Lesson

 1       Introduction  to  Concepts  and  Methods  of  Historical  Linguistics  

HISTORICAL  AND  COMPARATIVE  LINGUISTICS  

 
HISTORICAL  LINGUISTICS  is  the  branch  of  linguistics  concerned  with:  
•   The  study  of  language  change  and  stability  
•   The  reconstruction  of  earlier  stages  of  languages  
•   The   discovery   and   implementation   of   research   methodologies   by   which   genetic   relationships   among   languages   can   be   put  
forward.  
 
-­‐   The  linguist    
o   is  interested  in  a  dynamic  vision  of  language  
o   so  he’s  not  as  concerned  with  a  specific  static  span  of  time.    
-­‐   DESCRIPTIVE  LINGUISTICS:  former  describes  a  particular  stage  of  a  language  
-­‐   HISTORICAL  LINGUISTICS:  tries  to  address  why  languages  took  the  way  they  do;    
o   how  the  changes  can  show  how  they  relate  to  each  other;    
o   and  finally  ,  whether  a  parent  language  can  be  propounded  for  different  languages.  
-­‐   In   undertaking   this   task   is   where   the   COMPARATIVE   METHOD   is   used.   Historical   and   comparative   linguistics   are   tightly  
interconnected.    
 
-­‐   Back  in  Time  >  Stages  where  Old  and  current  form  are  distinctly  different.    
o   Those  stages  are  known  as  dead  languages.    
o   Linguists  must  entirely  rely  on  extant  written  evidence  which  has  survived  in  manuscripts.    
o   When  texts  are  not  found,  inscriptions  on  stones  or  pieces  of  jewelry  can  help  as  a  starting  point  in  the  reconstruction  
of  a  language.  -­‐‑>  State  of  Lge  in  distinct  stages  of  the  lge.  
o   Bynon  argues  :  That  methodology  will  not  catch  the  continuous  changing  nature  of  language.    
§   Explaining   linguistic   change   through   the   confrontation   of   different   texts   would   not   explain   linguistic  
evolution.    
§   E.g  just  as  a  series  of  straight  lines  linking  the  different  points  of  a  circle  do  not  explain  that  circle  
 
According  to  B YNON ,  these  2  factors  internal  to  linguistics  that  have  stood  in  the  W AY  O F  T HE  S TUDY  O F   L INGUISTIC  V ARIATION .  
 
-­‐   F ACTOR  1 :  SYNCHRONIC  STUDIES  USE  IDEALISATIONS  OF  A  LANGUAGE  IN  ORDER  TO  DESCRIBE  IT.    
o   Reason  -­‐‑>  The  actual  variation  existing  in  a  specific  moment  is  too  large  to  be  apprehended  in  a  synchronic  grammar.    
o   The  variation  depends  on  dialects,  gender,  social  class  and  age.    
o   The  two  leading  linguistic  schools,  structuralism  and  generativism  -­‐‑>  have  hindered  historical  linguistic  analyses  
§   Use  strong  generalization  of  actual  linguistic  system  as  subject  of  study  
o   Structuralists  -­‐‑>  Hokett  –  Chomsky:  el  procedimiento  descriptive  establece  la  ficción  de  las  distintas  articulaciones  en  
cuestión  no  poseen  orden  temporal,  especial  o  social  alguno  
o   Generativistis:   la   gramatica   de   la   lengua   pretende   ser   una   description   de   la   competencia   de   un   hablante   –   oyente  
ideal.  
 
-­‐   F ACTOR   2:  that  has  hindered  diachronic  linguistics  analyses  can  be  found,  in  the  BELIEF  THAT  THE  WAY  LANGUAGES  ARE  TRANSMITTED  IS  
RESPONSIBLE  FOR  A  MAJORITY  OF  LINGUISTIC  CHANGES.    
o   The  life  of  speakers  is  limited  -­‐‑>  This  recurrent  acquisition  plays  a  relevant  role  in  variation.    
o   Goed  –  Went/Volvido  instead  of  vuelto  resembles  attested  linguistic  developments  across  time.  Helpan/holp  -­‐‑>  helped  
o   Bynon  thinks  that  attribute  linguistic  change  to  the  improper  learning  of  the  language  by  children  gives  a  simplistic  
view  of  diachronic  phenomena.    
§   +  Improper  learning  is  counteracted  by  speakers  -­‐‑>  struggle  to  keep  integrity  of  linguistic  system  
 
-­‐   Bynon  concludes:  -­‐‑>  Even  though  the  mistakes  made  by  children  may  anticipate  linguistic  variation,  speakers  of  a  language  are  
not  aware  of  this  phenomenon.    
 
A  T WOFOLD  S TRATEGY  F OR  T HE  S TUDY  O F  L INGUISTIC  C HANGE :    
 
-­‐   S TRATEGY   1:  Focus  on  the  different  grammars  that  result  from  the  study  of  different  time  spans  in  the  evolution  of  a  language  
and  then  -­‐‑>  contrast  them  with  the  description  of  other  related  languages.    
o   Changes  attested  -­‐‑>  should  led  to  the  extrapolation  of  diachronic  rules  
 
-­‐   S TRATEGY  2 :  Linguistic  variation  must  be  approached  as  a  phenomenon  that  cannot  be  separated  from  sociological  factors.  
o   Geographical  space  plays  an  important  role.  -­‐‑>  implies  contact  between  unrelated  lges.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  1  
 1.   ORIGINS    
-­‐   Historical  Linguistics  has  its  origins  in  the  etymological  speculations  of  classical  and  medieval  times,    
o   Specifically  in  the  contrastive  study  of  Greek  and  Latin  carried  out  in  the  Renaissance  period.    
o   Search  of  scholars  for  a  parent  Lge  of  other  lges  of  the  world  
-­‐   More  TECHNICALLY,  the  origin  of  Historical  Linguistics  dates  back  to  the  19th  century  
o   when  S ANSKRIT ,  the  ancestor  of  most  northern  Indian  languages,  was  the  object  of  scientific  analysis  in  Europe.    
o   Analysis  found  different  geographical  and  cultural  differences  between  Sanskrit  –  Greek  –  Latin  
§   Some  similarities  still  identified  
§   Systematic  correspondences  =  existence  of  genetic  links  among  lges  
 
-­‐   SIR   WILLIAM   JONES  1786  stated  that  Greek  and  Latin  bore  more  systematic  similarities  than  could  have  been  produced  by  
chance  or  massive  borrowing.    
o   Achievement  1:    of  19th  century  linguists  was  the  acknowledgement  of  the  ubiquity  of  linguistic  change.    
§   Obvious  to  us  -­‐‑>  but  people  have  not  always  known  that  Lge  change  and  evolve  through  time  
o   Achievement  2:  The  second  major  achievement  was  the  development  of  the  Comparative  Method  (19th  c.).    
§   Much  we  know  about  English/ancestors  was  discovered  in  this  century  
-­‐   Historical  events  contributed  to  this  new  attitude  in  linguistic  research.  
o   Extension  of  the  empire  enhanced  the  interest  in  a  whole  range  of  language  other  than  the  classics  
 
-­‐   The   INTEREST   IN   S ANSKRIT  increased  the  settlement  of  Europeans  in  India  after  the  discovery  of  a  sea-­‐‑route  by  Vasco  de  
Gama  (1498).     B EEKES  points  3  main  reasons:    
1)   The  Greeks  were  not  sufficiently  acquainted  with  other  languages.  
2)   People  had  to  learn  that  language  change.  
3)   Greeks  never  compared  words  cross-­‐‑linguistically,  a  technique  which  was  solidly  established  in  India.  
 
-­‐   Important  to  note  -­‐‑>  tracing  genetic  relatedness  back  to  common  ancestor  
o   =  not  always  as  straightforward  as  it  was  with  the  case  of  Latin-­‐‑Greek-­‐‑Sanskrit  
 
-­‐   According  to  TRASK,  it  takes  6000-­‐‑8000  years  when  two  languages  split  for  them  to  lose  remnants  of  their  common  past.    
o   “archaeologist”  -­‐‑>  explores  remains  of  dead  lges  -­‐‑>  to  define  history,  attempts  reconstruction  of  ancestry  
o   The  comparison  between  languages  can  be  developed  in  relation  to  any  of  the  different  aspects  of  a  language  
§    Sounds  
§    grammar  
§   vocabulary.    
-­‐   A  common  procedure  was  the  comparison  of  cognates.    
o   To  id  certain  phonological  patterns  -­‐‑>  words  come  from  same  ancestral  parent  lge  
o   More  obvious  in  daily  concepts  -­‐‑>  are  less  frequently  borrowed  
 
-­‐   Beekes:  To  Be  in  Sanskrit  –  Latin    
E NGLISH   S ANSKRIT   L ATIN  

I  am   AS-­‐‑MI   S-­‐‑UM  

You  are   AS-­‐‑I   ES  

He  is   AS-­‐‑TI   ES-­‐‑T  

We  are   S-­‐‑MAS   S-­‐‑UMUS  

You  are   S-­‐‑THA   ES-­‐‑TIS  

They  are   S-­‐‑ANTI   S-­‐‑UNT  

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

  2  
 2.   THE  C OMPARATIVE  M ETHOD  
 
 
-­‐   This  method  developed  within  the  framework  of  Comparative  Linguistics.    (Comparative  Grammar,  Comparative  Philology)  
o   This  was  the  most  active  branch  of  linguistics  in  the  19th  c.    
o   Promoted  by  Sir  William  Jones’  discovery  that  Greek,  Sanskrit  and  Latin  stemmed  from  the  same  parent  language.    
 
-­‐   The  Comparative  Method  was  basically  developed  in  the  reconstruction  of  Proto-­‐‑Indo-­‐‑European  
o    and  then  it  was  used  in  the  analysis  of  other  language  families.    
 
-­‐   The  basis  is  above  all,  the  regular  principle  of  phonological  change.    
o   This  principle  was  introduced  as  a  linguistic  rule  by  the  Neogrammarians.    
o   At  the  beginning,  The  Neogrammarians’  hypothesis  endured  strong  opposition  on  the  part  of  some  schools,  
§    until  they  entered  the  linguistic  scene,  phonological  changes  had  not  been  considered  rules,  but  tendencies.    
o   It   was   finally   accepted   as   common   procedure   in   the   study   of   linguistic   changes   and   the   classification   of   language  
families.    
-­‐   Patterns  in  phonological  change  were  studied  in  terms  of  sound  laws  
o   the  most  important  being  Grimm’s  law  and  Verner’s  Laws,  both  developed  in  connection  with  Germanic  languages.    
-­‐   Also  Saussure’s  Laryngeal  Theory.  -­‐‑>  hypothesized  for  the  Indo-­‐‑European  
 
-­‐   In  the  C OMPARATIVE  M ETHOD  T HERE  A RE  T WO   S TEPS :  
1)   The  ISOLATION  OF  A  SET  OF  COGNATES,  or  putative  cognates.    
For  example  the  numeral  ten.     =>     Latin  decem;  Greek  deca;  Sanskrit  dasa;  Gothic  taihun  
2)   A  number  of  phonological  correspondences  can  be  extracted:  

 
     
-­‐   The  sound  laws  mentioned  before  would  help  the  scholar  to  reconstruct  a  series  of  phonemes.    
o   Proto-­‐‑indo-­‐‑European  word  for  ten  was  *dekm.    
o   Using  phonological  principles  -­‐‑>  figure  out  how  word  develop  into  different  variants  in  lges  under  analysis  
o   Ss  can  see  =>  
 
1)   on  single  change  separates  reconstructed  form  from  Latin  term  *m  >  em  
2)   In  Greek  -­‐‑>  2  steps  
o   Vocalization  of  syllabic  nasal  
o   Disappearance  of  nasality  *m  >a  
3)   In  Sanskrit  -­‐‑>  2  different  
o   Palatization  of  velar  *k  >  s  
o   Same  sound  change  as  Greek  *m  >a  
4)   Development  Gothic  term  -­‐‑>  only  that  seems  to  be  least  obvious  to  ss  
o   Constitutes  exemplar  of  Grimm´s  law  
o   Change  derived  taihum  from  *dekm  
o   1st  *d>t  and  *k>h  
o   dental  has  become  voiceless  
o   velar  has  become  fricative  
o   2nd  *m>un    
o   where  Indo  European  term  has  undergone  vocalization  of  syllabic  nasal  
o   velarisation  of  this  nasal  
 
-­‐   Despite  the  empirical  and  scientific  character  of  this  method,  it  has  been  subjected  to  some  criticism.    
o   For  instance,  there  are  linguists  who  claim  that  the  reconstructed  forms  are  the  result  of  comparing  attested  cognates,    
o   but  they  are  often  unpronounceable  and  cannot  be  taken  as  bearing  a  100%  correspondence  to  the  linguistic  reality  
of  Indo-­‐‑European.  
o    In  the  beginning  of  the  Comparative  Method  linguists  had  an  absolute  faith  in  its  feasibility.    
§   Assumption  that  lges  as  some  point  are  born  from  a  parent  lge  
§   This  view  poses  the  question  of  what  happens  with  the  parent  lge  as  their  descendants  rise.  
§    
-­‐   Another   controversial   points   is   the   belief   that   once   two   languages   have   split   from   their   common   ancestor   they   will   diverge  
until  they  do  not  bear  any  resemblance.    
o   The  facts  support  the  view  that  there  is  not  just  one  single  direction  for  the  evolution  of  two  languages.  
o   They   can   also   converge   if   social   or   historical   developments   stimulate   contact   again,   particularly   if   the   languages  
happen  to  be  geographically  close.    
o   This  is  something  that  occurs  with  the  English  dialects;  they  are  converging  rather  than  diverging  due  to  the  pressure  
of  the  standard  and  the  press  media.    
 
 
 
  3  
 3.   THE  W AVE  T HEORY  
 
-­‐   Johannes  Schmidt  propounded  the  existence  of  the  Wave  Theory.    
o   To  overcome  shortcomings  of  the  Comparative  Method  
o   Metaphor  of  Family-­‐‑tree  (by  August  Schleicher  –  German  linguist  Johannes  Schmidt  (1872)  
-­‐   He  proposes  changes  would  spread  as  waves  in  the  water  from  a  politically  or  historically  important  centre,  and  as  with  waves,  
not  all  the  changes  have  to  reach  the  same  area.    
-­‐   This  explains  the  fact  that  when  two  languages  are  compared,  there  exists  a  certain  correlation  between  
o    geographic  distance  
o   and  the  influence  that  one  specific  change  has.    
 
-­‐   B YNON  -­‐‑>  offers  enumeration  of  different  situations  that  can  take  place:    
-­‐   The  ideal  case  consists  of  a  linguistic  territory  that  has  not  been  “disturbed”  by  external  influences.    
o   A  centre  appears  (political,  commercial,  cultural,  etc)  
o   Innovations  -­‐‑>  only  reach  part  of  territory  where  lge  is  spoken  -­‐‑>  rest  territory  ruled  by  pre-­‐‑existent  centre  
o   Isoglosses  will  start  to  rise  -­‐‑>  until  speakers  of  2  territories  will  lose  mutual  intelligibility  -­‐‑>  2  different  Lgs  remain  
 
-­‐   Not  all  linguistic  changes  lead  to  divergence  between  languages,  the  opposite  case  may  also  occur.    
o   After  2  lges  independent  -­‐‑>  start  sharing  certain  features  
-­‐   B YNON  -­‐‑>  Two  dialects  that  are  clearly  differentiated  but  geographically  adjacent.    
o   If   the   territories   where   they   are   spoken   become   integrated   under   a   political   force   with   a   single   administrative   and  
cultural  centre  -­‐‑>  some  isoglosses  will  start  to  disappear  and  common  traits  will  be  shared.    
o   Also  innovations  which  apply  to  the  totality  of  the  new  territory  will  promote  the  convergence  of  the  two  languages.    
 
-­‐   The  spreading  -­‐‑>  not  only  to  lges  previously  related  -­‐‑>  also  lgs  geographically  close  (related  or  not)  
 
-­‐   B YNON   -­‐‑>  The  situation  presented  by  the  family-­‐‑tree  is  of  continuity  in  the  course  of  time,  since  the  evolution  of  language  is  
presented  in  an  ideal  temporal-­‐‑spatial-­‐‑frame.    
o   This  is  called  “a  relative  chronology”.    
o   It  does  not  deal  with  actual  innovations  which  take  place  in  real  time  and  space.  
   
-­‐   Vandeloise  -­‐‑>  distinguishes  between  historical  and  logical  time.  “  Logical  time  is  idealized  historical  time”  
o   He  uses  this  distinction  to  explain  the  path  semantic  evolution  followed.    
o   “Words  evolve  from  a  simple  toward  a  complex  meaning  
o   Logical  -­‐‑-­‐‑-­‐‑-­‐‑-­‐‑  Historical  time  =>  do  follow  parallel  routes  
 
-­‐   It   is   sometimes   necessary   to   idealise   actual   facts   so   that   general   theories   about   linguistic   variation   and   relatedness   can   be  
constructed.    
o   When  more  emphasis  placed  on  how  variation  is  determined  (geopraphical/social  factors)  
§   Wave  Theory  should  be  used  
o   2  approaches  to  linguistic  change  -­‐‑>  can  be  considered  to  complement  (rather  than  exclude)  
 
4.   THE  N OTION  O F  P ROTO-­‐‑LANGUAGE  
 
-­‐   A  proto-­‐‑language  is  a  hypothetical  reconstruction  of  the  earlier  form  of  a  language.    
-­‐   No  written  records  exist  of  a  proto-­‐‑language  and  its  reconstruction    
o   draws  upon  the  comparison  of  related  words    
o   and  expressions  of  the  different  languages  that  derived  from  it.    
-­‐   The  proto-­‐‑language  is  the  ancestral  parent  language  of  all  the  derived  language.    
-­‐   Proto-­‐‑language  can  be  reconstructed  with  more  or  less  accuracy  depending  on  the  evidence  available  to  linguists.    
-­‐   Lingusits  -­‐‑>  successful  in  reconstructing  great  deal  of  phonological,  morphological,  lexical  systems  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

  4  
 5.   LINGUISTIC  G ENEALOGIES  
 
-­‐   There  exists  two  basic  ways  in  which  languages  can  be  classified:  typologically  and  genetically.    
o   Are  not  mutually  exclusive  -­‐‑>  can  be  combined  
§   E.g   Once   a   genetic   classification   has   been   established,   a   typological   classification   can   be   superimposed   to  
observe  the  variation  in  linguistic  type  within  the  same  phylum  or  lge  family  
 
TYPOLOGICAL  CLASSIFICATION    
-­‐   is  based  on  similarities  in  the  linguistic  structure.    
-­‐   have  been  particularly  frequent  in  the  structuring  of  unwritten  languages.    
 
GENETIC  CLASSIFICATION    
-­‐   is  usually  preferred  when  scholars  observe  that  these  lgd  could  also  be  grouped  on  genetically  grounds  
 
-­‐   However,  the  use  of  typologies  is  again  relevance  in  the  study  of  the  world’s  languages.    
-­‐   Scholars  also  Focus  on  lexical  typologies  -­‐‑>  particularly  useful  for  anthropologists,    
o   since  they  bring  along  a  large  amount  of  data  on  social  organization  and  cultural  spaces.    
 
-­‐   Typological  classifications  of  language  lead  to  the  establishment  of  L ANGUAGE  F AMILIES      
o   consist  of  language  stocks  that  are  considered  to  be  related  by  common  origin  because  of  cognates  in  vocabulary.    
-­‐   P HYLUM    
o   This  category  encompasses  a  number  of  language  families    
o   very  often  the  term  phylum  is  equated  with  that  of  language  family    
o   both  terms  are  often  used  interchangeably.    (  are  not  mutually  exclusive,  can  be  combined)  
-­‐   L ANGUAGE  ISOLATE.  There  are  some  families  that  are  made  up  of  just  one  language.      
 
-­‐   Once  a  genetical  classification  has  been  established  
o   a  typological  classification  can  be  superimposed  to  observe  the  variation  in  linguistic  type  within  
§    the  same  phylum  or  language  family.  
 
-­‐   There  exists  T HREE  M AIN  T YPES  O F  L ANGUAGES :    Traugott  
1)   Isolating  (analytic)  -­‐‑>  words  are  typically  made  up  of  a  single  morpheme.    
o   Classical  Chinese  and  Vietnamese.    
2)   Agglutinative  -­‐‑>  Series  of  morphemes,  each  of  them  represents  a  single  grammatical  category.    
o   Japanese,  Turkish  and  Finnish.  
3)   Inflectional  (synthetic)  -­‐‑>Single  morpheme  in  one  word  may  represent  several  grammatical  categories.  
o   Greek,  Latin  and  Sanskrit.    
 
6.   THE  N EOGRAMMARIANS  
 
-­‐   Despite   the   regularity   attested   in   phonological   changes   there   remain   exceptions   that   have   led   linguists   to   speak   of  
tendencies  instead  of  rules.    
-­‐   Example  (Trask):  Old  English      
o   have  evolved  into    
o   in  present-­‐‑day  English,  all  with  the  diphthong   .    
 
-­‐   This  occurred  due  to  the  effects  of  the  Great  Vowel  Shift.  Grimm’s  law  explaining  the  F IRST  G ERMANIC  C ONSONANT  S HIFT  
o   presented  exceptions  seemed  to  confirm  that  phonological  developments  should  not  be  placed  under  rules  
o    but  should  be  considered  as  tendencies.    
 
-­‐   Neogrammarian  Hypothesis    
o   Karl  Verner  found  an  explanation  for  those  apparent  exceptions  to  Grimm’s  Law  
o   showed  that  they  were  conditioned  by  the  phonological  environment.    
o   This  proved  that  every  Germanic  word  had  evolved  in  a  predictable  regular  way.  
o   This  kind  of  change  is  always  regular  and  the  apparent  exceptions  were  for  which  no  explanation  was  yet  found.  
 
-­‐   Most  of  these  linguists  were  working  at  the  University  of  Leipzig.  -­‐‑>  called  Junggrammatiker  (“young  grammarians”)    
o   Neogramáticos  
-­‐   The  Neogrammarian  Hypothesis  had  become  part  of  the  orthodoxy  in  Historical  Linguistics.    
-­‐   Factors  for  successful  reception  of  Neogrammarian  Hypothesis  
o   Rigorous  methodology  employed  in  their  analysis  and  the  scientific  concern  that  this  Hypothesis  held.    
§   example  of  interest  in  approaching  language  change  -­‐‑>    their  attitude  towards  exceptions.  
§   Exceptions  were  only  apparent  
§   It  was  a  linguist´s  work  to  find  the  rules  that  were  behind  those  apparent  exceptions  
 
 
 
 
 
 
  5  
 7.   INTERNAL  R ECONSTRUCTION  
-­‐   The   method   of   Internal   Reconstruction   supplements   Comparative   Linguistics   in   the   reconstruction   of   earlier   forms   of   a  
language.    
o   It   focuses   on   the   analysis   of   irregular   linguistic   patterns   and   its   main   tenet   is   that   they   had   developed   from  
earlier  regular  forms.    
 
-­‐   Example  of  Internal  Reconstruction  in  Latin  
o   Honos  –oris    
o   Orator  –  oris  
o   May  lead  one  to  believe  that  regular  form  of  genitive  singular  of  honos  was  honosis  
§   But  at  some  point  intervocalic  /s/  became  /r/  
-­‐   The  reason  why  it  is  called  INTERNAL  is  that  it  is  not  necessary  to  examine  other  languages  to  reconstruct  the  earlier  stages  
of  a  given  language.    
 
-­‐   Example  ENGLISH  PAST  PARTICIPLES.  (Trask)  
o   The  past  participle  of  English  regular  verbs  is  formed  by  the  addition  of  the  suffix  –ed:  /loved/.    
o   In  a  number  of  strong  verbs  this  past  form  is  constructed  using  the  suffix  –en  instead:  write/written.    
o   This  second  pattern  is  not  productive  anymore  
§   since  all  the  new  verbs  entering  the  language  follow  the  first  pattern.    
o   However,  some  older  verbs  show  a  curious  pattern  
§   even  though  they  keep  the  suffix  –ed,  they  have  developed  adjectival  forms  ending  in  –en.    
•   He  has  shaved       -­‐‑>  He  is  clean-­‐‑shaven  
•   The  lead  has  melted       -­‐‑>  This  is  molten  lead  
•   I  have  mowed  the  lawn     -­‐‑>  This  is  new-­‐‑mown  hay  
-­‐   Original  forms  of  the  participles  showed  the  –en  pattern,  since  they  were  strong  verbs  
o   but  by  analogy  with  weak  verbs  the  regular  forms  in  –ed    displaced  the  original  strong  pattern.    
o   Considered  Strange  development.    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

  6