Grammar&Semantics.Gr.is semantically expr. means, expresses diff. sem. meanings. Gr. is acomplex set of semantically charged regularities of formingutterances of speech from the nominative means of l-ge. Since gr.forms and regularities are meaningful, the rules of grammar must bestated semantically, or they must be worded functionally. (ex:inverted w/o, its meaningful functions – difference betweenmeaningful&marginal idea, emotive&unemotivemodes of speech,dif. types of style) Gr. elements of l-ge present a unity of content& expression (or form & meaning).
Syntagmatic& Paradigmatic Relations.Beaudoin de Courtenay (Rus.) & Ferdinand de Saussure (Swiss):showed difference betw. Lingual synchrony (coexistence of lingualelements) & diachrony (diff. time-periods in the development oflingual elements as well as l-ge as a whole) & defined l-ge as asynchronic system of meaningful elements at any stage of its hist.evolution. Lingual units stand to one another in 2 fundamentaltypes of relations: syntagmatic& paradigmatic.Syntagmaticrelations are immediate linear relations between units in a segmentalsequence. Ex: Thespaceship was launched without the help of a booster rocket.Words, word-groups and morphemes of words are connectedsyntagmatically. The combination of 2 words or word-groups one ofwhich is modified by the other forms a unit, which is referred to asa syntactic “syntagma”.Notional syntagmas: predicative(a subject+predicate), objective(averb+its object), attributive(a noun+its attr.), adverbial(verb/adj/adverb+adv.modifier). The other type of relations, opposedto synt. And called paradigmatic,are such as exist between elements of the system outside the stringswhere they co-occur. These intra-systemic relations &dependencies are expressed in the fact that each lingual unit isincluded in a set of connections based on diff. formal and functionalproperties.
Levelsof l-ge.1) The lowest level – phonemic.Phonemeis not a sign, but a unit of a l-ge (lacks content). It’sabstract, represents by a sound & letter. Specific function –differential:phonemes distinguish words & morphemes as material bodies,changes their meanings.2) Morphemic.Morpheme is a sign–2 sides; the smallest meaningful part of aword. The smallest -s. F-tion – significative:m. express the signif. or generalized meaning. M. is a group ofallophones. Ex: roots (can function by themselves-free morph.) &affixes (suffixes, prefixes & inflections). 3) Lexemic.Lexeme (a word) in a l-ge performs a nominative(назывная) f-tion, itnames objects & phenomena. 1 morpheme can be 1 word (thesmallest). 4) Denotemic.A w-comb./phrase (denoteme) is a comb. of at least 2 notional w-sconnected semantically. A comb. of a n.word & an aux. element isnot a phrase, but just a gram.form. (ex.has been done). F-tion –polynominative.Phrases name complicated things & phenom, give add. info. aboutqualities of objects, circumstances. Phrases: free(we can choose elements freely) & stable(phraseological units). 5) Proposemic(alevel of a sentence). F-tions: a) Nominative(names a whole situation or a sit. event) & b) Predicative.Predication is the connection betw. the subj.& the predicate of as-ce, which form a predicative line. Predication is expr. throughtense&mood of a verb. 6) Dictemic– level of topicalization. (Blokh) Unit – dicteme.Utterance – supra-sentential construction. A dicteme is acomb.of 2/more s-ces which are united by common topic. Though theremay be only 1 s-ce in a d. f-tions: a) Nominative:names sit./sit.events. b)Predicative(see), c) F.of topicalozation(тематизир.) -main:each dicteme presents a separate topic in a continual text, d)Stylistic(to expr.the attitude of the speaker).
The word& the morpheme.In studying the moroheme we study the word in the necess.details ofits composition&f-tions. The word is a basic nominative unit.Without words – no com-tion even in thought. Bloomfield:phoneme&morpheme are basic categories of ling.discription. M. –minimal meaningful segment. M.is a meaningful segmental component ofthe word; the m.is formed by phonemes. The word is a nominative unitof of l-ge built up by morphemes & indivisible into smallersegments as regards its nominative f-tion. The morphol.system of l-gereveals its properties through the morphemic str-re of words.
Traditional(functional) class-tion of morphemes.Henry Sweet, Smirnitsky. Study of morph.str-re in traditional gr. - 2criteria.1)Positional:the analysis of the location of the marginal morphemes in relation tothe central ones. 2) Semantic(functional):involves the study of the correlative contribution of the morpheme tothe general meaning of the word. M-s at the upper level are dividedinto root & affixal (lex.&gram.).A lot of varieties ofmorphemic composition of modern E.words,but preferable model is:prefix+root+lexical suffix+gram.suffix. Roots: concrete, “material”part of the meaning of the word, affixes – specificational partof the meaning. Specifications: of lexico-semantic &grammatico-semantic character. Or 3 criteria: a) semantic propertiesof words (meaning), b) formal properties (form), c) functional(syntactic f-tion).
Distributionalclass-tion of morphemes.In the distrib.analysis 3 main types of distribution are discrimin.:contrastive distr., non-contrastive distr., and complementary distr.Contr.& non-contr.distr.concern identical environments ofdifferent morphs. (Morph is combination of phones that has a meaning,it happens only once) The morphs are said to be in contrastive distr.if their meanings (f-tions) are different; such morphs constitutedofferent morphemes. Ex: returned/returning/returns.The morphs are in non-contrastive d. if their mean.(f-tions) areidentical; such morphs constitute “free variants” of thesame morpheme. Ex: suffixes –ed & -t (learned/learnt), -s &-i (genies/genii). As for complementary distr., it concernsdiff.environments of formally diff.morphs which fulfill one & thesame f-tion; such morphs are termed “allo-morphs”. Ex: afew allomorphs of the plural suffix: -en (children), -s (toys), -a(data), -es (crises), -I (genii), zero (trout-trout). The applicationof distr.analysis to the morphemic level-> cl-tion of m. ondistr.lines. a) free & bound m., b) overt & covert m., c)additive & replacive m., d) continuous & discontin.m, e)segmental & supra-segmental m.
Synthetical& Analytical forms in Grammar.Gr.opposition – correlation of gr.forms expressing acategorical gram. meaning based on common & differential featuresof these forms. The means used for building up member-forms ofcategorical oppositions are divided into synthetical &analytical, and so do the gram.forms. Synthetical– realized by the inner morphemic composition of the word,while analyticalgr.forms are built up by a combination of 2/more words, one of whichis a gram.auxiliary (word-morpheme), & the other, a word of“substantial” meaning. Syntheticalgr.f. are based on innerinflexion(phonemic (vowel) interchange; non-productive now, on ancientelements, used in irregular verbs, some nouns-plural), outerinflection(productive, gram.suffixation: number, case, person-number,tenseparticipial-gerundial forms, the comparisons), and suppletivity(non-prod., based on gram.interchange of word roots (be-am-is-are,go-went, good-better, we-us; +can-be able – broadermorphological interpretation). Analytical(typical of modern E.) – a combination of aux.word+basic word.“Gramatically idiomatic” combinations (whose relevantgram.meaning is not dependent on meanings of their component elementstaken apart). But: more, most – unidiomatic
Identificationof parts of speech.The words of l-ge, depending on various formal & semanticfeatures, are divided into grammatically relevant sets or classes.Traditionally they are called parts of speech (“lexico-gram.”series of words or categories). Today they are discriminated ac. to 3criteria: semantic, formal & functional. Semantic(meaning): presupposes the evaluation of the generalized meaning,characteristic of all words of a given part of speech. The meaning isunderstood as “categorical meaning of the p.of sp.”.Formal(form): provides for the exposition of the specific inflexional &derivational (word-building) features of all the lexemic subsets of apart of speech. Functional(function): concerns the syntactic role of words in the s-ce typicalof a part of speech.
Notionalparts of speech in English.Acc.tothese criteria words on the upper level are div.into notional(thenoun, adj., numeral, pronoun, verb, adverb), words of completenominative mean.characterized by self-dependent f-tions, &functional(thearticle, prepos., conj., particle, modal verb, interjection). Noun:1) meaning-substance(thinfness), 2) the changeable formsof number & case; specific suff.forms of derivation, 3) thesubstantive f-tionsin the s-ce (subj., obj., substantival predicate); prepositionalconnections; modiication by an adj. Adjective:1) the categorical mean.of property (qualitative & relative), 2) formsof degrees of comparison (for qualitative adj.), spec.suff.formsof deriv., 3) adj.f-tions(attribute to a noun, adjectival predicate). Numeral:1) number (cardinal-порядк. &ordinal-колич.), 2) narrow set ofsimple numerals, sp.forms of composition for compound num., sp.formsof deriv.for ordinal num., 3)f-tions of numerical attr. & numer.substantive. Pronoun:1)indication (deixis), 2)narrow sets of various status with thecorresponding formal properties of categ.changeability &w-building, 3)the subst. & adjectival f-tions for dif.sets. Verb:1)process (finite process & non-finite pr.), 2)of verbalcategories of person, number, tense, aspect, voice, mood; oppositionof finite & non-finite forms, 3)f-tion of the finite predicatefor the finite verb; mixed verbal-other than verbal f-tions for thenon-f.verb. Adverb:1) secondary property (i.e. of process or another property), 2)ofdegrees of comparison for qualitative adverbs; sp.suffixal forms ofderivation; 3) f-tions of various adv. modifiers.
Functionalparts of speech.-Wordsof incomplete nominative meaning & non-self-dependent, mediaryf-tions in the s-ce. Their number is limited. Article:expresses the specific limitation of the substantive f-tions.Preposition:expr.the dependencies and interdependencies of substantive referents.Conjunction:expr. connections of phenomena. Particle:unites the funct.words of specifying&limiting meaning. Modalverbs:expr.the attitude of the sp.to the situation. Here belong words ofprobability (probably, perhaps), of qualitative evaluation(un/fortunately, luckily), of affirm. & negation. Interjection:is a signal of emotions.
Syntacticclasses of words (Ch.Fries).The syntactic (monofiggerential) cl-tion of words is based onsyntactic featuring of words only. The syntactic cl-tion of words, inprinciple, supplements the 3-criteria cl-tion specifying thesyntactic features of parts of speech. For the Rus. l-ge the basicprinciples of the syntactic cl-tion of words were outlined in theworks of Peshkovski. In English the syntactico-distributional cl-tionof words was worked out by Bloomfield & his followers Harris andesp-ly Ch.Fries. The synt.-distrib. Cl-tion of words is based on thestudy of their combinability by means of substitution tests. As arezult of this testing, a standart model of 4 main syntacticpositions of notional words was built up. These positions are thoseof the noun,verb,adj,&adverb. Pronouns are included into thecorresponding positional classes as their substitutes. Wordsincapable to occupy the said main syntactic positions are treated asfunctional words.
Thethree-Layer structure of vocabulary (M.Blokh).–cl-tion of the lexicon presenting some essentialgeneralizations about its str-re. Lexicon is divided into 2 parts:notional words & f-tional words. The open character of thenotional part & the closed character of the f-tional part havethe status of a formal grammatical feature. Between them there isalso an intermediary field of semi-functional words. 1)The whole ofthe lexicon is divided into 3 layers. 2)The 1st(upper)layer, of open character, is formed by 4 classes of notional words;since these words have full nominative value,they may be referred toas “names”: respectively, substance-names (nouns),process-n.(verbs), primary property n.(adj.), secondary property n.(adverbs); 3) the names are consolidated into an integral system bythe lexical paradigm of nomination-the paradigmatic series whosef-tion is to form & distribute any given word root among the 4lexical class-types (p-s of speech); 4) the 2nd(intermediate) layer of closed char., is formed by pronominal wordsor “substitutes of names”; here belong pronouns &replacer lexemes of all kinds (noun-,verb-,adj-,adv-replacers), w. ofbroad meaning (thing, matter etc) & numbers; 5) the 3rd(lower) layer of closed char., is formed by functional w. proper, or“specifiers of names”: determiners, prep., conj.,particles etc. The f-tion of 2nd& 3rdlayers is to organize together with the categorial means of grammar,the production of speech utterances out of the direct naming means ofl-ge (the 1stlayer).
13.The structure of gram. Cat.
It’s agr.concept proper. Gr. Cat. Is a whole system of gr. Forms expressing ageneralized gr. Func..
Gr.cat.: 1.gr. Feture – гр.признак(ex. suffix). 2. gr. Form. 3. Gr. Paradigm. 4. Gr. Opp.
Synthetiacal,analytical – the feat.s expressing the form are gr. Morphemes.Synth. Form is one-single word including the gr. Feat.. Ex. Tables.Analyt.Form consists of 2 parts (word expressing the material meaning &word exp. The feat.). Ex. Willgo.3 types of synth.forms:
1. built up bythe change of root morpheme, vowel-interchange (man-men)inner inflexion.
2. outerinflexion – table– tables.
3.suppletivity – Iam, you are, bad-worse
14. Cat.of Number
The cat.of number is expressed by the opp. of the plural form of the noun toits singular form. The semantic difference of the opp.al members ofthe cat. of number in many linguistic works is treated trad.ly: themeaning of the singular is interpreted as "1" & themeaning of the plural - as "many" ("more than 1").As the trad. interpretation of the singular & the plural membersdoes not work in many cases, recently the categorial meaning of theplural has been reconsidered & now it is interpreted as thedenotation of "the potentially dismembering reflection of thestructure of the referent" (correspondingly, the categorialmeaning of the singular is treated as "the non-dismemberingreflection of the structure of the referent").
The categorialopp. of number is subjected to the process of opp.al reduction.Neutralization takes place when countable Ns begin to func. asSingularia Tantum Ns, denoting in such cases either abstract ideas orsome mass material, e.g. Onmy birthday we alw have goose;orwhen countable Ns are used in the func. of the Absol. Plural: Theboard are not unanimous on the ?. Astyl.ally marked transposition is achieved by the use of thedescriptive uncountable plural (Thefruitsof the toil are not alw visible) &the "repetition plural" (Carafter carrushed past me).
15. Cat.of Case
The casemeanings in Engrelate to 1 another in a peculiar, unknown in other lang.s, way: thecommon case is quite indiff. from the semantic point of view, whilethe genitive case func.s as a subsidiary element in the morphologicalsystem of Eng be cause its semantics is also rendered by the CommonCase noun in prepositional collocations & in contact.
In thediscussion of the case probl. 4 main views advanced by diff. scholarsshould be considered: the "theory of positional cases", the"theory of prepositional cases", the "limited casetheory", & the "postpositional theory". Acc. tothe "theory of positional cases", the Eng noundistinguishes the inflectional genitive case & 4non-inflectional, purely positional, cases - Nominative, Vocative,Dative, Accusative. The cardinal weak point of this theory lies inthe fact that it mixes up the func.al (syntactic) characteristics ofthe sent. parts & the morphological feat.s of the noun.
The "theoryof prepositional cases" regards nounal combinations with theprepositions in certain object & attributive collocations asmorphological case forms: the Dative Case (to + N, for + N), theGenitive Case (of + N).
The "limitedcase theory" recognizes the existence in Eng of a limited casesystem whose members are the Genitive Case (a strong form) & theCommon Case (a weak form).
The"postpositional theory" claims that the Eng noun in thecourse of its historical development has completely lost themorphological cat. of case; that is why the trad. Genitive Caseis treated by its advocates as a combination of a noun with aparticle.
Taking intoaccount the advantages of the 2 theories - the "limitedcase theory" & the "postpositional theory" opensnew perspectives in the treatment of the cat. of case. It st&s toreason to regard the element -sI -es asa special case particle. Thus, acc. to the "particle casetheory" the 2-case system of the noun is to be recognized inEng: the Common Case is a direct case, the Genitive Case is anoblique case. As the case opp. does not work with all Ns, from thefunc.al point of view the Genitive Case is to be regarded assubsidiary to the syntactic system of prepositional phrases.
16. Cat.of Gender
The probl.of gender in Eng is being vigorously disputed. Linguistic scholars asa rule deny the existence of gender in Eng r as a gr. cat. &stress its purely semantic character.' The actual gender distinctionsof Ns are not denied by any1; what is disputable is the character ofthe gender class-tion: whether it is purely semantic orsemantico-gr..
In fact, thecat. of gender in Eng is expressed with the help of the obligatorycorrelation of Ns with the personal proNs of the third person.The third person proNs being specific & obligatory classifiers ofNs, Eng gender distinctions display their gr. nature.
The cat. ofgender is based on 2 hierarchically arranged opp.s: the upper opp. isgeneral, it func.s in the whole set of Ns; the lower opp. is partial,it func.s in the subset of person Ns only. As a result of the doubleopp.al correlation, in Modern Eng a specific system of 3 gendersarises: the neuter, the masculine, & the feminine genders.
In Eng thereare many person Ns capable of expressing both feminine &masculine genders by way of the pronominal correlation. These Nscomprise a group of the so-called "common' gender" Ns,e.g.: "person", "friend", etc.
In the pluralall the gender distinctions are neutralized but they are renderedobliquely through the correlation with the singular.
Alongside ofthe gr. (or lexico-gr.) gender distinctions, Eng Ns can show the sexof their referents also lexically with the help of speciallexical markers, e.g.: bull-calf/cow-calf,cock-sparrow/hen-sparrow, he-bear/she-bear, etc.or through suffixal derivation: sultan/sultana,lion/li1ss, etc.
The cat. ofgender can undergo the process of opp.al reduction. It can be easilyneutralized (with the group of "common gender" Ns) &transponized (the process of "personification").
The Eng genderdiffers much from the Russian gender: the Eng gender has a semanticcharacter (opp.ally, i.e. gr.ly expressed), while the gender inRussian is partially semantic (Russian animate Ns have semanticgender distinctions), & partially formal.
17. Cat.of Article Determination
The probl.of Eng articles has been the subject of hot discussions for manyyears. Today the most disputable ?s concerning the system ofarticles in Eng are the following: the identifiction of the articlestatus in the hierarchy of lang. units, the nurriber of articles,their categorial & pragmatic func.s.
There exist 2basic approaches to the probl. of the article status some scholarsconsider the article a self-sufficient word which forms with themodified noun a syntactic syntagma; others identify the article withthe morpheme-like element which builds up with the nounal, stem aspecific morph.
In recentworks on the probl. of article determination of Eng Ns, more oftenthan not an opinion is expressed that in the hierarchy of lang. unitsthe article occupies a peculiar place - the place intermediary btwthe word & the morpheme.
In the lightof the opp.al theory the cat. of article determination of thenoun is regarded as 1 which is based on 2 binary opp.s: 1 of them isupper, the other is lower. The opp. of the higher level operates inthe whole system of articles & contrasts the definite articlewith the noun against the 2 other forms of article determination ofthe noun - the indefinite article & the meaningful absence of thearticle. The opp. of the lower level operates within the sphere ofrealizing the categorial meaning of non-identification (the sphere ofthe weak member of the upper opp.) & contrasts the 2 types ofgeneralization - the relat. generalization & the absol.generalization. As a result, the system of articles in Eng isdescribed as 1 consisting of 3 articles - the definite article,the indefinite article, & the 0 article, which, correspondingly,express the categorial func.s (meanings) of identification, relat.generalization, & absol. generalization.
The articleparadigm is generalized for the whole system of the common Ns in Eng& is transpositionally outstretched into the subsystems of properNs & Unica (unique Ns) as well as into the system of proNs.
18.Non-finite forms of the V
Non-finiteforms of the V (Vids)are the forms of the V which have feat.s intermediary btw the V &the non-processual parts of spee4. They perform mixed, Val &non-Val, syntactic func.s. They are: inf-ve, gerund, pres.participle, past participle.
The inf-vecombinesthe properties of the V with those of the noun, as a result it servesas the Val name of a process. By virtue of its general process-namingfunc., the inf-ve should be considered as the head-form of the wholeparadigm of the V. The inf-ve has a dual, V-type & noun-type,valency. The inf-ve has 3 gr. cat.: the aspective cat. of development(the opp. of Continuous & Non-Continuous forms), the aspectivecat. of retrospective coordination (the opp. of Perf. & Non-Perf.forms), the cat. of voice (the opp. of Pass. & Non-Pass. forms).Conseq-ly, the categorial paradigm of the inf-ve of the objective Vincl.s eight forms: the Indefinite Act., the Continuous Act., thePerf. Act., the Perf. Continuous Act.; the Indefinite Pass., theContinuous Pass., the Perf. Pass., the Perf. Continuous Pass.. Theinf-ve paradigm of the non-objective V, correspondingly, incl.s4 forms.
The gerund,likethe infinitive, combines the properties of the-V with those of thenoun & gives the process the Val name. In comp. with theinfinitive the gerund reveals stronger substantive properties.Namely, as diff. from the infinitive, & similar to the noun, thegerund can be modified by a noun in the possessive case or itspronominal equivalents (expressing the subject of the Val process), &it can be used with prepositions.
Thecombinability of the gerund is dual: it has a mixed, V-type &noun-type, valency. Like the infinitive, the gerund performs thesyntactic func.s of the subject, the object, the predicative, theattrib., & the adVial modifier. The gerund has 2 gr. cat.: theaspective cat. of retrospective coordination & the cat. of voice.Conseq-ly, the categorial paradigm of the gerund of the objective Vincludes four forms: the Simple Active, the Perf. Active, the SimplePassive, the Perf. Passive. The ge-rundial paradigm of thenon-objective V, correspondingly, includes 2 forms.
The pres.participle servesas a qualifying-processual name. It combines the properties of the Vwith those of the adjective & adV.
The pres.participle has 2 cat.: the cat. of retrospective coordination &the cat. of voice. The triple nature of the pres. participle findsits expression in its mixed (V-type, adjective-type, adV-type)valency & its syntactic func.s (those of the predicative, theattrib., & the adVial modifier).
The pres.participle, similar to the infinitive, can build up semi-predicativecomplexes of objective &subjective types.
The pastparticiplecombinesthe properties of the V with those of the adjective. The categorialmeaning of the past participle is qualifying: it gives some sortof qualification to the denoted process. The past participle has noparadigmatic forms; by way of paradigmatic correlation with the pres.participle, it conveys implicitly the categorial meanings of theperf. & the passive. Its valency is not specific; itstypical syntactic func.s are those of the attrib. & thepredicative.
Like the pres. participle, thepast participle is capable of making up semi-predicativeconstructions of complex object, complex subject, as well as absolutecomplexes.
Theconsideration of the English Vids in their mutual comp.,supported & supplemented by comparing them with their nonValcounterparts, reveals a peculiar character of their correlation.
Thecorrelation of the infinitive, the gerund, &the Val noun, being of an indisputably systemic nature & coveringa vast proportion of the lexicon, makes up a special lexico-gr.cat. of processual repres.ation. The 3 stages of this cat. repres.the referential processual entity of the lexemic series,respectively, as dynamic (the infinitive & its phrase),semi-dynamic (the gerund & its phrase), & static (theVal noun & its phrase). The cat. of processual repres.ationunderlies the predicative diff. between various situation-namingconstructions in the sphere of syntactic nominalization.
19.Cat. of Tense.
Thecat. of tense is considered to be an immanent gr. Cat. which meansthat the finite Vform alw expresses time distinctions.
The cat. oftense finds diff. interpretations with diff. scholars. Thus, in trad.linguistics gr. time is often repres.ed as a 3-form cat. consistingof the "linear" past, pres., & future forms. Thefuture-in-the-past does not find its place in the scheme based on thelinear principle, hence, this system is considered to be deficient,not covering all lingual data.
At the same time linguists buildup new systems of tenses in order to find a suitable place in themfor future-in-the past. Nevertheless, many of such schemes are opento criticism for their inconsistency which finds its expression inthe fact that some of them deny the independent status of futuretenses while others exclude from the analysis future-in-the-pastforms.
The saidinconsistency can be overcome if we accept the idea that in Eng thereexist 2 tense cat..
The 1st cat. -thecat. of primary time - expresses a direct retrospective evaluation ofthe time of the process denoted, due to which the process receives anabsolutive time characteristic. This cat. is based upon the opp. of"the past tense" & "the pres. tense", thepast tense being its strong member.
The 2nd tensecat. is the cat. of "prospective time", it is based uponthe opp. of "after-action" & "non-after-action",the marked member being the future tense. The cat. of prospect isrelat. by nature which means that it characterizes the action fromthe point of view of its correlation with some other action. Asthe future Val form may be relat. either to the pres. time, or to thepast time incl.d in non-future, the Eng V acquires 2 diff. futureforms: the future of the pres. & the future of the past. It meansthat the future of the past is doubly strong expressing the strongmembers of the cat. of primary time & the cat. of prospect.
The cat. ofprimary time is subjected to neutralization & transposition,transposition being more typical. The vivid cases of transpositionare the "historical pres." & the "Preterite ofModesty". As for the cat. of prospect, it is oftenneutralized; neutralization can be of 2 types: syntacticallyoptional & syntactically obligatory.
20.Cat. of Aspect
Gr.aspective meanings form a variable gr. cat. which is trad.lyassociated with the opp. of continuous & non-continuousforms of the V. Yet, 1 can find a great divergence of opinions on theprobl. of the Eng aspect. The main difference lies in theinterpretation of the categorial semantics of the opp.al members- continuous & indefinite forms: the categorial meaning of thecontinuous form is usually defined as the meaning of duration, whilethe interpretation of the categorial semantics of the Indefinite formcauses controversy (the indefinite form may be interpreted as havingno aspective meaning (I.P. Ivanova), as a form having a vague content(G.N. Vorontsova), as a form stressing the fact of the performance ofthe action (A.I. Smirnitsky). In Modern Linguistics A.I. Smirnitsky'sinterpretation of the categorial semantics of the indefiniteform is widely accepted.
In theoreticalgr-ar the interpretation of perf. / non-perf. V-forms also refers todisputable ?s. Some linguists interpret the opp. of perf. /non-perf. forms as aspective (O. Jespersen, I.P. Ivanova, G.N.Vorontsova), others - as the opp. of tense forms (H. Sweet, G.O.Curme, A. Korsakov). A.I. Smirnitsky was the 1st to prove that perf.& non-perf. make up a special, self-sufficient, cat. which hecalled the "cat. of time correlation"; this viewpoint isshared now by a vast majority of linguists.
DevelopingA.I. Smirnitsky's views on the categorial semantics of perf. /non-perf. forms, we can come to the conclusion that in Eng thereexist 2 aspective cat.: the cat. of development (based on theopp. of continuous & non-continuous forms) & the cat. ofretrospective coordination (based on the opp. of perf. &non-perf. forms).
The perf. formhas a mixed categorial meaning: it expresses both retrospective timecoordination of the process & the connexion of the prior actionwith a time-limit reflected in a subsequent event. The recognition ofthe 2 aspect cat. also enables 1 to give a sound interpretation tothe perf. continuous forms: they must be treated as forms havingmarks in both the aspect cat..
The opp. ofcontinuous & non-continuous forms can be neutralized &transponized. Besides, in the cat. of development Vs which areusually not used in continuous forms can be subjected to the processof reverse transposition, e.g.: Wereyou wanting my help?
As for theopp. of perf. & non-perf. forms, it can undergo only theprocess of neutralization, transposition being alien to it.
21.Cat. of Mood
A greatdivergence of opinions on the ?of the cat. of mood is caused by the fact that identical mood formscan express diff. meanings & diff. forms can express similarmeanings.
The cat. ofmood shows the relation of the nominative content of the sent.towards reality. By this cat. the action can be pres.ed as real,non-real, desirable, recommended, etc.
It is obviousthat the opp. of the 1 integral form of the indicative & the1 integral form of the subj-ve underlies the unity of the wholesystem of Eng moods. The formal mark of this opp. is thetense-retrospect shift in the subj-ve, the latter being the strongmember of the opp.. The shift consists in the perf. aspect beingopposed to the imperf. aspect, both turned into the relat.substitutes for the absolutive past & pres. tenses of theindicative.
The study ofthe Eng mood reveals a certain correlation of its formal &semantic feat.s. The subj-ve, the integral mood of unreality, pres.sthe 2 sets of forms acc. to the structural division of Val tensesinto the pres. & the past. These form-sets constitute the 2corresponding func.al subsystems of the subj-ve, namely, thespective, the mood of attitudes, & the conditional, the moodof appraising causal-conditional relations of processes. Each ofthese, in its turn, falls into 2 systemic subsets, so that at theimmed-ly working level of pres.ation we have the 4 subj-veform-types identified on the basis of the strict correlation btwtheir structure & their func.: the pure spective, the modalspective, the stipulative conditional, the consective conditional:
PureSpective(Subj-ve 1) consideration, desideration, inducement
StipulativeConditional(Subj-ve 2)unreal condition
ConsectiveConditional(Subj-ve 3)unreal consequence
ModalSpective(Subj-ve 4) consideration, desideration, inducement
The elaboratedscheme clearly shows that the so-called "imperative mood"has historically coincided with Subj-ve1.
The describedsystem is not finished in terms of the historical development oflang.; on the contrary, it is in the state of making & change.Its actual manifestations are complicated by neutralizations offormal & semantic contrasts, by fluctuating uses of theauxiliaries, of the finite "be" in the singular.
22. Thesent.as a syntactic unit.
The sent. isthe immediate integral unit of spee4built up of words acc. to a definite syntactic pattern &distinguished by contextually relevant comm-tive purpose. Anycoherent connexion of words having an informative destination iseffected within the frame work of sent.. Therefore the sent. idis themain object of syntax. The sent., being composed of word, may incertain cases include one word of various lexico-gram. st&ings.Ex. Congratulations!The actual existence of one-word sent.s does not contradict thegeneral idea of a sent. as a special syntactic combination of words.The sent. is a predicative utterance unit. It means that the sent.not only names some referents with the help of its word-constituents,but also, 1stpresents these referents as making up a certain situation (asituational event) & 2ndreflects the connexion btw the nominal denotation of the event &objective reality showing the time of the event, its being real orunreal, desirable or undes., etc. There is a diff. btw the sent. &the word. Unlike the word, the sent. does not exist in the system ofthe lang. as a ready-made unit. It is created by the speaker in thecourse of commun-tion. Trad. gr. has never regarded the sent. as partof the system of means of expression; It has alw interpreted thesent. not as an implement for constructing spee4, but as spee4itself. Being a unit of spee4, the sent is intonationally delimited.Intonation separates one sent. from another in the continual flow ofuttered segments. The sent. is characterized by its specific categoryof predication which establishes the relation of the named phenomenato actual life. As for predication proper, it embodies syntacticmodality as the fundamental feature of the sent. It is the feature ofpredication that identifies the sent. as opposed to any othercombination of words having a situational referent. The centre ofpredication in a sent. of Val type is a finite V. The finite Vexpresses essential predicative meanings by its categorical forms.The sent as a lingual unit performs 2 essential signemic (meaningful)func.s: 1stsubstance-naming (nomin-ve func.), 2nd– reality-evaluating (predicative func.).
23. The phrase, its relationto the word & the sent.
The phrase isthe object of minor syntax. The phrase is usually understood as acombination of 2 or more words which is a gr. unit but is not ananalytical form of a word. Nominal phrase – a compound signemicunit made up of words & denoting a complex phenomenon of realityanalyzable into its component elements together with variousrelations btw them.The trad. class-tion of phrases is based on the part of spee4 statusof the phrase constituents. In accordance with this criterion,the following types of phrases can be identified: "noun + noun","adjective + noun", "V + noun", "V + adV","adV + adjective", "adV + adV", etc. Phrasesare made up not only by notional words but also by func.alwords, e.g.: "in accordance with", "due to","apart from", "as soon as" - such phrases performin a sent. preposition-like & conjunction-like func.s. Syntacticrelations of the phrase constituents are divided into 2 main types:agreement & government. Agreementtakes place when the subord. word assumes a form similar to that ofthe word to which it is subord.. In English agreement is typicalonly of the category of number in demonstrative pronouns.Governmenttakes place when the subord. word is used in a certain form requiredby its head word, the form of the subord. word not coinciding withthe form of the head word. The expression of government is the use ofthe objective case of personal pronouns & of the pronoun "who"when they are used in a Val phrase or follow a preposition. Phrasescan also be classified according to the nominative value of theirconstituents. As a result three major types of phrases areidentified: notional (consisting of grammatically connectednotional words), formative (made up by notional & func.al words),& func.al (consisting of func.al words alone). Notional phrasesare subdivided into 2 groups on the principle of the constituentrank: equipotent phrases (the phrase constituents are of an equalrank) & dominational phrases (the syntactic ranks of theconstituents are not equal as they refer to one another as themodifier & the modified). Further subdivision of equipotentnotional word groupings into coordinative & cumulative is carriedout on the principle of the character of nomination realized bythe phrase constituents: coordinative phrases are based on thelogically consecutive connexions, cumulative phrases arecharacterized by the constituent inequality in the character ofnomination realized & the presence of a coordinativeconjunction. In their turn, dominational notional phrases aresubdivided into consecutive & cumulative: the class-tionprinciple of the character of nomination realized by the phraseconstituents remains valid. Dominational consecutive phrasesfall into minor groupings according to the specific features ofdominational connexion.
24. Actual division of thesent.
The actualdivision of the sent. exposes its informative perspective showingwhat immediate semantic contribution the sent. parts make to totalinf-tionconveyed by the sent. Fromthe point of view of the actual division the sent. can be dividedinto 2 sections: thematic (theme) & rhematic (rheme). The themeexpresses the starting point of communication; it means that itdenotes an object or a phenomenon about which smth is reported. Therheme expresses the basic informative part of the communication,emphasizing its contextually relevant centre. Between the theme &the rheme intermediary, transitional parts of the actualdivision can be placed, also known under the term "transition".Transitional parts of the sent. are characterized by diff. degreesof their informative value. The theory of actual division has provedfruitful in the study of the comm-tive properties of sent.s. Inparticular, it has been demonstrated that each comm-tive type isdistinguished by features which are revealed first &foremost in the nature of the rheme. As a declarative sent.immediately expresses a proposition, its actual division pattern hasa complete form, its rheme making up the centre of some statement. Asan imperative sent. does not directly express a proposition, itsrheme represents the informative nucleus not of an explicitproposition, but of an inducement in which the thematic subject isusuallyzeroed. If the inducement is emphatically addressed to the listener,or to the speaker himself, or to the third person, thematic subjectshave an explicit form.
The diff.ialfeature of the actual division pattern of an interrogative sent.is determined by the fact that its rheme is inf-tionally open becausethis type of sent. expresses an inquiry about inf-tion which thespeaker does not possess. The function of the rheme in aninterrogative sent. consists in marking the rhematic position in aresponse sent., thus programming its content. Diff. types of ?s arecharacterized by diff. types of rhemes.
The analysisof the actual division of comm-tivesent. types gives an add-al proof of the "non-comm-tive"nature of the so-called purely exclamatory sent.s (e.g. "Oh, Isay!"): it shows that interjectional utterances of the typedon't make up grammatically predicated sent.s with their owninformative perspective; in other words, they remain meresignals of emotions.
| 1Communicativetypes of s-ces 3cardinal s-ce types:declarative, imperative,interrogative.Dec-ve expr-sa statement(affir-ve/neg) Im-ve- inducement(aff/neg),- request/command.Int-ve - requestfor infor-n. Ch.Fries:classedthem acc-g toresponses they elict. In this systemutter-ce is chosen as a universalspeech unit. 1)situationut-s2) response ut-s. 1)weredividedinto 3 groups: a)utfollowed by oral responses (greetings,calls,questions. hello! dad!)b)ut-s eliciting action res-s (requests/commands).c)ut-s elicitingconventional signals ofattention to continuous discours(statements).Also existnon-commun-ve ut-s (charact-cof surprise,anger, pain-Oh!,Darn!).Another type isrecognized-exclamatorys-ce. | 1Each of cardinal com-ve s-ces canbe repres-ed in 2 variants: excl-ry/non-exc.What a nice dog!It's a very nice dog.Then whyin God's name did you come ?Whydid you come?Inthe lightof of theory of actual division: eachcomm-ve type isdistin-ed by spec. act-al div-n features,whichare revealed in the natureof rheme. Dec-ve s-sespr-s certainproposition.Rheme makes up centre os statement-the next instantshe had recogn-edhim.- rheme. Imp-ve s-s exp-san urge to do smth/not to do. Rheme exp-s inform-ve nucleus ofinducement. Its thematic subject is zeroed. Don't try to sidetrackme! Inter-ves-s expr-sinquiry about inf-n.Rheme is informat-ly opened. Purelyexcl-ry s-s -interjectionalexlamations (Good Lord!) |
| 2Thesimple s-ce and its parts Thisis s-ce in which only 1 pred -veline is expr-ed. The nominative partsare subj, pred-te,obj,adverbial, attr-te,parentheticalenclosure, adressingenc-re,interjectional enc-re. Theparts are arranged in hierarchy, allperfom modifying roles. Subj- person-modifierof subj-person. Obj-substance-mod-ierofa processu alpart.Adve-l, attr-te are quality mod-iers,parethenc-speaker boundmod-er,adr-g enc-re-mod-er ofdestination,interj. enc-speaker boundemotional mod. The idea ofverbal valency-principle of dividings-ce parts into obligatory andoptional.We disting-sh betweenunexpanded simple s-s(monopredic-ves-s formed onlyby oblig-ry notional | 2parts and expended s. s-s( mopr. s.which includes oblig. parts+ optionalparts, suplementive mod-ierswhich don't constituate pred-veenlargement of the s-ce. Thetall trees by the island shorewere shaking violently in the gusty wind.-exp-ed. Acc-g to presenceof both members s-s areclassed into 2-member/1m. 1-axisconstructions(whowill meetus?-Mary).Free 1-axis s-s - elliptical.Reflecting the cat-es of Subj:s-sare divided into personal/im# Pred-te:s-sare div-ed into processfeaturing(verbal) and substance # Subj-obj rel-s:s-s aresubjective(J lives in London) /objective(J reads a book andneutral(John reads). |
| 3Theconcept of Parad-tic Syntax Incontemprorary ling-cs paradig-c approachprovides theoretical ground fortreating the s-ce as a meaningful linqualunit existing in a pattern form. Paradigma-csfinds its essential expr-n insystem of oppositions. Syntactic opp-nsare realized correlated s-ce patternsthe observable relations betweenwhich can be described by transformations,as transitions from 1 patternof certain notional parts to another pattern. So some patterns shouldbe approached as base patterns andothers as their transforms. Question isis produced from statement, negation fromaffirmation. | 11elementsthat relate given s to 1 that precedes it and semanticallycomplete. On basis of funct-l nature of connc-rs cumulation is dividedinto 1)conjunctive(then, moreover,consequently,hence, besides)2)correlative a)substitutional connection(Mary woke me.She said..)b)representativeI went home. She accepted my departureindifferantly. Elementaryunit-segment of text Canbe built by a cumeleme or a single s. This unit is called dicteme.In written sp it’spes-d by paragraph. P-s are conn-ed within frame work of largerelements of text.P groupings compose chapters of othercompositional divisions. |
| 4TheKernel Sentence Theinitial basic element of syntacticderivation,unit serving assen-ce-root and providing objectiveground for identifying syntacticcategorial oppositions. Thepattern of KS. is interpreted asforming the base of paradig-c derivation.Derivation isn't change 1s into another. It's production ofmore complex pattern const-s outof kernel pattern const-s as theirstructural bases. I saw him come=Isaw him+he came. K.S.is an elementary s-ce which isnon-inter-ve,non-imper-ve, non-negative,non-modal. | 4Procedures of derivation: 1)morphologicalarrangement (morph.changesexpressing synt acticallyrelevant categories: tense,aspect,voice)John+start= Jstarts.2)usesof functional words heunderstood me-he seemed to# 3)substitutionThe boys played- theyplayed.4)Deletion Would youlike a cup of tea?-a cup of tea? 5)intonational arrag-t we mustgo- we must go?6)positional arr-nt the man is here Is the manhere? |
| 5SyntacticNominalization Kernels-s expand base s-s undergo derivationchanges into clauses and phrases.Transformationof base s intoclause-clausalization.Byway ofit s is charged into subordinate or coordinateclausein the process of subordinativeor coordinative com binationof s-s.This procedure includes useof conjunctive words.They arrived+ Iwas relieved of my fears=When they arrievedI was...Transformation of bases into a phrase-phrasalization. Byit s is tras-ed into a semi-predic-ve constructionor a nominal phrase. | 5Nominal phrases are produced by the process of nominalization.It may be complete(consisting in completely depriving the s of itspredic-ve aspect) orpartial(Partly depriving of it). Partialnom-n produces infinitive and gerundial phrases. The resultingconstr-s produced by application of these procedures in theprocess of derivational combinationof base s-s will be both simple expanded s-s(in case of completenom-n_ and semi-composite s-s(in case ofpartial nom-n). |
| 6SyntacticParadigm of predi-ve Func-s Asa part of predi-ve system kernel s-s undergosuch structural modifications as immediatelyexpress the pred-ve functions of a s-ce, fun-s relating nominativemeanings ofthe s to reality. Pred-ve func-s are dividedinto 1)lower fun-s(include expre ssionof morph-l categ-s as tenses andaspects) 2)higher fun-s(evaluative .expressfunctional semantics of relati ngthe nominative content of s to reality) Theprinciple pred-ve fun-s expr-ed by | 6syntactic categ-l oppos-s are the following: 1)?opposed tostatement2)negation to aff-n3)inducementto statement 4)unrealityto reality5)probability to fact 6)modal identity to fact7)modalsubject- actionrelations to fact8)special actual subject action to fact9)phase ofaction tofact 10)passive action to active 11)specializedactual division to non- specialized#12)emotiveness to un#. |
| 7Composites, structure,derivation Isformed by 2 or more predi-ve lines Expr-sesa complicated act of thought Eachpred-ve unit in a comp s makes upa clause in it.The use of comp s-s iss a special char-c of written speech. Comps display 2 types of construc tions:hypotaxis(subordination)and parataxis(coordination).Sub-nand coord-nare main types of connect ionof clauses. Sub-n-clauses are arrangedas units of equal rank.Co-n- asunits of unequal rank, dominated bythe other.The means combining clausesare syndetic(conjuncti-al) /asyndetic(non-#).Composites-s | 7are classed into compounds-s (coord-ingtheir clauses) and complex(subord-ing#). Cumulation-kindof syntactic connectionplacing the sequential clausein a sintactically detached positin.-Hewas sent for,asI have toldyou,verysuddenly this morning. Thereexist constr-ns where 1 pred-ve lineis combined with another 1, the latternot being expr-ed comletely. Heignored the question and remained silent. |
| 8Complexsentence Isa polyper-ve constr-n built up onthe principle of subordination. It'sderived from 1 or more base s-s1 of which performs the role of amatrix in relation to the others, inserts-s.The matrix s becomes principleclause,insert s-s-subor-te clauses.Theprinciple cl dominates sub-tecl.Sub-te cl is joined to prin-l clby a subordinator or asyndatically. Howdo you know he left the room? Classif-nof sub-te cl-s:1)funct-l clas-n2)categorial cla-n1)Sub cl are classedon the analogy of the posi tionalparts of simple s.2)are classed bytheir nominal prop-s irrespective oftheir positional relations in the s. Frompoint of v. of their nomin-ve featuresthey sub cl are divided into a)clnaming event or fact-substantive | 8nominal.Heknew whatwas right. b)qualification-nominal(givechar-c) Theman whocame in the morning lefta letter.c)adverbial(gives quality ofdescriptios)Describe it asyou see it. Connectiveword: 1)thosethat occupynotional position in the der ivedcl-Positionalsubordinators: conjunctivesubstitutes-who,what, that,where,when,why.2)non-pos-l subord-rs-pureconjunctions:since, because,though,however,than,asif. Allsub-te cl-s are divided into 1)cl ofprimary nominal positions (subject,pred-ve,obj.cl-s).2)of2nd-ry nominalpositions(attributive)3)cl ofadverbial positions.(includecl oftime/place,manner/comparison, ofdifferent circums-al semant-cs: ofcondition,reason,result,cause, concession,,purpose. |
| 9Compoundsentence Isa copposite s built on principle ofcoordination.Coord-n can be expr-edsyndatically(by means of connections)or asyndatically.The mainsemantic relations between cl-s arecopulative,adversative,disjunctive causal,consequential,resultative. Comps is derived from 2 or more bases-s connected on the principle ofcoord-n syndet-lly or asyn-ly. Bases-s lose their independ status andbecome coord-te cl-s, parts of acomposite unity.1st cl is leading, successivecl-s are sequential. Coordinativeconnec-s are divided | 9into1)conjunctionsproper(and,but, neither,nor,for,either.andsemi- functionalclausal connectors of ad verbialcharacter(then,yet,so,thus, nethertheless,however).Approached fromsemantico-syntactic point of v. connectionis analysed into 2 types: 1)unmarkedcoord-ve connection 2)marked#1)is realized by conj and andalso asyndetically.2)is effected bypure and adverbial coordinators (but,still,howeveretc.). |
| 10Semi-compositesentence Isa s with 1 or more pred-ve lines whichare expr-ed in fusion.1 of theselines is dominant, others- makesemi-pred-ve expansion of thes. Semi-predi-ve line is either whollyfused with dominant pred -veline of construction or parti allyfused with it.Semi-composite sdisplays intermediary syntactic characterbetween copmposite s andsimple s.According to ranking structureof semi-cop. s-s there existsemi-complexands-comp ound.S-complexisbuilt up on principleof subordination. It's derivedfrom minimum 2 base s-s (1matrix,1insert).Subtypes: divisionbased on char-r of pred fusion-1)effectedby process of positionalsharing:a)subject sharing-Themoon rose+the mwas red=the moon rose red. b)objectsharing we asw him+ heapproached us=we saw him | 10approach us.2)linearexpansion a)attributivecomplication I came latefor supper+supper was served inthe dining room.b)adverbial complic-nWindowswere closed +she didn't hear noise=windows beingclosed,she#.c)nominal- phrasecomplicationTom's com inglate annoyed his mother. S-compounds is built up on principleof coordination. composedof 2 base s-s having identicalelement sharing it in coordinativefusion.By the number ofbases joined:1)2base2)multi-b Theconnection types of 2) are: a)syndetica1)homosyndatic- Yousaw flash,then heard crack, thensaw smoke. a2)heterosyndetic- Awoman came and looked at them,but vanished when they adressedher. b)asyndeticc)mixed |
| 11The Syntactic Structure of Text S-sin continual speech aren’t used in isolation.They’reinterconnected both Semanticallyand syntactically. S-s come under broad grammatical arraagement They Mayor may not build coherent sequence, Dependingon aim of speaker. Text can be interpreted as lingual enity withits 2 features: Semanticunity, semantico-syntactic cohesion. Divisionof s sequences in speech is based on communicative direction oftheir component s-s.:1)monologuesequences2)dialoque s 1)s-sare directed from 1 speaker to his listeners-1-direction sequence. 2) s-s are directed to meet 1 another- 2directionseq-s. 1direction seq. Is based on syntactic cumulation of s-s. So thesupra-segmental constructionof 1 direction commu-ve type is | 11 Called cumulative sequence, a cumuleme. Formation of 2direct-nseq is based on sent-s being positioned to meet each other.Supra-segm. Const-n -occurseme.Occ-me occupies place above cum-me.Cum-me is contrasted by2 or more s-s joined by cumul-n. Occ-mecontrasted by 2 or more cum-s. The supro-proposemic level is Dividedinto1)lower level at which Cumulemicconnection os s-s are identified, and higher l at which occursemic#. S-s in cumulative seq Canbe connected prospectively (prospectiveconnector signals continuation of speech-I tell you, 1 or 2 thingsmust happen). Or retrospectively (is effected by con-ve |