESEARCHESTHE SPECIFICS OF LINGVOGENETIC RESEARCH: COMPARATIVE-HISTORICAL AND HISTORICAL METHODSTHE SPECIFICS OF LINGVOGENETIC RESEARCH: COMPARATIVE-HISTORICAL AND HISTORICAL METHODSTyschenkoKateryna A.TyschenkoKateryna A.k.a.tyshchenko@gmail.com20162200

The crucial thing is the fact that the comparative-historical method is the most important instrument for the cognition of language history, that possesses, firstly, certain features and, secondly, some constraints of implementation. The comparative-historical method should be interpreted as a complex unit that contains three diverse components: ontological, operational and theological. The main purpose of the comparative-historical method (a theological component) is to reconstruct the antecedent models of allied languages families and groups, their further development and division into separate languages, and creation of the comparative-historical description of allied languages (grammars and dictionaries). The specific principles (the principle of historicism, the principle of causality, consistency principle and the principle of universal connection of phenomena) and approaches (historical, causal, and systematic) constitute the ontological component of the comparative-historical method. The operational component of the comparative-historical method is represented by such methods and procedures as: 1) genetic equation of facts, 2) linguistic reconstruction of the archetype and phonetic linguistic law, 3) chronology and localization of linguistic phenomena. Uneven changes occurred in different levels of one linguistic structure and throughout some representatives of language family, archaisms and innovations available are a diachronic linguistics axiom. A procedure of linguistic reconstruction plays a rather significant role in the practice of modern comparatively genetic studies. For sure, the reconstruction is the most essential part of the comparative-historical method. Three kinds of linguistic reconstruction are distinguished in scientific literature: external, internal and the philological method. Definitely, the primary goal of genetic research is to outline the historical process development of allied languages or the separate language. Nowadays only the issue of the scope of innovations in certain languages entering the jurisdiction of comparative-historical method is argued.

The crucial thing is the fact that the comparative-historical method is the most important instrument for the cognition of language history, that possesses, firstly, certain features and, secondly, some constraints of implementation. The comparative-historical method should be interpreted as a complex unit that contains three diverse components: ontological, operational and theological. The main purpose of the comparative-historical method (a theological component) is to reconstruct the antecedent models of allied languages families and groups, their further development and division into separate languages, and creation of the comparative-historical description of allied languages (grammars and dictionaries). The specific principles (the principle of historicism, the principle of causality, consistency principle and the principle of universal connection of phenomena) and approaches (historical, causal, and systematic) constitute the ontological component of the comparative-historical method. The operational component of the comparative-historical method is represented by such methods and procedures as: 1) genetic equation of facts, 2) linguistic reconstruction of the archetype and phonetic linguistic law, 3) chronology and localization of linguistic phenomena. Uneven changes occurred in different levels of one linguistic structure and throughout some representatives of language family, archaisms and innovations available are a diachronic linguistics axiom. A procedure of linguistic reconstruction plays a rather significant role in the practice of modern comparatively genetic studies. For sure, the reconstruction is the most essential part of the comparative-historical method. Three kinds of linguistic reconstruction are distinguished in scientific literature: external, internal and the philological method. Definitely, the primary goal of genetic research is to outline the historical process development of allied languages or the separate language. Nowadays only the issue of the scope of innovations in certain languages entering the jurisdiction of comparative-historical method is argued.

methodontological componentoperational componenttheological componentcomparative-historical methodhistorical methodlinguistic reconstructioncomparisonmethodontological componentoperational componenttheological componentcomparative-historical methodhistorical methodlinguistic reconstructioncomparisonСписок литературыCrowley, T. and Bowern, C. An Introduction to Historical Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2010. 376 p.Gluschenko, V. A. The Principles of Comparatively Historical Research in Ukrainian and Russian Linguistics (70-ies nineteenth century – 20-ies the twentieth century). Donetsk, 1998. 222 p.Hale, M. Historical Linguistics: Theory and Method. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2007. 269 p.Khrolenko, A. T. General Linguistics. Moscow: Prosveshchenie, 1989. 127 p.Klimov, G. A. The Issues of Comparative-Genetic Methods of Research. Leningrad: Nauka, 1971. 87 p.Klimov, G. A. The Methodology of Linguogenetic Research (Introduction). General Linguistics: the Methods of Linguistic Research. Moscow: Nauka, 1973. Pp. 9-33.Koduhov, V. I. The General Linguistics. Moscow: Vysshaya shkola, 1974. 303 p.Makaev, E. A. The General Theory of Comparative Linguistics. Moscow: Nauka, 1977. 205 p.Millar, R. McColl. Trask’s Historical Linguistics. London: Hodder Education, 2007. 514 p.Neroznak, V. P. The Comparative-historical method. Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary. Moscow: Sovetskaya Entziklopediya, 1990. Pp. 485-486.Serebrennikov, B. A. The Problem of the Common Methodology, Linguistics and Separate Methods Correlation of Research. General Linguistics: the Methods of Linguistic Research. Moscow: Nauka, 1973. Pp. 257-313.Smirnitskiy, A. I. The Comparative-historical method and the Definition of Language Alliance: Materials to Linguistic Courses. Moscow: Publishing of Moscow University, 1955. 58 p.Tischenko, K. A. On an Issue of Linguistic Reconstruction. Lexical and Grammatical Innovations in Modern Slavic Languages: Proceedings of the International Conference II, April 14-15, 2005. Dnipropetrovsk: Porogi, 2005. Pp. 411-414.Tischenko, K. A. The Problems of Lingvogenetic Methodology (Theoretical and Lingvohistorical Aspects). Visnik Dnipropetrovskogo universitetu: seriya Movoznavstvo. Dnipropetrovsk: Vidavnitstvo DNU. Vol. 2. Vip. 11 (2005). Pp. 179-186.Vinogradov, V. A. The Methods of Typology. General Linguistics: the Methods of Linguistic Research. Moscow: Nauka, 1973. Pp. 224–256.Zhuravlev, V. K. The Internal Reconstruction. Comparative-Historical Study of Languages of Different Families: The Theory of Linguistic Reconstruction. Moscow: Nauka, 1988. Pp. 68-90.Zvegintsev, V. A. Essays on General Linguistics. Moscow: Publishing of Moscow University, 1962. 384 p.