is semantically expr. means, expresses diff. sem. meanings. Gr. is a
complex set of semantically charged regularities of forming
utterances of speech from the nominative means of l-ge. Since gr.
forms and regularities are meaningful, the rules of grammar must be
stated semantically, or they must be worded functionally. (ex:
inverted w/o, its meaningful functions – difference between
meaningful&marginal idea, emotive&unemotivemodes of speech,
dif. types of style) Gr. elements of l-ge present a unity of content
& expression (or form & meaning).
& Paradigmatic Relations.
Beaudoin de Courtenay (Rus.) & Ferdinand de Saussure (Swiss):
showed difference betw. Lingual synchrony (coexistence of lingual
elements) & diachrony (diff. time-periods in the development of
lingual elements as well as l-ge as a whole) & defined l-ge as a
synchronic system of meaningful elements at any stage of its hist.
evolution. Lingual units stand to one another in 2 fundamental
types of relations: syntagmatic
relations are immediate linear relations between units in a segmental
sequence. Ex: The
spaceship was launched without the help of a booster rocket.
Words, word-groups and morphemes of words are connected
syntagmatically. The combination of 2 words or word-groups one of
which is modified by the other forms a unit, which is referred to as
a syntactic “syntagma”.
Notional syntagmas: predicative
(a subject+predicate), objective
verb+its object), attributive
(a noun+its attr.), adverbial
(verb/adj/adverb+adv.modifier). The other type of relations, opposed
to synt. And called paradigmatic,
are such as exist between elements of the system outside the strings
where they co-occur. These intra-systemic relations &
dependencies are expressed in the fact that each lingual unit is
included in a set of connections based on diff. formal and functional
1) The lowest level – phonemic.Phoneme
is not a sign, but a unit of a l-ge (lacks content). It’s
abstract, represents by a sound & letter. Specific function –
phonemes distinguish words & morphemes as material bodies,
changes their meanings.2) Morphemic.
Morpheme is a sign–2 sides; the smallest meaningful part of a
word. The smallest -s. F-tion – significative:
m. express the signif. or generalized meaning. M. is a group of
allophones. 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, it
names objects & phenomena. 1 morpheme can be 1 word (the
smallest). 4) Denotemic.
A w-comb./phrase (denoteme) is a comb. of at least 2 notional w-s
connected semantically. A comb. of a n.word & an aux. element is
not a phrase, but just a gram.form. (ex.has been done). F-tion –
Phrases name complicated things & phenom, give add. info. about
qualities of objects, circumstances. Phrases: free
(we can choose elements freely) & stable
(phraseological units). 5) Proposemic
level 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 a
s-ce, which form a predicative line. Predication is expr. through
tense&mood of a verb. 6) Dictemic
– level of topicalization. (Blokh) Unit – dicteme.
Utterance – supra-sentential construction. A dicteme is a
comb.of 2/more s-ces which are united by common topic. Though there
may be only 1 s-ce in a d. f-tions: a) Nominative:
names sit./sit.events. b)Predicative
(see), c) F.of topicalozation
each dicteme presents a separate topic in a continual text, d)
(to expr.the attitude of the speaker).
& the morpheme.
In studying the moroheme we study the word in the necess.details of
its 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 of
the word; the m.is formed by phonemes. The word is a nominative unit
of of l-ge built up by morphemes & indivisible into smaller
segments as regards its nominative f-tion. The morphol.system of l-ge
reveals its properties through the morphemic str-re of words.
(functional) class-tion of morphemes.
Henry Sweet, Smirnitsky. Study of morph.str-re in traditional gr. - 2
the analysis of the location of the marginal morphemes in relation to
the central ones. 2) Semantic
involves the study of the correlative contribution of the morpheme to
the general meaning of the word. M-s at the upper level are divided
into root & affixal (lex.&gram.).A lot of varieties of
morphemic 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 part
of the meaning. Specifications: of lexico-semantic &
grammatico-semantic character. Or 3 criteria: a) semantic properties
of words (meaning), b) formal properties (form), c) functional
class-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 of
different 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 constitute
dofferent morphemes. Ex: returned/returning/returns.
The morphs are in non-contrastive d. if their mean.(f-tions) are
identical; such morphs constitute “free variants” of the
same morpheme. Ex: suffixes –ed & -t (learned/learnt), -s &
-i (genies/genii). As for complementary distr., it concerns
diff.environments of formally diff.morphs which fulfill one & the
same f-tion; such morphs are termed “allo-morphs”. Ex: a
few allomorphs of the plural suffix: -en (children), -s (toys), -a
(data), -es (crises), -I (genii), zero (trout-trout). The application
of distr.analysis to the morphemic level-> cl-tion of m. on
distr.lines. a) free & bound m., b) overt & covert m., c)
additive & replacive m., d) continuous & discontin.m, e)
segmental & supra-segmental m.
& Analytical forms in Grammar.
Gr.opposition – correlation of gr.forms expressing a
categorical gram. meaning based on common & differential features
of these forms. The means used for building up member-forms of
categorical oppositions are divided into synthetical &
analytical, and so do the gram.forms. Synthetical
– realized by the inner morphemic composition of the word,
gr.forms are built up by a combination of 2/more words, one of which
is a gram.auxiliary (word-morpheme), & the other, a word of
“substantial” meaning. Synthetical
gr.f. are based on inner
(phonemic (vowel) interchange; non-productive now, on ancient
elements, used in irregular verbs, some nouns-plural), outer
(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 – broader
morphological interpretation). Analytical
(typical of modern E.) – a combination of aux.word+basic word.
“Gramatically idiomatic” combinations (whose relevant
gram.meaning is not dependent on meanings of their component elements
taken apart). But: more, most – unidiomatic
of parts of speech.
The words of l-ge, depending on various formal & semantic
features, 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 3
criteria: semantic, formal & functional. Semantic
(meaning): presupposes the evaluation of the generalized meaning,
characteristic of all words of a given part of speech. The meaning is
understood as “categorical meaning of the p.of sp.”.
(form): provides for the exposition of the specific inflexional &
derivational (word-building) features of all the lexemic subsets of a
part of speech. Functional
(function): concerns the syntactic role of words in the s-ce typical
of a part of speech.
parts of speech in English.
these criteria words on the upper level are div.into notional
noun, adj., numeral, pronoun, verb, adverb), words of complete
nominative mean.characterized by self-dependent f-tions, &
article, prepos., conj., particle, modal verb, interjection). Noun:
(thinfness), 2) the changeable forms
of number & case; specific suff.forms of derivation, 3) the
in the s-ce (subj., obj., substantival predicate); prepositional
connections; modiication by an adj. Adjective:
1) the categorical mean.
of property (qualitative & relative), 2) forms
of degrees of comparison (for qualitative adj.), spec.suff.forms
of deriv., 3) adj.f-tions
(attribute to a noun, adjectival predicate). Numeral:
1) number (cardinal-порядк. &
ordinal-колич.), 2) narrow set of
simple numerals, sp.forms of composition for compound num., sp.forms
of deriv.for ordinal num., 3)f-tions of numerical attr. & numer.
1)indication (deixis), 2)narrow sets of various status with the
corresponding 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 verbal
categories of person, number, tense, aspect, voice, mood; opposition
of finite & non-finite forms, 3)f-tion of the finite predicate
for the finite verb; mixed verbal-other than verbal f-tions for the
1) secondary property (i.e. of process or another property), 2)of
degrees of comparison for qualitative adverbs; sp.suffixal forms of
derivation; 3) f-tions of various adv. modifiers.
parts of speech.-Words
of incomplete nominative meaning & non-self-dependent, mediary
f-tions in the s-ce. Their number is limited. Article:
expresses the specific limitation of the substantive f-tions.
expr.the dependencies and interdependencies of substantive referents.
expr. connections of phenomena. Particle:
unites the funct.words of specifying&limiting meaning. Modal
expr.the attitude of the sp.to the situation. Here belong words of
probability (probably, perhaps), of qualitative evaluation
(un/fortunately, luckily), of affirm. & negation. Interjection:
is a signal of emotions.
classes of words (Ch.Fries).
The syntactic (monofiggerential) cl-tion of words is based on
syntactic featuring of words only. The syntactic cl-tion of words, in
principle, supplements the 3-criteria cl-tion specifying the
syntactic features of parts of speech. For the Rus. l-ge the basic
principles of the syntactic cl-tion of words were outlined in the
works of Peshkovski. In English the syntactico-distributional cl-tion
of words was worked out by Bloomfield & his followers Harris and
esp-ly Ch.Fries. The synt.-distrib. Cl-tion of words is based on the
study of their combinability by means of substitution tests. As a
rezult of this testing, a standart model of 4 main syntactic
positions of notional words was built up. These positions are those
of the noun,verb,adj,&adverb. Pronouns are included into the
corresponding positional classes as their substitutes. Words
incapable to occupy the said main syntactic positions are treated as
three-Layer structure of vocabulary (M.Blokh).
–cl-tion of the lexicon presenting some essential
generalizations about its str-re. Lexicon is divided into 2 parts:
notional words & f-tional words. The open character of the
notional part & the closed character of the f-tional part have
the status of a formal grammatical feature. Between them there is
also an intermediary field of semi-functional words. 1)The whole of
the 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 to
as “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 by
the lexical paradigm of nomination-the paradigmatic series whose
f-tion is to form & distribute any given word root among the 4
lexical class-types (p-s of speech); 4) the 2nd
(intermediate) layer of closed char., is formed by pronominal words
or “substitutes of names”; here belong pronouns &
replacer lexemes of all kinds (noun-,verb-,adj-,adv-replacers), w. of
broad 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
layers is to organize together with the categorial means of grammar,
the production of speech utterances out of the direct naming means of
l-ge (the 1st
The structure of gram. Cat.
concept proper. Gr. Cat. Is a whole system of gr. Forms expressing a
generalized gr. Func..
gr. Feture – гр.
(ex. suffix). 2. gr. Form. 3. Gr. Paradigm. 4. Gr. Opp.
analytical – the feat.s expressing the form are gr. Morphemes.
Synth. Form is one-single word including the gr. Feat.. Ex. Tables.
Form consists of 2 parts (word expressing the material meaning &
word exp. The feat.). Ex. Will
3 types of synth.forms:
1. built up by
the change of root morpheme, vowel-interchange (man-men)
inflexion – table
suppletivity – I
am, you are, bad-worse
of number is expressed by the opp. of the plural form of the noun to
its singular form. The semantic difference of the opp.al members of
the cat. of number in many linguistic works is treated trad.ly: the
meaning of the singular is interpreted as "1" & the
meaning of the plural - as "many" ("more than 1").
As the trad. interpretation of the singular & the plural members
does not work in many cases, recently the categorial meaning of the
plural has been reconsidered & now it is interpreted as the
denotation of "the potentially dismembering reflection of the
structure of the referent" (correspondingly, the categorial
meaning of the singular is treated as "the non-dismembering
reflection of the structure of the referent").
opp. of number is subjected to the process of opp.al reduction.
Neutralization takes place when countable Ns begin to func. as
Singularia Tantum Ns, denoting in such cases either abstract ideas or
some mass material, e.g. On
my birthday we alw have goose;
when countable Ns are used in the func. of the Absol. Plural: The
board are not unanimous on the ?. A
styl.ally marked transposition is achieved by the use of the
descriptive uncountable plural (The
of the toil are not alw visible) &
the "repetition plural" (Car
rushed past me).
meanings in Eng
relate to 1 another in a peculiar, unknown in other lang.s, way: the
common case is quite indiff. from the semantic point of view, while
the genitive case func.s as a subsidiary element in the morphological
system of Eng be cause its semantics is also rendered by the Common
Case noun in prepositional collocations & in contact.
discussion of the case probl. 4 main views advanced by diff. scholars
should be considered: the "theory of positional cases", the
"theory of prepositional cases", the "limited case
theory", & the "postpositional theory". Acc. to
the "theory of positional cases", the Eng noun
distinguishes the inflectional genitive case & 4
non-inflectional, purely positional, cases - Nominative, Vocative,
Dative, Accusative. The cardinal weak point of this theory lies in
the fact that it mixes up the func.al (syntactic) characteristics of
the sent. parts & the morphological feat.s of the noun.
of prepositional cases" regards nounal combinations with the
prepositions in certain object & attributive collocations as
morphological case forms: the Dative Case (to + N, for + N), the
Genitive Case (of + N).
case theory" recognizes the existence in Eng of a limited case
system whose members are the Genitive Case (a strong form) & the
Common Case (a weak form).
"postpositional theory" claims that the Eng noun in the
course of its historical development has completely lost the
morphological cat. of case; that is why the trad. Genitive Case
is treated by its advocates as a combination of a noun with a
account the advantages of the 2 theories - the "limited
case theory" & the "postpositional theory" opens
new perspectives in the treatment of the cat. of case. It st&s to
reason to regard the element -s
I -es as
a special case particle. Thus, acc. to the "particle case
theory" the 2-case system of the noun is to be recognized in
Eng: the Common Case is a direct case, the Genitive Case is an
oblique case. As the case opp. does not work with all Ns, from the
func.al point of view the Genitive Case is to be regarded as
subsidiary to the syntactic system of prepositional phrases.
of gender in Eng is being vigorously disputed. Linguistic scholars as
a rule deny the existence of gender in Eng r as a gr. cat. &
stress its purely semantic character.' The actual gender distinctions
of Ns are not denied by any1; what is disputable is the character of
the gender class-tion: whether it is purely semantic or
In fact, the
cat. of gender in Eng is expressed with the help of the obligatory
correlation of Ns with the personal proNs of the third person.
The third person proNs being specific & obligatory classifiers of
Ns, Eng gender distinctions display their gr. nature.
The cat. of
gender is based on 2 hierarchically arranged opp.s: the upper opp. is
general, 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 double
opp.al correlation, in Modern Eng a specific system of 3 genders
arises: the neuter, the masculine, & the feminine genders.
In Eng there
are many person Ns capable of expressing both feminine &
masculine genders by way of the pronominal correlation. These Ns
comprise a group of the so-called "common' gender" Ns,
e.g.: "person", "friend", etc.
In the plural
all the gender distinctions are neutralized but they are rendered
obliquely through the correlation with the singular.
the gr. (or lexico-gr.) gender distinctions, Eng Ns can show the sex
of their referents also lexically with the help of special
lexical markers, e.g.: bull-calf/cow-calf,
cock-sparrow/hen-sparrow, he-bear/she-bear, etc.
or through suffixal derivation: sultan/sultana,
The cat. of
gender can undergo the process of opp.al reduction. It can be easily
neutralized (with the group of "common gender" Ns) &
transponized (the process of "personification").
The Eng gender
differs much from the Russian gender: the Eng gender has a semantic
character (opp.ally, i.e. gr.ly expressed), while the gender in
Russian is partially semantic (Russian animate Ns have semantic
gender distinctions), & partially formal.
of Article Determination
of Eng articles has been the subject of hot discussions for many
years. Today the most disputable ?s concerning the system of
articles in Eng are the following: the identifiction of the article
status in the hierarchy of lang. units, the nurriber of articles,
their categorial & pragmatic func.s.
There exist 2
basic approaches to the probl. of the article status some scholars
consider the article a self-sufficient word which forms with the
modified noun a syntactic syntagma; others identify the article with
the morpheme-like element which builds up with the nounal, stem a
works on the probl. of article determination of Eng Ns, more often
than not an opinion is expressed that in the hierarchy of lang. units
the article occupies a peculiar place - the place intermediary btw
the word & the morpheme.
In the light
of the opp.al theory the cat. of article determination of the
noun is regarded as 1 which is based on 2 binary opp.s: 1 of them is
upper, the other is lower. The opp. of the higher level operates in
the whole system of articles & contrasts the definite article
with the noun against the 2 other forms of article determination of
the noun - the indefinite article & the meaningful absence of the
article. The opp. of the lower level operates within the sphere of
realizing the categorial meaning of non-identification (the sphere of
the weak member of the upper opp.) & contrasts the 2 types of
generalization - the relat. generalization & the absol.
generalization. As a result, the system of articles in Eng is
described 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.
paradigm is generalized for the whole system of the common Ns in Eng
& is transpositionally outstretched into the subsystems of proper
Ns & Unica (unique Ns) as well as into the system of proNs.
Non-finite forms of the V
forms 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 properties of the V with those of the noun, as a result it serves
as the Val name of a process. By virtue of its general process-naming
func., the inf-ve should be considered as the head-form of the whole
paradigm 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 aspective
cat. 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 V
incl.s eight forms: the Indefinite Act., the Continuous Act., the
Perf. Act., the Perf. Continuous Act.; the Indefinite Pass., the
Continuous Pass., the Perf. Pass., the Perf. Continuous Pass.. The
inf-ve paradigm of the non-objective V, correspondingly, incl.s
the infinitive, combines the properties of the-V with those of the
noun & gives the process the Val name. In comp. with the
infinitive the gerund reveals stronger substantive properties.
Namely, as diff. from the infinitive, & similar to the noun, the
gerund can be modified by a noun in the possessive case or its
pronominal equivalents (expressing the subject of the Val process), &
it can be used with prepositions.
combinability of the gerund is dual: it has a mixed, V-type &
noun-type, valency. Like the infinitive, the gerund performs the
syntactic func.s of the subject, the object, the predicative, the
attrib., & the adVial modifier. The gerund has 2 gr. cat.: the
aspective cat. of retrospective coordination & the cat. of voice.
Conseq-ly, the categorial paradigm of the gerund of the objective V
includes four forms: the Simple Active, the Perf. Active, the Simple
Passive, the Perf. Passive. The ge-rundial paradigm of the
non-objective V, correspondingly, includes 2 forms.
as a qualifying-processual name. It combines the properties of the V
with those of the adjective & adV.
participle has 2 cat.: the cat. of retrospective coordination &
the cat. of voice. The triple nature of the pres. participle finds
its expression in its mixed (V-type, adjective-type, adV-type)
valency & its syntactic func.s (those of the predicative, the
attrib., & the adVial modifier).
participle, similar to the infinitive, can build up semi-predicative
complexes of objective &
the properties of the V with those of the adjective. The categorial
meaning of the past participle is qualifying: it gives some sort
of qualification to the denoted process. The past participle has no
paradigmatic forms; by way of paradigmatic correlation with the pres.
participle, it conveys implicitly the categorial meanings of the
perf. & the passive. Its valency is not specific; its
typical syntactic func.s are those of the attrib. & the
Like the pres. participle, the
past participle is capable of making up semi-predicative
constructions of complex object, complex subject, as well as absolute
consideration of the English Vids in their mutual comp.,
supported & supplemented by comparing them with their nonVal
counterparts, reveals a peculiar character of their correlation.
correlation of the infinitive, the gerund, &
the Val noun, being of an indisputably systemic nature & covering
a 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 (the
Val noun & its phrase). The cat. of processual repres.ation
underlies the predicative diff. between various situation-naming
constructions in the sphere of syntactic nominalization.
Cat. of Tense.
cat. of tense is considered to be an immanent gr. Cat. which means
that the finite V
form alw expresses time distinctions.
The cat. of
tense finds diff. interpretations with diff. scholars. Thus, in trad.
linguistics gr. time is often repres.ed as a 3-form cat. consisting
of the "linear" past, pres., & future forms. The
future-in-the-past does not find its place in the scheme based on the
linear principle, hence, this system is considered to be deficient,
not covering all lingual data.
At the same time linguists build
up new systems of tenses in order to find a suitable place in them
for future-in-the past. Nevertheless, many of such schemes are open
to criticism for their inconsistency which finds its expression in
the fact that some of them deny the independent status of future
tenses while others exclude from the analysis future-in-the-past
inconsistency can be overcome if we accept the idea that in Eng there
exist 2 tense cat..
The 1st cat. -
cat. of primary time - expresses a direct retrospective evaluation of
the time of the process denoted, due to which the process receives an
absolutive time characteristic. This cat. is based upon the opp. of
"the past tense" & "the pres. tense", the
past tense being its strong member.
The 2nd tense
cat. is the cat. of "prospective time", it is based upon
the opp. of "after-action" & "non-after-action",
the marked member being the future tense. The cat. of prospect is
relat. by nature which means that it characterizes the action from
the point of view of its correlation with some other action. As
the future Val form may be relat. either to the pres. time, or to the
past time incl.d in non-future, the Eng V acquires 2 diff. future
forms: the future of the pres. & the future of the past. It means
that the future of the past is doubly strong expressing the strong
members of the cat. of primary time & the cat. of prospect.
The cat. of
primary time is subjected to neutralization & transposition,
transposition being more typical. The vivid cases of transposition
are the "historical pres." & the "Preterite of
Modesty". As for the cat. of prospect, it is often
neutralized; neutralization can be of 2 types: syntactically
optional & syntactically obligatory.
Cat. of Aspect
aspective meanings form a variable gr. cat. which is trad.ly
associated with the opp. of continuous & non-continuous
forms of the V. Yet, 1 can find a great divergence of opinions on the
probl. of the Eng aspect. The main difference lies in the
interpretation of the categorial semantics of the opp.al members
- continuous & indefinite forms: the categorial meaning of the
continuous form is usually defined as the meaning of duration, while
the interpretation of the categorial semantics of the Indefinite form
causes controversy (the indefinite form may be interpreted as having
no aspective meaning (I.P. Ivanova), as a form having a vague content
(G.N. Vorontsova), as a form stressing the fact of the performance of
the action (A.I. Smirnitsky). In Modern Linguistics A.I. Smirnitsky's
interpretation of the categorial semantics of the indefinite
form is widely accepted.
gr-ar the interpretation of perf. / non-perf. V-forms also refers to
disputable ?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 he
called the "cat. of time correlation"; this viewpoint is
shared now by a vast majority of linguists.
A.I. Smirnitsky's views on the categorial semantics of perf. /
non-perf. forms, we can come to the conclusion that in Eng there
exist 2 aspective cat.: the cat. of development (based on the
opp. of continuous & non-continuous forms) & the cat. of
retrospective coordination (based on the opp. of perf. &
The perf. form
has a mixed categorial meaning: it expresses both retrospective time
coordination of the process & the connexion of the prior action
with a time-limit reflected in a subsequent event. The recognition of
the 2 aspect cat. also enables 1 to give a sound interpretation to
the perf. continuous forms: they must be treated as forms having
marks in both the aspect cat..
The opp. of
continuous & non-continuous forms can be neutralized &
transponized. Besides, in the cat. of development Vs which are
usually not used in continuous forms can be subjected to the process
of reverse transposition, e.g.: Were
you wanting my help?
As for the
opp. of perf. & non-perf. forms, it can undergo only the
process of neutralization, transposition being alien to it.
Cat. of Mood
divergence of opinions on the ?
of the cat. of mood is caused by the fact that identical mood forms
can express diff. meanings & diff. forms can express similar
The cat. of
mood 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 obvious
that the opp. of the 1 integral form of the indicative & the
1 integral form of the subj-ve underlies the unity of the whole
system of Eng moods. The formal mark of this opp. is the
tense-retrospect shift in the subj-ve, the latter being the strong
member of the opp.. The shift consists in the perf. aspect being
opposed to the imperf. aspect, both turned into the relat.
substitutes for the absolutive past & pres. tenses of the
The study of
the Eng mood reveals a certain correlation of its formal &
semantic feat.s. The subj-ve, the integral mood of unreality, pres.s
the 2 sets of forms acc. to the structural division of Val tenses
into the pres. & the past. These form-sets constitute the 2
corresponding func.al subsystems of the subj-ve, namely, the
spective, the mood of attitudes, & the conditional, the mood
of appraising causal-conditional relations of processes. Each of
these, in its turn, falls into 2 systemic subsets, so that at the
immed-ly working level of pres.ation we have the 4 subj-ve
form-types identified on the basis of the strict correlation btw
their structure & their func.: the pure spective, the modal
spective, the stipulative conditional, the consective conditional:
(Subj-ve 1) consideration, desideration, inducement
(Subj-ve 4) consideration, desideration, inducement
scheme clearly shows that the so-called "imperative mood"
has historically coincided with Subj-ve
system is not finished in terms of the historical development of
lang.; on the contrary, it is in the state of making & change.
Its actual manifestations are complicated by neutralizations of
formal & semantic contrasts, by fluctuating uses of the
auxiliaries, of the finite "be" in the singular.
as a syntactic unit.
The sent. is
the immediate integral unit of spee4
built up of words acc. to a definite syntactic pattern &
distinguished by contextually relevant comm-tive purpose. Any
coherent connexion of words having an informative destination is
effected within the frame work of sent.. Therefore the sent. idis the
main object of syntax. The sent., being composed of word, may in
certain cases include one word of various lexico-gram. st&ings.
The actual existence of one-word sent.s does not contradict the
general 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, 1st
presents these referents as making up a certain situation (a
situational event) & 2nd
reflects the connexion btw the nominal denotation of the event &
objective reality showing the time of the event, its being real or
unreal, desirable or undes., etc. There is a diff. btw the sent. &
the word. Unlike the word, the sent. does not exist in the system of
the lang. as a ready-made unit. It is created by the speaker in the
course of commun-tion. Trad. gr. has never regarded the sent. as part
of the system of means of expression; It has alw interpreted the
sent. not as an implement for constructing spee4, but as spee4
itself. Being a unit of spee4, the sent is intonationally delimited.
Intonation separates one sent. from another in the continual flow of
uttered segments. The sent. is characterized by its specific category
of predication which establishes the relation of the named phenomena
to actual life. As for predication proper, it embodies syntactic
modality as the fundamental feature of the sent. It is the feature of
predication that identifies the sent. as opposed to any other
combination of words having a situational referent. The centre of
predication in a sent. of Val type is a finite V. The finite V
expresses essential predicative meanings by its categorical forms.
The sent as a lingual unit performs 2 essential signemic (meaningful)
substance-naming (nomin-ve func.), 2nd
– reality-evaluating (predicative func.).
23. The phrase, its relation
to the word & the sent.
The phrase is
the object of minor syntax. The phrase is usually understood as a
combination of 2 or more words which is a gr. unit but is not an
analytical form of a word. Nominal phrase – a compound signemic
unit made up of words & denoting a complex phenomenon of reality
analyzable into its component elements together with various
relations btw them.
The trad. class-tion of phrases is based on the part of spee4 status
of 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. Phrases
are made up not only by notional words but also by func.al
words, e.g.: "in accordance with", "due to",
"apart from", "as soon as" - such phrases perform
in a sent. preposition-like & conjunction-like func.s. Syntactic
relations of the phrase constituents are divided into 2 main types:
agreement & government. Agreement
takes place when the subord. word assumes a form similar to that of
the word to which it is subord.. In English agreement is typical
only of the category of number in demonstrative pronouns.
takes place when the subord. word is used in a certain form required
by its head word, the form of the subord. word not coinciding with
the form of the head word. The expression of government is the use of
the objective case of personal pronouns & of the pronoun "who"
when they are used in a Val phrase or follow a preposition. Phrases
can also be classified according to the nominative value of their
constituents. As a result three major types of phrases are
identified: notional (consisting of grammatically connected
notional words), formative (made up by notional & func.al words),
& func.al (consisting of func.al words alone). Notional phrases
are subdivided into 2 groups on the principle of the constituent
rank: equipotent phrases (the phrase constituents are of an equal
rank) & dominational phrases (the syntactic ranks of the
constituents are not equal as they refer to one another as the
modifier & the modified). Further subdivision of equipotent
notional word groupings into coordinative & cumulative is carried
out on the principle of the character of nomination realized by
the phrase constituents: coordinative phrases are based on the
logically consecutive connexions, cumulative phrases are
characterized by the constituent inequality in the character of
nomination realized & the presence of a coordinative
conjunction. In their turn, dominational notional phrases are
subdivided into consecutive & cumulative: the class-tion
principle of the character of nomination realized by the phrase
constituents remains valid. Dominational consecutive phrases
fall into minor groupings according to the specific features of
24. Actual division of the
division of the sent. exposes its informative perspective showing
what immediate semantic contribution the sent. parts make to total
conveyed by the sent. From
the point of view of the actual division the sent. can be divided
into 2 sections: thematic (theme) & rhematic (rheme). The theme
expresses the starting point of communication; it means that it
denotes an object or a phenomenon about which smth is reported. The
rheme expresses the basic informative part of the communication,
emphasizing its contextually relevant centre. Between the theme &
the rheme intermediary, transitional parts of the actual
division can be placed, also known under the term "transition".
Transitional parts of the sent. are characterized by diff. degrees
of their informative value. The theory of actual division has proved
fruitful in the study of the comm-tive properties of sent.s. In
particular, it has been demonstrated that each comm-tive type is
distinguished 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 has
a complete form, its rheme making up the centre of some statement. As
an imperative sent. does not directly express a proposition, its
rheme represents the informative nucleus not of an explicit
proposition, but of an inducement in which the thematic subject is
zeroed. If the inducement is emphatically addressed to the listener,
or to the speaker himself, or to the third person, thematic subjects
have an explicit form.
feature of the actual division pattern of an interrogative sent.
is determined by the fact that its rheme is inf-tionally open because
this type of sent. expresses an inquiry about inf-tion which the
speaker does not possess. The function of the rheme in an
interrogative sent. consists in marking the rhematic position in a
response sent., thus programming its content. Diff. types of ?s are
characterized by diff. types of rhemes.
of the actual division of comm-tive
sent. types gives an add-al proof of the "non-comm-tive"
nature of the so-called purely exclamatory sent.s (e.g. "Oh, I
say!"): it shows that interjectional utterances of the type
don't make up grammatically predicated sent.s with their own
informative perspective; in other words, they remain mere
signals of emotions.
types of s-ces
cardinal s-ce types:declarative,
responses they elict. In this
utter-ce is chosen as a
ut-s2) response ut-s.
dividedinto 3 groups:
followed by oral responses
b)ut-s eliciting action res-s
attention to continuous
Each of cardinal com-ve s-ces
be repres-ed in 2 variants:
What a nice
It's a very nice dog.Then
in God's name did you come
did you come?In
of of theory of actual
distin-ed by spec. act-al div-n
are revealed in the
of rheme. Dec-ve s-s
proposition.Rheme makes up centre os statement-the next instant
she had recogn-ed
him.- rheme. Imp-ve s-s exp-s
an urge to do smth/not to do. Rheme exp-s inform-ve nucleus of
inducement. Its thematic subject is zeroed. Don't try to sidetrack
inquiry about inf-n.Rheme is informat-ly opened. Purely
excl-ry s-s -interjectional
exlamations (Good Lord!)
simple s-ce and its parts
is s-ce in which only 1 pred
line is expr-ed. The nominative
are subj, pred-te,obj,adverbial,
parts are arranged in hierarchy,
perfom modifying roles. Subj-
part.Adve-l, attr-te are quality
emotional mod. The idea
verbal valency-principle of
s-ce parts into obligatory
by oblig-ry notional
parts and expended s. s-s( mopr.
which includes oblig. parts+
which don't constituate
enlargement of the s-ce.
tall trees by the island
were shaking violently in the gusty wind.-exp-ed. Acc-g to
of both members s-s
classed into 2-member/1m.
us?-Mary).Free 1-axis s-s -
Reflecting the cat-es of
are divided into personal/im# Pred-te:s-sare div-ed into process
featuring(verbal) and substance # Subj-obj rel-s:s-s are
subjective(J lives in London) /objective(J reads a book and
concept of Parad-tic Syntax
contemprorary ling-cs paradig-c
provides theoretical ground
treating the s-ce as a meaningful
unit existing in a pattern form.
finds its essential expr-n
system of oppositions. Syntactic
are realized correlated s-ce
the observable relations
which can be described by
as transitions from 1
of certain notional parts to
pattern. So some patterns
be approached as base patterns
others as their transforms. Question
is produced from statement, negation
elementsthat relate given s to 1 that precedes it and semantically
complete. On basis of funct-l nature of connc-rs cumulation is
2)correlative a)substitutional connection(Mary woke me.
b)representativeI went home. She accepted my departure
unit-segment of text
be built by a cumeleme or a single s. This unit is called dicteme.
In written sp it’s
pes-d by paragraph. P-s are conn-ed within frame work of larger
elements of text.P groupings compose chapters of other
initial basic element of
sen-ce-root and providing
ground for identifying
pattern of KS. is interpreted
forming the base of paradig-c
Derivation isn't change
s into another. It's production
more complex pattern const-s
of kernel pattern const-s as
structural bases. I saw him
saw him+he came.
is an elementary s-ce which
Procedures of derivation:
starts.2)usesof functional words
understood me-he seemed to#
The boys played-
like a cup of tea?-a cup of tea? 5)intonational arrag-t we must
go- we must go?6)positional arr-nt the man is here Is the man
s-s expand base s-s undergo
changes into clauses and
of base s
it s is charged into subordinate or
clausein the process of
or coordinative com
of s-s.This procedure includes
of conjunctive words.They arrived+
was relieved of my fears=When they
I was...Transformation of
s into a phrase-phrasalization.
it s is tras-ed into a semi-predic-ve
or a nominal phrase.
Nominal phrases are produced by the process of nominalization.
It may be complete(consisting in completely depriving the s of its
partial(Partly depriving of it).
nom-n produces infinitive and gerundial phrases. The resulting
constr-s produced by application of these procedures in the
process of derivational
of base s-s will be both simple expanded s-s(in case of complete
nom-n_ and semi-composite s-s(in case
Paradigm of predi-ve Func-s
a part of predi-ve system kernel s-s
such structural modifications as
express the pred-ve functions of a s-ce, fun-s relating nominative
the s to reality. Pred-ve func-s are
into 1)lower fun-s(include expre
of morph-l categ-s as tenses
aspects) 2)higher fun-s(evaluative
functional semantics of relati
the nominative content of s to reality)
principle pred-ve fun-s expr-ed by
syntactic categ-l oppos-s are the following: 1)?opposed to
to reality5)probability to fact 6)modal identity to fact7)modal
relations to fact8)special actual subject action to fact9)phase of
fact 10)passive action to active
actual division to non- specialized#12)emotiveness to un#.
formed by 2 or more predi-ve lines
a complicated act of thought
pred-ve unit in a comp s makes
a clause in it.The use of comp s-s
s a special char-c of written speech.
s display 2 types of construc
are main types of connect
of clauses. Sub-n-clauses are
as units of equal rank.Co-n-
units of unequal rank, dominated
the other.The means combining
are classed into compound
their clauses) and
placing the sequential
in a sintactically detached
was sent for,as
suddenly this morning.
exist constr-ns where 1 pred-ve
is combined with another 1, the
not being expr-ed comletely.
ignored the question and remained
a polyper-ve constr-n built up
the principle of subordination.
derived from 1 or more base
1 of which performs the role of
matrix in relation to the others,
s-s.The matrix s becomes
principle cl dominates
cl.Sub-te cl is joined to prin-l
by a subordinator or asyndatically.
do you know he left the room?
of sub-te cl-s:1)funct-l
2)categorial cla-n1)Sub cl are
on the analogy of the posi
parts of simple s.2)are classed
their nominal prop-s irrespective
their positional relations in the s.
point of v. of their nomin-ve
they sub cl are divided into
naming event or fact-substantive
came in the morning
descriptios)Describe it as
you see it.
notional position in the der
sub-te cl-s are divided into 1)cl
primary nominal positions
different circums-al semant-cs:
a copposite s built on principle
coordination.Coord-n can be
syndatically(by means of
semantic relations between cl-s
s is derived from 2 or more
s-s connected on the principle
coord-n syndet-lly or asyn-ly.
s-s lose their independ status
become coord-te cl-s, parts of
composite unity.1st cl is leading,
cl-s are sequential.
connec-s are divided
clausal connectors of ad
semantico-syntactic point of v.
is analysed into 2 types:
#1)is realized by conj and
also asyndetically.2)is effected
pure and adverbial coordinators
a s with 1 or more pred-ve lines
are expr-ed in fusion.1 of
lines is dominant, others-
semi-pred-ve expansion of
s. Semi-predi-ve line is either
fused with dominant pred
line of construction or parti
fused with it.Semi-composite
displays intermediary syntactic
between copmposite s
simple s.According to ranking
of semi-cop. s-s there
built up on
of subordination. It's
from minimum 2 base s-s
based on char-r of pred
by process of
was red=the moon rose red.
sharing we asw him+
approached us=we saw him
complication I came
for supper+supper was served
the dining room.b)adverbial
she didn't hear noise=windows
late annoyed his mother.
s is built up on
of 2 base s-s having
element sharing it in
fusion.By the number
connection types of 2) are:
saw flash,then heard crack,
saw smoke. a2)heterosyndetic-
woman came and looked at
but vanished when they
The Syntactic Structure of Text
in continual speech aren’t used in isolation.They’re
and syntactically. S-s come under broad grammatical arraagement
or may not build coherent sequence,
on aim of speaker. Text can be interpreted as lingual enity with
its 2 features:
unity, semantico-syntactic cohesion.
of s sequences in speech is based on communicative direction of
are directed from 1 speaker to his listeners-1-direction
sequence. 2) s-s are directed to meet 1 another- 2direction
seq. Is based on syntactic cumulation of s-s. So the
of 1 direction commu-ve type is
Called cumulative sequence, a cumuleme. Formation of 2direct-n
seq is based on sent-s being positioned to meet each other.
Occ-me occupies place above cum-me.Cum-me is contrasted
2 or more s-s joined by cumul-n.
contrasted by 2 or more cum-s. The supro-proposemic level is
into1)lower level at which
connection os s-s are identified, and higher l at which occursemic
#. S-s in cumulative seq
be connected prospectively
connector signals continuation of speech-I tell you, 1
or 2 things
must happen). Or retrospectively (is effected by con-ve