ꯂꯣꯟꯃꯤꯠ(linguistics) ꯇꯥ, ꯂꯣꯟꯆꯠ ꯄꯊꯥꯞ ꯑꯁꯤ ꯏꯪꯂꯤꯁ ꯂꯣꯟꯗ ꯍꯟꯗꯣꯛꯂꯒꯅꯥ ꯒ꯭ꯔꯥꯃꯥꯔ(Grammar) ꯍꯥꯏꯕ ꯑꯗꯨꯅꯤ,ꯃꯁꯤ ꯂꯣꯟ ꯱ ꯒꯤ ꯄꯊꯥꯞ ꯑꯣꯏꯗꯨꯅꯥ ꯂꯣꯟ ꯑꯗꯨꯒꯤ ꯋꯥꯍꯩ, ꯋꯥꯍꯩ ꯆꯕꯨꯟ ꯑꯃꯁꯨꯡ ꯃꯈꯥꯄꯣꯟꯕ ꯋꯥꯔꯦꯡ,ꯋꯥꯍꯩꯄꯔꯦꯡ ꯑꯁꯤꯅꯆꯤꯡꯕ ꯃꯌꯥꯝ ꯉꯥꯛ ꯁꯦꯟꯂꯤ ꯫ ꯋꯥꯍꯩ ꯑꯁꯤꯅ ꯑꯁꯤꯒꯨꯝꯕ ꯄꯊꯥꯞꯁꯤꯡ ꯑꯁꯤ ꯇꯝꯅꯕꯁꯨ ꯈꯪꯅꯩ, ꯑꯃꯁꯨꯡ ꯂꯝ ꯑꯁꯤꯗ ꯐꯣꯅꯣꯂꯣꯖꯤ, ꯃꯣꯔꯐꯣꯂꯣꯖꯤ, ꯑꯃꯁꯨꯡ ꯁꯤꯟꯇꯦꯛꯁ ꯌꯥꯎꯔꯤ, ꯃꯈꯣꯏꯁꯤꯡ ꯑꯁꯤ ꯑꯌꯥꯝꯕꯅ ꯐꯣꯅꯦꯇꯤꯛꯁ, ꯁꯦꯃꯦꯟꯇꯤꯛꯁ ꯑꯃꯁꯨꯡ ꯄ꯭ꯔꯦꯒꯃꯦꯇꯤꯛꯁꯅꯥ ꯃꯄꯨꯡ ꯐꯥꯍꯜꯂꯤ ꯫
ꯂꯣꯜ ꯑꯃꯒꯤ ꯋꯥꯉꯥꯡꯂꯣꯏꯁꯤꯡꯅꯥ ꯂꯣꯜ ꯑꯗꯨ ꯁꯤꯖꯤꯟꯅꯅꯕꯒꯤꯗꯃꯛ ꯏꯟꯇꯔꯅꯦꯂꯥꯏꯖ ꯇꯧꯔꯕ ꯔꯨꯜꯁꯤꯡꯒꯤ ꯁꯦꯠ ꯑꯃꯥ ꯂꯩ[ꯄ] ꯑꯃꯁꯨꯡ ꯔꯨꯜꯁꯤꯡ ꯑꯁꯤꯅꯥ ꯂꯣꯜ ꯑꯗꯨꯒꯤ ꯒ꯭ꯔꯥꯃꯥꯔ ꯑꯗꯨ ꯁꯦꯝꯃꯤ ꯫ ꯒ꯭ꯔꯥꯃꯥꯔꯗ ꯌꯥꯎꯔꯤꯕ ꯏꯅꯐꯣꯔꯃꯦꯁꯅꯒꯤ ꯑꯌꯥꯝꯕꯥ ꯁꯔꯨꯛ ꯑꯁꯤ – ꯌꯥꯃꯗ꯭ꯔꯕꯗ ꯀꯅꯥꯒꯨꯝꯕ ꯑꯃꯒꯤ ꯃꯃꯥꯂꯣꯟꯒꯤ ꯑꯣꯏꯅꯗꯤ – ꯀꯟꯁꯆꯤꯌꯁ ꯁ꯭ꯇꯗꯤ ꯅꯠꯇ꯭ꯔꯒ ꯏꯟꯁꯠꯔꯛꯁꯅꯒꯤ ꯈꯨꯠꯊꯥꯡꯗ ꯅꯠꯇꯦ, ꯑꯗꯨꯕꯨ ꯑꯇꯣꯞꯄꯥ ꯋꯥꯉꯥꯡꯂꯣꯏꯁꯤꯡꯕꯨ ꯌꯦꯡꯗꯨꯅꯥ ꯐꯪꯕꯅꯤ꯫ ꯃꯁꯤꯒꯤ ꯊꯕꯛ ꯑꯁꯤꯒꯤ ꯑꯌꯥꯝꯕꯥ ꯁꯔꯨꯛ ꯑꯁꯤ ꯑꯉꯥꯡ ꯑꯣꯏꯔꯤꯉꯩꯗꯥ ꯄꯥꯡꯊꯣꯀꯏ; ꯄꯨꯟꯁꯤꯒꯤ ꯃꯇꯨꯡꯗꯥ ꯂꯣꯜ ꯑꯃꯥ ꯇꯝꯕꯗꯥ ꯃꯍꯧꯁꯥꯅ ꯍꯦꯟꯅ ꯃꯌꯦꯛ ꯁꯦꯡꯕ ꯇꯝꯕꯤꯕꯒꯤ ꯆꯥꯡ ꯌꯥꯎꯏ ꯫ ꯑꯁꯨꯝꯅ, ꯒ꯭ꯔꯥꯃꯥꯔ ꯑꯁꯤ ꯂꯣꯜ ꯁꯤꯖꯤꯟꯅꯕꯒꯤ ꯃꯈꯥ ꯄꯣꯜꯂꯤꯕ ꯀꯣꯒꯅꯤꯇꯤꯕ ꯏꯅꯐꯣꯔꯃꯦꯁꯅꯅꯤ ꯫  Thus, grammar is the cognitive information underlying language use.
The term "grammar" can also be used to describe the rules that govern the linguistic behaviour of a group of speakers. The term "English grammar", therefore, may have several meanings. It may refer to the whole of English grammar, that is, to the grammars of all the speakers of the language, in which case, the term encompasses a great deal of variation. Alternatively, it may refer only to what is common to the grammars of all, or of the vast majority of English speakers (such as subject–verb–object word order in simple declarative sentences). Or it may refer to the rules of a particular, relatively well-defined variety of English (such as standard English for a particular region).
A specific description, study or analysis of such rules may also be referred to as a grammar. A reference book describing the grammar of a language is called a "reference grammar" or simply "a grammar" (see History of English grammars). A fully explicit grammar that exhaustively describes the grammatical constructions of a language is called a descriptive grammar. This kind of linguistic description contrasts with linguistic prescription, an attempt to discourage or suppress some grammatical constructions, while promoting others. For example, preposition stranding occurs widely in Germanic languages and has a long history in English. John Dryden, however, objected to it (without explanation), leading other English speakers to avoid the construction and discourage its use.
Outside linguistics, the term grammar is often used in a rather different sense. In some respects, it may be used more broadly, including rules of spelling and punctuation, which linguists would not typically consider to form part of grammar, but rather as a part of orthography, the set of conventions used for writing a language. In other respects, it may be used more narrowly, to refer to prescriptive grammar only and excluding those aspects of a language's grammar that are not subject to variation or debate. Jeremy Butterfield claimed that, for non-linguists, "Grammar is often a generic way of referring to any aspect of English that people object to."
ꯋꯥꯄꯣꯛꯂꯣꯟ ꯊꯤꯂꯦꯜ[ꯁꯦꯝꯒꯠꯂꯨ | ꯁꯦꯝꯒꯠꯂꯛꯄꯒꯤ ꯍꯧꯔꯛꯐꯝ]
ꯂꯣꯟꯆꯠ ꯄꯊꯥꯞ ꯑꯁꯤ ꯃꯤꯇꯩꯂꯣꯟ ꯒꯤ ꯅꯧꯅꯥ ꯁꯦꯝꯕ ꯋꯥꯍꯩ ꯑꯃꯅꯤ ꯫ ꯃꯁꯤꯅꯥ ꯃꯤꯇꯩꯂꯣꯟ ꯉꯥꯡꯅꯔꯤꯕ ꯀꯥꯡꯕꯨꯗ ꯍꯦꯟꯅ ꯈꯨꯗꯣꯡꯆꯥꯕ ꯄꯤꯔꯤ ꯑꯃꯗꯤ ꯒꯔꯥꯃꯃꯥꯔ(grammar) ꯍꯥꯏꯕ ꯋꯥꯍꯩ ꯁꯤ ꯑꯔꯤꯕ ꯒ꯭ꯔꯤꯛ ꯂꯣꯟ ꯗꯒꯤ ꯑꯣꯏꯔꯛꯄꯅꯤ "γραμματικὴ τέχνη "(grammatikē technē), ꯃꯁꯤꯒꯤ ꯋꯥꯍꯟꯗꯤ "ꯃꯌꯦꯛ ꯁꯤꯡꯒꯤ ꯍꯩꯁꯤꯡꯕ", γράμμα (gramma), ꯗꯒꯤ ꯬꯬꯫ ꯃꯁꯤꯒ ꯆꯞ ꯃꯥꯟꯅꯕ ꯒ꯭ꯔꯤꯛ ꯃꯔꯨ(ꯃꯔꯥ)ꯁꯨ ꯎꯠꯂꯛꯂꯤ graphics, grapheme, and photograph ꯗꯥ ꯫
ꯄꯨꯋꯥꯔꯤ[ꯁꯦꯝꯒꯠꯂꯨ | ꯁꯦꯝꯒꯠꯂꯛꯄꯒꯤ ꯍꯧꯔꯛꯐꯝ]
ꯕꯦꯕꯤꯂꯣꯟ ꯀꯥꯡꯕꯨꯁꯤꯡꯅꯥ ꯑꯍꯥꯟꯕ ꯑꯣꯏꯅꯥ ꯂꯣꯟꯒꯤ ꯃꯇꯥꯡꯗ ꯁꯟꯗꯣꯛꯅꯥ ꯇꯥꯛꯅꯕ ꯍꯣꯠꯅꯔꯝꯃꯤ, ꯑꯗꯨꯕ ꯑꯍꯥꯟꯕ ꯊꯧꯁꯤꯜ ꯅꯥꯏꯕ ꯂꯣꯟꯆꯠ ꯄꯊꯥꯞ ꯑꯁꯤ ꯁꯤꯖꯤꯟꯅꯕ ꯍꯧꯕꯁꯤ ꯁꯥꯟꯁꯀ꯭ꯔꯤꯠ, ꯍꯣꯔꯛꯐꯝꯅꯥ ꯏꯟꯗꯤꯌꯥ ꯌꯣꯠꯀꯤ ꯆꯍꯤ ꯃꯇꯥꯡꯅꯥ ꯑꯣꯏ, ꯂꯣꯏꯅꯅ ꯌꯥꯁꯀꯥ (꯶ ꯁꯨꯕ ꯆꯥꯍꯤ ꯆꯥ ꯖꯤꯁꯨꯁ ꯄꯣꯛꯇ꯭ꯔꯤꯉꯩ ꯃꯃꯥꯡꯗ), ꯄꯥꯅꯤꯅꯤ (꯶-꯵ ꯁꯎꯕ ꯆꯥꯍꯤ ꯆꯥ ꯖꯤꯁꯨꯁ ꯄꯣꯛꯇ꯭ꯔꯤꯉꯩ ꯃꯃꯥꯡꯗ)) ꯑꯃꯁꯨꯡ ꯃꯍꯥꯛꯀꯤ ꯋꯥꯉꯥꯡꯂꯣꯏ ꯄꯤꯟꯒꯥꯂꯥ (c.꯲꯰꯰ ꯕꯤ ꯁꯤ), Katyayana, and Patanjali (2nd century BC). Tolkāppiyam, the earliest Tamil grammar, is mostly dated to before the 5th century AD.
In the West, grammar emerged as a discipline in Hellenism from the 3rd century BC forward with authors like Rhyanus and Aristarchus of Samothrace, the oldest extant work being the Art of Grammar (Τέχνη Γραμματική), attributed to Dionysius Thrax (c. 100 BC). Latin grammar developed by following Greek models from the 1st century BC, due to the work of authors such as Orbilius Pupillus, Remmius Palaemon, Marcus Valerius Probus, Verrius Flaccus, and Aemilius Asper.
A grammar of Irish originated in the 7th century with the Auraicept na n-Éces. Arabic grammar emerged with Abu al-Aswad al-Du'ali in the 7th century. The first treatises on Hebrew grammar appeared in the High Middle Ages, in the context of Mishnah (exegesis of the Hebrew Bible). The Karaite tradition originated in Abbasid Baghdad. The Diqduq (10th century) is one of the earliest grammatical commentaries on the Hebrew Bible. Ibn Barun in the 12th century compares the Hebrew language with Arabic in the Islamic grammatical tradition.
Belonging to the trivium of the seven liberal arts, grammar was taught as a core discipline throughout the Middle Ages, following the influence of authors from Late Antiquity, such as Priscian. Treatment of vernaculars began gradually during the High Middle Ages, with isolated works such as the First Grammatical Treatise, but became influential only in the Renaissance and Baroque periods. In 1486, Antonio de Nebrija published Las introduciones Latinas contrapuesto el romance al Latin, and the first Spanish grammar, Gramática de la lengua castellana, in 1492. During the 16th-century Italian Renaissance, the Questione della lingua was the discussion on the status and ideal form of the Italian language, initiated by Dante's de vulgari eloquentia (Pietro Bembo, Prose della volgar lingua Venice 1525). The first grammar of Slovene language was written in 1583 by Adam Bohorič.
Grammars of non-European languages began to be compiled for the purposes of evangelization and Bible translation from the 16th century onward, such as Grammatica o Arte de la Lengua General de los Indios de los Reynos del Perú (1560), and a Quechua grammar by Fray Domingo de Santo Tomás.
From the latter part of the 18th century, grammar came to be understood as a subfield of the emerging discipline of modern linguistics. The Deutsche Grammatik of the Jacob Grimm was first published in the 1810s. The Comparative Grammar of Franz Bopp, the starting point of modern comparative linguistics, came out in 1833.
Theoretical frameworks[ꯁꯦꯝꯒꯠꯂꯨ | ꯁꯦꯝꯒꯠꯂꯛꯄꯒꯤ ꯍꯧꯔꯛꯐꯝ]
Frameworks of grammar, which attempt to give a precise scientific theory of the syntax rules of grammar and their function, have been developed in theoretical linguistics. Most mainstream frameworks are based on the conception of an innate "universal grammar", an idea developed by Noam Chomsky. The most prominent theories are:
- Generative grammar: algorithmic constituency aka "phrase structure" relation (Noam Chomsky 1950)
- Transformational grammar (1960s)
- Generalised phrase structure grammar (late 1970s)
- Lexical functional grammar
- Categorial grammar (lambda calculus)
- Minimalist program-based grammar (1993)
- Dependency grammar: dependency relation (Lucien Tesnière 1959)
- Cognitive grammar / Cognitive linguistics
- Stochastic grammar: probabilistic
- Functional grammar: usage-oriented (behaviorist)
Parse trees are commonly (but not always) used by such frameworks to depict their rules. There are various additional notation schemes for some grammars:
- Constraint grammar
- Tree-adjoining grammar
- Affix grammar over a finite lattice
- Lambda calculus
- X-bar theory
- Backus–Naur form
ꯂꯣꯟꯆꯠ ꯄꯊꯥꯞ ꯆꯥꯎꯈꯠꯂꯛꯄꯒꯤ ꯃꯇꯥꯡꯗ[ꯁꯦꯝꯒꯠꯂꯨ | ꯁꯦꯝꯒꯠꯂꯛꯄꯒꯤ ꯍꯧꯔꯛꯐꯝ]
Grammars evolve through usage and also due to separations of the human population. With the advent of written representations, formal rules about language usage tend to appear also. Formal grammars are codifications of usage that are developed by repeated documentation over time, and by observation as well. As the rules become established and developed, the prescriptive concept of grammatical correctness can arise. This often creates a discrepancy between contemporary usage and that which has been accepted, over time, as being correct. Linguists tend to view prescriptive grammars as having little justification beyond their authors' aesthetic tastes, although style guides may give useful advice about standard language employment, based on descriptions of usage in contemporary writings of the same language. Linguistic prescriptions also form part of the explanation for variation in speech, particularly variation in the speech of an individual speaker (an explanation, for example, for why some people say "I didn't do nothing", some say "I didn't do anything", and some say one or the other depending on social context).
The formal study of grammar is an important part of education for children from a young age through advanced learning, though the rules taught in schools are not a "grammar" in the sense most linguists use the term, particularly as they are often prescriptive rather than descriptive.
Constructed languages (also called planned languages or conlangs) are more common in the modern day than they used to be, although still extremely uncommon compared to natural languages. Many have been designed to aid human communication (for example, naturalistic Interlingua, schematic Esperanto, and the highly logic-compatible artificial language Lojban). Each of these languages has its own grammar.
Syntax refers to the linguistic structure above the word level (e.g. how sentences are formed)—though without taking into account intonation, which is the domain of phonology. Morphology, by contrast, refers to structure at and below the word level (e.g. how compound words are formed), but above the level of individual sounds, which, like intonation, are in the domain of phonology. No clear line can be drawn, however, between syntax and morphology. Analytic languages use syntax to convey information that is encoded via inflection in synthetic languages. In other words, word order is not significant and morphology is highly significant in a purely synthetic language, whereas morphology is not significant and syntax is highly significant in an analytic language. Chinese and Afrikaans, for example, are highly analytic, and meaning is therefore very context-dependent. (Both do have some inflections, and have had more in the past; thus, they are becoming even less synthetic and more "purely" analytic over time.) Latin, which is highly synthetic, uses affixes and inflections to convey the same information that Chinese does with syntax. Because Latin words are quite (though not completely) self-contained, an intelligible Latin sentence can be made from elements that are placed in a largely arbitrary order. Latin has a complex affixation and simple syntax, while Chinese has the opposite.
ꯃꯍꯩ ꯃꯁꯤꯟ[ꯁꯦꯝꯒꯠꯂꯨ | ꯁꯦꯝꯒꯠꯂꯛꯄꯒꯤ ꯍꯧꯔꯛꯐꯝ]
ꯂꯣꯟꯆꯠ ꯄꯊꯥꯞ ꯑꯁꯤ ꯌꯥꯝꯅꯥ ꯅꯧꯔꯤꯉꯩ ꯃꯇꯝ ꯑꯃꯁꯨꯡ ꯃꯌꯥꯝ ꯑꯣꯏꯕ ꯃꯍꯩ ꯃꯁꯤꯡ ꯇꯝꯂꯤꯕ ꯃꯤꯑꯣꯏꯁꯤꯡꯗ ꯇꯥꯛꯄꯤ ꯇꯝꯕꯤ ꯃꯍꯩꯂꯣꯏꯁꯪꯁꯤꯡꯒꯤ ꯎꯖꯥꯁꯤꯡꯅꯥ ꯫
ꯃꯑꯣꯡ ꯇꯥꯔꯕ ꯂꯣꯟ ꯑꯁꯤ ꯂꯣꯟ ꯑꯗꯨꯗꯥ ꯏꯕꯥ, ꯃꯍꯩ ꯃꯁꯤꯡ ꯇꯝꯕꯤꯕꯥ ꯑꯃꯁꯨꯡ ꯂꯣꯟ ꯑꯗꯨ ꯃꯤꯌꯥꯝ ꯇꯤꯟꯕ ꯃꯐꯝꯗ ꯄꯥꯛ ꯁꯟꯅꯥ ꯉꯥꯡꯅꯕ ꯑꯣꯏꯒꯗꯕꯅꯤ ꯫ ꯃꯁꯤꯒꯤ ꯈꯦꯠꯅꯕꯅꯥ ꯃꯃꯥꯂꯣꯟ ꯗꯒꯤ ꯈꯖꯤꯛ ꯈꯔꯥꯛ ꯍꯦꯟꯗꯣꯛꯅꯥ ꯌꯥꯎꯒꯅꯤ ꯫ ꯃꯄꯤ ꯂꯥꯏꯔꯤꯛ ꯇꯥꯛꯄ ꯃꯇꯝꯗ ꯂꯣꯟꯆꯠ ꯄꯊꯥꯞ ꯅꯤꯡꯊꯤꯖꯕ ꯇꯝꯕꯤꯅꯕ ꯍꯣꯠꯅꯩ ꯑꯗꯨꯝꯑꯣꯏꯅꯃꯛ ꯆꯌꯦꯠꯅꯕꯗꯤ ꯃꯔꯛ ꯃꯔꯛꯇꯥ ꯊꯣꯛ ꯏ ꯃꯔꯝꯗꯤ ꯂꯣꯟꯆꯠ ꯄꯊꯥꯞ ꯑꯁꯤ ꯄꯨꯊꯣꯛꯂꯤ ꯃꯤꯑꯣꯏꯁꯤꯡ ꯑꯃꯥꯒ ꯑꯃꯥꯒ ꯃꯥꯟꯅꯗꯦ ꯂꯥꯏꯔꯤꯛ ꯑꯣꯏꯅꯥ ꯄꯨꯊꯣꯛꯄ ꯃꯇꯝꯗꯁꯨ ꯈꯦꯠꯅꯕ ꯃꯌꯥꯝ ꯊꯣꯛꯂꯛ ꯏ ꯃꯁꯤ ꯂꯣꯟꯆꯠ ꯄꯊꯥꯞ ꯑꯁꯤ ꯂꯩꯄꯥꯛ ꯑꯃꯒꯤ ꯊꯥꯧꯇꯥ ꯄꯨꯊꯣꯛꯄ ꯉꯝꯗꯕꯒꯤꯅꯤ
ꯏꯀꯨꯏꯀꯨꯏꯗꯔꯤꯕꯗ, ꯋꯥꯈꯜ ꯂꯧꯁꯤꯡ ꯈꯔꯥ ꯍꯥꯞꯆꯤꯟꯂꯦ ꯃꯇꯝꯁꯤꯒ ꯆꯥꯟꯅꯕ ꯃꯑꯣꯡꯗ ꯃꯍꯩ ꯃꯁꯤꯟ ꯗ ꯂꯣꯟꯃꯤꯠ ꯑꯍꯥꯟꯕꯒꯤ ꯃꯤꯠꯌꯦꯡ ꯆꯠꯅꯗꯔꯕ ꯄꯊꯥꯞ ꯁꯤꯖꯤꯟꯅꯕꯗꯒꯤ ꯀꯟꯅꯕ ꯍꯣꯠꯅꯕ ꯑꯃꯁꯨꯡ ꯑꯆꯨꯝꯕꯗ ꯌꯨꯝꯐꯝ ꯑꯣꯏꯕ ꯑꯗꯨꯅꯤ ꯫
The pre-eminence of Parisian French has reigned largely unchallenged throughout the history of modern French literature. Standard Italian is not based on the speech of the capital, Rome, but on the speech of Florence because of the influence Florentines had on early Italian literature. Similarly, standard Spanish is not based on the speech of Madrid, but on that of educated speakers from more northerly areas like Castile and León (e.g. see Gramática de la lengua castellana). In Argentina and Uruguay the Spanish standard is based on the local dialects of Buenos Aires and Montevideo (Rioplatense Spanish). Portuguese has, for now, two official standards, respectively Brazilian Portuguese and European Portuguese.
The Serbian language is divided in a similar way; Serbia and the Republika Srpska use their own separate standards. The existence of a third standard is a matter of controversy, some consider Montenegrin as a separate language, and some think it is merely another variety of Serbian.
Norwegian has two standards, Bokmål and Nynorsk, the choice between which is subject to controversy: Each Norwegian municipality can declare one of the two its official language, or it can remain "language neutral". Nynorsk is endorsed by a minority of 27 percent of the municipalities. The main language used in primary schools normally follows the official language of its municipality and is decided by referendum within the local school district. Standard German emerged from the standardized chancellery use of High German in the 16th and 17th centuries. Until about 1800, it was almost entirely a written language, but now it is so widely spoken that most of the former German dialects are nearly extinct.
Standard Chinese has official status as the standard spoken form of the Chinese language in the People's Republic of China (PRC), the Republic of China (ROC) and the Republic of Singapore. Pronunciation of Standard Chinese is based on the local accent of Mandarin Chinese from Luanping, Chengde in Hebei Province near Beijing, while grammar and syntax are based on modern vernacular written Chinese. Modern Standard Arabic is directly based on Classical Arabic, the language of the Qur'an. The Hindustani language has two standards, Hindi and Urdu.
ꯁꯤꯖꯨ ꯌꯦꯡꯉꯨ[ꯁꯦꯝꯒꯠꯂꯨ | ꯁꯦꯝꯒꯠꯂꯛꯄꯒꯤ ꯍꯧꯔꯛꯐꯝ]
- Category:Grammars of specific languages
- Ambiguous grammar
- Government and binding
- Harmonic Grammar
- Higher order grammar
- Linguistic typology
- List of linguists
ꯇꯦꯟꯇꯛꯅ ꯏꯕꯁꯤꯡ[ꯁꯦꯝꯒꯠꯂꯨ | ꯁꯦꯝꯒꯠꯂꯛꯄꯒꯤ ꯍꯧꯔꯛꯐꯝ]
ꯂꯧꯔꯛꯐꯝꯁꯤꯡ[ꯁꯦꯝꯒꯠꯂꯨ | ꯁꯦꯝꯒꯠꯂꯛꯄꯒꯤ ꯍꯧꯔꯛꯐꯝ]
- Traditionally, the mental information used to produce and process linguistic utterances is referred to as "rules". However, other frameworks employ different terminology, with theoretical implications. Optimality theory, for example, talks in terms of "constraints", while construction grammar, cognitive grammar, and other "usage-based" theories make reference to patterns, constructions, and "schemata"
- O'Grady, William (1996). Contemporary Linguistics: An Introduction. Harlow, Essex: Longman, 4–7; 464–539. ISBN 9780582246911.
- Holmes, Janet (2001). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics, second, Harlow, Essex: Longman, 73–94. ISBN 978-0582328617. ; for more discussion of sets of grammars as populations, see: Croft, William (2000). Explaining Language Change: An Evolutionary Approach. Harlow, Essex: Longman, 13–20. ISBN 978-0582356771.
- Rodney Huddleston and Geoffrey K. Pullum, 2002, The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press, p. 627f.
- Lundin, Leigh (23 September 2007). The Power of Prepositions. On Writing. Criminal Brief.
- Jeremy Butterfield, (2008). Damp Squid: The English Language Laid Bare, Oxford University Press, Oxford. ISBN 978-0199574094. p. 142.
- McGregor, William B. (2015). Linguistics: An Introduction. Bloomsbury Academic, 15–16. ISBN 978-0567583529.
- cite book |url= https://www.britannica.com/topic/Ashtadhyayi%7Ctitle= Ashtadhyayi, Work by Panini |author=The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica |year= 2013 | publisher= Encyclopædia Britannica|accessdate=23 October 2017, Quote: "Ashtadhyayi, Sanskrit Aṣṭādhyāyī (“Eight Chapters”), Sanskrit treatise on grammar written in the 6th to 5th century BCE by the Indian grammarian Panini."
- G. Khan, J. B. Noah, The Early Karaite Tradition of Hebrew Grammatical Thought (2000)
- Pinchas Wechter, Ibn Barūn's Arabic Works on Hebrew Grammar and Lexicography (1964)
- (2005) Understanding Phonology, second, London: Hodder Arnold. ISBN 978-0340807354.
- Cite web|url=http://nationalgrammarday.com/%7Ctitle=National Grammar Day: Brought to you by Grammar Girl and the Society for the Promotion of Good Grammar}}
- ꯃꯤꯇꯩꯂꯣꯟ ꯂꯣꯟꯆꯠ ꯄꯊꯥꯞ
- American Academic Press, The (ed.). William Strunk, Jr., et al. The Classics of Style: The Fundamentals of Language Style From Our American Craftsmen. Cleveland: The American Academic Press, 2006. ISBN 0978728203.
- Rundle, Bede. Grammar in Philosophy. Oxford: Clarendon Press; New York: Oxford University Press, 1979. ISBN 0198246129.
ꯃꯄꯥꯟꯒ ꯁꯝꯅꯕꯁꯤꯡ[ꯁꯦꯝꯒꯠꯂꯨ | ꯁꯦꯝꯒꯠꯂꯛꯄꯒꯤ ꯍꯧꯔꯛꯐꯝ]
- Cite EB1911 |last=Sayce |first=Archibald Henry |wstitle=Grammar|short=x}}
- Grammar from the Oxford English Dictionary