Lectures in Theoretical Grammar
by buttocks. prof. L.M.Volkova,
National Linguistic University of Kiev
List of books:
1. B.Ilyish. The Structure of Modern English.
2. M.Blokh. A Course in Theoretical Grammar.
3. E.Morokhovskaya. Fundamentalss of Theoretical Grammar.
4. & # 1048 ; . & # 1055 ; . & # 1048 ; & # 1074 ; & # 1072 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1074 ; & # 1072 ; , & # 1042 ; . & # 1042 ; . & # 1041 ; & # 1091 ; & # 1088 ; & # 1083 ; & # 1072 ; & # 1082 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1074 ; & # 1072 ; , & # 1043 ; . & # 1043 ; . & # 1055 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1095 ; & # 1077 ; & # 1087 ; & # 1094 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1074 ; . & # 1058 ; & # 1077 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1088 ; & # 1077 ; & # 1090 ; & # 1080 ; & # 1095 ; & # 1077 ; & # 1089 ; & # 1082 ; & # 1072 ; & # 1103 ; & # 1075 ; & # 1088 ; & # 1072 ; & # 1084 ; & # 1084 ; & # 1072 ; & # 1090 ; & # 1080 ; & # 1082 ; & # 1072 ; & # 1089 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1074 ; & # 1088 ; & # 1077 ; & # 1084 ; & # 1077 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1075 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1072 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1075 ; & # 1083 ; . & # 1103 ; & # 1079 ; ..
5. Methods Guides.
LECTURE 1 ( 2 ) : THE SCOPE OF THEORETICAL GRAMMAR.
BASIC LINGUISTIC NOTIONS.
1.Theoretical grammar and its topic.
Man is non good defined as & # 8220 ; Homo sapiens & # 8221 ;
( & # 8220 ; adult male with wisdom & # 8221 ; ) . For what do we intend by wisdom? It has non been proved so far that animate beings do non possess it. Those of you who have pets can easy turn out the reverse. Most late anthropologists have started specifying human existences as & # 8220 ; adult male the toolmaker & # 8221 ; . However, apes can besides do crude tools. What sets adult male apart from the remainder of carnal land is his ability to talk: he is & # 8220 ;
can easy object by stating that animate beings can besides talk Homo loquens & # 8221 ;
& # 8211 ; & # 8220 ; adult male the speech production animate being & # 8221 ; . And once more, you, of course, in their ain manner. But their sounds are nonmeaningful, and there is no nexus between sound and significance ( or if there is, it is of a really crude sort ) and the nexus for adult male is grammar. Merely with the aid of grammar we can unite words to organize sentences and texts. Man is non simply Homo loquens
, he is Homo Grammaticus.
The term & # 8220 ; grammar & # 8221 ; goes back to a Grecian word that may be translated as the & # 8220 ; art of composing & # 8221 ; . But later this word acquired a much wider sense and came to encompass the whole survey of linguistic communication. Now it is frequently used as the equivalent word oflinguistics
. A inquiry comes instantly to mind: what does this survey affect?
Grammar may be practical and theoretical. The purpose ofpractical
grammar is the description of grammar regulations that are necessary to understand and explicate sentences. The purpose oftheoretical
grammar is to offer account for these regulations. By and large talking, theoretical grammar trades with the linguistic communication as a functional system.
2. General rules of grammatical analysis.
Harmonizing to the Bible: & # 8216 ; In the beginning was the Word & # 8217 ; . In fact, the word is considered to be the cardinal ( but non the merely ) lingual unit ( & # 1086 ; & # 1076 ; & # 1080 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1080 ; & # 1094 ; & # 1103 ; ) of linguistic communication. Linguistic units ( or in other words & # 8211 ; marks ) can travel into three types of dealingss:
a ) The relation between a unit and an object in the universe around us ( nonsubjective world ) . E.g. the word & # 8216 ; table & # 8217 ; refers to a definite piece of furniture. It may be non merely an object but a procedure, province, quality, etc.
This type of significance is calledreferential
significance of a unit. It issemantics
that surveies the referential significance of units.
B ) The relation between a unit and other units ( interior dealingss between units ) . No unit can be used independently ; it serves as an component in the system of other units. This sort of significance is calledsyntactic
. Formal relation of units to one another is studied bysyntactics
( orsentence structure
) .
degree Celsius ) The relation between a unit and a individual who uses it. As we know excessively good, when we are stating something, we normally have some intent in head. We use the linguistic communication as an instrument for our intent ( e.g. ) . One and the same word or sentence may get different significances in communicating. This type of significance is calledmatter-of-fact
. The survey of the relationship between lingual units and the users of those units is done bypragmatics
.
Therefore there are three theoretical accounts of lingual description: semantic, syntactic and matter-of-fact. To exemplify the difference between these different ways of lingual analysis, allow us see the undermentioned sentence: Students are pupils
.
The first portion of the XXth century can be characterized by a formal attack to the linguistic communication survey. Merely interior ( syntactic ) dealingss between lingual units served the footing for lingual analysis while the mention of words to the nonsubjective world and linguistic communication users were really non considered. Later, semantic linguistic communication analysis came into usage. However, it was certainly non plenty for a elaborate linguistic communication survey. Language surely figures centrally in our lives. We discover our individuality as persons and societal existences when we get it during childhood. It serves as a agency of knowledge and communicating: it enables us to believe for ourselves and to collaborate with other people in our community. Therefore, the matter-of-fact side of the linguistic communication should non be ignored either.Functional
attack in linguistic communication analysis trades with the linguistic communication & # 8216 ; in action & # 8217 ; . Naturally, in order to acquire a wide description of the linguistic communication, all the three attacks must be combined.
3. General features of linguistic communication as a functional system.
Any human linguistic communication has two chief maps: the communicative map and the expressive or representative map & # 8211 ; human linguistic communication is the populating signifier of idea. These two maps are closely interrelated as the expressive map of linguistic communication is realized in the procedure of address communicating.
The expressive map of linguistic communication is performed by agencies of lingual marks and that is why we say that linguistic communication is asemiotic
system. It means that lingual marks are of semiotic nature: they areenlightening
andmeaningful
. There are other illustrations of semiotic systems but all of them are no uncertainty much simpler. For case, traffic visible radiations use a system of colorss to teach drivers and people to travel or to halt. Some more illustrations: Code Morse, Brighton Alphabet, computing machine linguistic communications, etc. What is the difference between linguistic communication as a semiotic system and other semiotic systems? Language is cosmopolitan, natural, it is used by all members of society while any other mark systems are unreal and depend on the domain of use.
4. Impressions of & # 8216 ; system & # 8217 ; and & # 8216 ; construction & # 8217 ; . General features of lingual units.
Language is regarded as a system of elements ( or: marks, units ) such as sounds, words, etc. These elements have no value without each other, they depend on each other, they exist merely in a system, and they are nil without a system.System
implies the word picture of a complex object as made up of separate parts ( e.g. the system of sounds ) . Language is a structural system.Structure
agencies hierarchal layering of parts in `constituting the whole. In the construction of linguistic communication there are four chief structural degrees: phonological, morphological, syntactical and supersyntatical. The degrees are represented by the corresponding degree units:
Thephonological
degree is the lowest degree. The phonological degree unit is the`phoneme
. It is a typical unit ( bag & # 8211 ; back
) .
Themorphological
degree has two degree units:
a ) the`morpheme
& # 8211 ; the lowest meaningful unit ( learn & # 8211 ; learnEr
) ;
B ) theword –
the chief naming ( `nominative ) unit of linguistic communication.
Thesyntactical
degree has two degree units every bit good:
a ) theword-group
& # 8211 ; the dependent syntactic unit ;
B ) thesentence
& # 8211 ; the chief communicative unit.
Thesupersyntactical
degree has thetext
as its degree unit.
All structural degrees are capable affairs of different degrees of lingual analysis. At different degrees of analysis we focus attending on different characteristics of linguistic communication. By and large talking, the larger the units we deal with, the closer we get to the actuality of people & # 8217 ; s experience of linguistic communication.
To sum it up, each degree has its ain system. Therefore, linguistic communication is regarded as a system of systems. The flat units are built up in the same manner and that is why the units of a lower degree serve the edifice stuff for the units of a higher degree. This similarity and similitude of organisation of lingual units is calledisomorphy
. This is how linguistic communication works & # 8211 ; a little figure of elements at one degree can come in into 1000s of different combinations to organize units at the other degree.
We have arrived at the decision that the impressions of system and construction are non synonyms & # 8211 ; any system has its ain construction ( comparison: the system of Ukrainian instruction vs. the construction of Ukrainian instruction ; army organisation ) .
Any lingual unit is a dual entity. It unites a construct and a sound image. The two elements are closely united and each recalls the other. Consequently, we distinguishthe content side
andthe look side
. The signifiers of lingual units bear no natural resemblance to their significance. The nexus between them is a affair of convention, and conventions differ radically across linguistic communications. Therefore, the English word & # 8216 ; Canis familiaris & # 8217 ; happens to denote a peculiar quadrupedal domesticated animal, the same animal that is denoted in Ukrainian by the wholly different signifier. Neither form expressions like a Canis familiaris, or sounds like one.
LECTURE 2: BASIC LINGUISTIC NOTIONS.
5. Language and address.
The differentiation between linguistic communication and address was made by Ferdinand de Saussure, the Swiss bookman normally credited with set uping rules of modern linguistics.Language
is a corporate organic structure of cognition, it is a set of basic elements, but these elements can organize a great assortment of combinations. In fact the figure of these combinations is eternal.Address
is closely connected with linguistic communication, as it is the consequence of utilizing the linguistic communication, the consequence of a definite act of speech production. Speech is single, personal while linguistic communication is common for all persons. To exemplify the difference between linguistic communication and address let us compare a definite game of cheat
and a set of regulations
how to play cheat.
Language is opposed to speech and consequently linguistic communication units are opposed to speech units. The linguistic communication unitphoneme
is opposed to the address unit & # 8211 ;sound
: phoneme /s/ can sound otherwise in address – /s/ and /z/ ) . Thesentence
is opposed to thevocalization ;
thetext
is opposed to thediscourse
.
6.Systemic dealingss in linguistic communication. Paradigmatic and Syntagmatic dealingss.
A lingual unit can come in into dealingss of two different sorts. It enters intoparadigmatic
dealingss with all the units that can besides happen in the same environment. PR are dealingss based on the rules of similarity. They exist between the units that can replace one another. For case, in the word-group A PINT OF MILK
the word PINT
is in paradigmatic dealingss with the words bottle, cup,
etc. The article A
can come in into PR with the units the, this, one, same,
etc. Harmonizing to different rules of similarity PR can be of three types:semantic, formal
andfunctional
.
a ) Semantic PR are based on the similarity of significance: a book to read = a book for reading
. He used to
pattern English every twenty-four hours & # 8211 ; He would
pattern English every twenty-four hours.
B ) Formal PR are based on the similarity of signifiers. Such dealingss exist between the members of a paradigm
: adult male & # 8211 ; work forces ; play & # 8211 ; played & # 8211 ; will play & # 8211 ; is playing
.
degree Celsius ) Functional PR are based on the similarity of map. They are established between the elements that can happen in the same place. For case, noun clinchers: a, the, this, his, Ann & # 8217 ; s, some, each,
etc.
Praseodymiums are associated with the domain of & # 8216 ; linguistic communication & # 8217 ; .
A lingual unit enters intosyntagmatic
dealingss with other units of the same degree it occurs with. SR exist at every linguistic communication degree. E.g. in the word-group A PINT OF MILK the word PINT contrasts SR with A, OF, MILK ; within the word PINT & # 8211 ; P, I, N and T are in syntagmatic dealingss. SR are additive dealingss, that is why they are manifested in address. They can be of three different types:co-ordinate, subsidiary
andpredicative.
a ) Coordinate SR exist between the homogenous lingual units that are equal in rank, that is, they are the dealingss of independency: you
and me
; They were tired
but happy
.
B ) Subordinate SR are the dealingss of dependance when one lingual unit depends on the other: Teach + Er
& # 8211 ; morphological degree ; a smart pupil
& # 8211 ; word-group degree ; predicative and low-level clauses & # 8211 ; sentence degree.
degree Celsius ) Predicative SR are the dealingss of mutuality: primary and secondary postulation.
As mentioned above, SR may be observed in vocalizations, which is impossible when we deal with PR. Therefore, PR are identified with & # 8216 ; linguistic communication & # 8217 ; while SR are identified with & # 8216 ; address & # 8217 ; .
7. General features of the grammatical construction of linguistic communication.
The grammatical construction of linguistic communication is a system of agencies used to turn lingual units into communicative 1s, in other words & # 8211 ; the units of linguistic communication into the units of address. Such agencies are inflections, affixation, word order, map words and phonological agencies.
By and large talking, Indo-germanic linguistic communications are classified into two structural types & # 8211 ;man-made
andanalytic
. Man-made linguistic communications are defined as 1s of & # 8216 ; internal & # 8217 ; grammar of the word & # 8211 ; most of grammatical significances and grammatical dealingss of words are expressed with the aid of inflections ( Ukrainian – & # 1079 ; & # 1088 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1073 ; & # 1083 ; & # 1102 ;
, Russian, Latin, etc ) . Analytic linguistic communications are those of & # 8216 ; external & # 8217 ; grammar because most grammatical significances and grammatical signifiers are expressed with the aid of words ( will make
) . However, we can non talk of linguistic communications as strictly man-made or analytic & # 8211 ; the English linguistic communication ( Modern English ) possesses analytical signifiers as prevailing, while in the Ukrainian linguistic communication man-made devices are dominant. In the procedure of clip English has become more analytical as compared to Old English. Analytic alterations in Modern English ( particularly American ) are still under manner.
8. Morphology and sentence structure as two parts of lingual description.
As the word is the chief unit of traditional grammatical theory, it serves the footing of the differentiation which is often drawn between morphology and sentence structure. Morphology trades with the internal construction of words, distinctive features of their grammatical classs and their semantics while traditional syntax trades with the regulations regulating combination of words in sentences ( and texts in modern linguistics ) . We can therefore state that the word is the chief unit of morphology.
It is hard to get at a one-sentence definition of such a complex lingual unit as the word. First of wholly, it is the chiefexpressive
unit of human linguistic communication which ensures the thought-forming map of the linguistic communication. It is besides the basicnominative
unit of linguistic communication with the aid of which the calling map of linguistic communication is realized. As any lingual mark the word is a flat unit. In the construction of linguistic communication it belongs to the upper phase of the morphological degree. It is a unit of the domain of & # 8216 ; linguistic communication & # 8217 ; and it exists merely through its address realization. One of the most characteristic characteristics of the word is its indivisibility. As any other lingual unit the word is a bilateral entity. It unites a construct ( & # 1087 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1103 ; & # 1090 ; & # 1090 ; & # 1103 ; , & # 1110 ; & # 1076 ; & # 1077 ; & # 1103 ; ) and a sound image and therefore has two sides & # 8211 ; the content and look sides ( & # 1087 ; & # 1083 ; & # 1072 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1079 ; & # 1084 ; & # 1110 ; & # 1089 ; & # 1090 ; & # 1091 ; & # 1090 ; & # 1072 ; & # 1087 ; & # 1083 ; & # 1072 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1074 ; & # 1080 ; & # 1089 ; & # 1083 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1074 ; & # 1091 ; ) : construct and sound signifier.
LECTURE 3: Grammatical Meaning.
GRAMMATICAL CATEGORIES.
1. The impression of & # 8216 ; grammatical significance & # 8217 ; .
The word combines in its semantic construction two significances & # 8211 ; lexical and grammatical.Lexical
significance is the single significance of the word ( e.g. tabular array
) .Grammatical
significance is the significance of the whole category or a subclass. For illustration, the category of nouns has the grammatical significance of thingness
. If we take a noun ( table
) we may state that it possesses its single lexical significance ( it corresponds to a definite piece of furniture ) and the grammatical significance of thingness
( this is the significance of the whole category ) . Besides, the noun & # 8216 ; table & # 8217 ;
has the grammatical significance of a subclass & # 8211 ; countableness
. Any verb combines its single lexical significance with the grammatical significance of verbiality & # 8211 ; the ability to denote actions or provinces. An adjectival combines its single lexical significance with the grammatical significance of the whole category of adjectives & # 8211 ; qualitativeness & # 8211 ; the ability to denote qualities. Adverbs possess the grammatical significance of adverbiality & # 8211 ; the ability to denote quality of qualities.
There are some categories of words that are barren of any lexical significance and possess the grammatical significance merely. This can be explained by the fact that they have no referents in the nonsubjective world. All map words belong to this group & # 8211 ; articles, atoms, prepositions, etc.
2. Types of grammatical significance.
The grammatical significance may be expressed and inexplicit. Theimplicit
grammatical significance is non expressed officially ( e.g. the word tabular array
does non incorporate any intimations in its signifier as to it being inanimate ) . Theexplicit
grammatical significance is ever marked morphologically & # 8211 ; it has its marker. In the word cats
the grammatical significance of plurality is shown in the signifier of the noun ; cat & # 8217 ; s
& # 8211 ; here the grammatical significance of possessiveness is shown by the signifier & # 8216 ; s
; is asked
& # 8211 ; shows the expressed grammatical significance of passivity.
The inexplicit grammatical significance may be of two types & # 8211 ; general and dependent. Thegeneral
grammatical significance is the significance of the whole word-class, of a portion of address ( e.g. nouns & # 8211 ; the general grammatical significance of thingness ) . Thedependant
grammatical significance is the significance of a subclass within the same portion of address. For case, any verb possesses the dependent grammatical significance of transitivity/intransitivity, terminativeness/non-terminativeness, stativeness/non-stativeness ; nouns have the dependent grammatical significance of contableness/uncountableness and animateness/inanimateness. The most of import thing about the dependent grammatical significance is that it influences the realisation of grammatical classs curtailing them to a subclass. Thus the dependent grammatical significance of countableness/uncountableness influences the realisation of the grammatical class of figure as the figure class is realized merely within the subclass of denumerable nouns, the grammatical significance of animateness/inanimateness influences the realisation of the grammatical class of instance, teminativeness/non-terminativeness – the class of tense, transitivity/intransitivity & # 8211 ; the class of voice.
GRAMMATICAL Meaning
EXPLICIT IMPLICIT
GENERAL DEPENDENT
3. Grammatical classs.
Grammatical classs are made up by the integrity of indistinguishable grammatical significances that have the same signifier ( e.g. singular: :plural ) . Due to dialectal integrity of linguistic communication and idea, grammatical classs correlate, on the one manus, with the conceptual classs and, on the other manus, with the nonsubjective world. It may be shown with the aid of a triangle theoretical account:
Conceptual world Conceptual class
Objective world Lingual world Objective class Grammatical class
It follows that we may specify grammatical classs as mentions of the corresponding nonsubjective classs. For illustration, the nonsubjective class ofclip
finds its representation in the grammatical class oftense
, the nonsubjective class ofmeasure
finds its representation in the grammatical class offigure
. Those grammatical classs that have mentions in the nonsubjective world are calledreferential
grammatical classs. However, non all of the grammatical classs have mentions in the nonsubjective world, merely a few of them do non match to anything in the nonsubjective world. Such classs correlate merely with conceptual affairs:
Conceptual correlative
Linguistic correlative
They are calledsignificational
classs. To this type belong the classs oftemper
andgrade
. Talking about the grammatical class of temper we can state that it hasmode
as its conceptual correlative. It can be explained by the fact that it does non mention to anything in the nonsubjective world & # 8211 ; it expresses the talker & # 8217 ; s attitude to what he says.
4. The impression of resistance.
Any grammatical class must be represented by at least two grammatical signifiers ( e.g. the grammatical class of figure & # 8211 ; remarkable and plural signifiers ) . The relation between two grammatical signifiers differing in significance and external marks is calledresistance & # 8211 ;
book: :books
( unmarked member/marked member ) . All grammatical classs find their realisation through resistances, e.g. the grammatical class of figure is realized through the resistance singular: :plural.
Taking all the above mentioned into consideration, we may specify the grammatical class as the resistance between two reciprocally sole form-classes ( a form-class is a set of words with the same expressed grammatical significance ) .
Meanss
of realisation of grammatical classs may be man-made ( near & # 8211 ; nearer
) and analytic ( beautiful & # 8211 ; more beautiful
) .
5. Transposition and neutralisation of morphological signifiers.
In the procedure of communicating grammatical classs may undergo the procedures of heterotaxy and neutralisation.
Transposition
is the usage of a lingual unit in an unusual environment or in the map that is non characteristic of it ( He is a king of beasts
) . In the sentence He is coming tomorrow
the paradigmatic significance of the uninterrupted signifier is reduced and a new significance appears & # 8211 ; that of a future action. Transposition ever consequences in the neutralisation of a paradigmatic significance.Neutralization
is the decrease of the resistance to one of its members: usage: : imposts & # 8211 ; x: : imposts ; tens: : eyeglassess.
LECTURE 4: THE PARTS OF SPEECH PROBLEM. WORD CLASSES
The parts of address are categories of words, all the members of these categories holding certain features in common which distinguish them from the members of other categories. The job of word categorization into parts of address still remains one of the most controversial jobs in modern linguistics. The attitude of syntacticians with respect to parts of address and the footing of their categorization varied a good trade at different times. Merely in English syntacticians have been hovering between 3 and 13 parts of address. There are four attacks to the job:
1.
Classical ( logical-inflectional )
2.
Functional
3.
Distributional
4.
Complex
Theclassical
parts of address theory goes back to antediluvian times. It is based on Latin grammar. Harmonizing to the Latin categorization of the parts of address all words were divided dichotomically intodeclinable
andindeclinable
parts of address. This system was reproduced in the earliest English grammars. The first of these groups, declinable words, included nouns, pronouns, verbs and participials, the 2nd & # 8211 ; indeclinable words & # 8211 ; adverbs, prepositions, concurrences and ejaculations. The logical-inflectional categorization is rather successful for Latin or other linguistic communications with developed morphology and man-made paradigms but it can non be applied to the English linguistic communication because the rule of declinability/indeclinability is non relevant for analytical linguistic communications.
A new attack to the job was introduced in the Nineteen century by Henry Sweet. He took into history the distinctive features of the English linguistic communication. This attack may be defined asfunctional
. He resorted to the functional characteristics of words and singled out nominative units and atoms. Tonominative
parts of address belonged noun-words
( noun, noun-pronoun, noun-numeral, infinitive, gerund ) , adjective-words
( adjectival, adjective-pronoun, adjective-numeral, participials ) , verb
( finite verb, verbals & # 8211 ; gerund, infinitive, participials ) , while adverb, preposition
, concurrence
and ejaculation
belonged to the group ofatoms
. However, though the standard for categorization was functional, Henry Sweet failed to interrupt the tradition and classified words into those holding morphological signifiers and missing morphological signifiers, in other words, declinable and indeclinable.
Adistributional
attack to the parts to the parts of address categorization can be illustrated by the categorization introduced by Charles Fries. He wanted to avoid the traditional nomenclature and set up a categorization of words based on distributive analysis, that is, the ability of words to unite with other words of different types. At the same clip, the lexical significance of words was non taken into history. Harmonizing to Charles Fries, the words in such sentences as 1. Woggles ugged diggles ; 2. Uggs woggled diggs ; and 3. Woggs diggled uggles are rather apparent structural signals, their place and combinability are adequate to sort them into three word-classes. In this manner, he introduced four majorcategories of words
and 15form-classes
. Let us see how it worked. Three trial frames
formed the footing for his analysis:
Frame A – The concert was good ( ever ) ;
Frame B – The clerk remembered the revenue enhancement ( all of a sudden ) ;
Frame C & # 8211 ; The squad went at that place.
It turned out that his four categories of words were practically the same as traditional nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs. What is truly valuable in Charles Fries & # 8217 ; categorization is his probe of 15 groups of map words ( form-classes ) because he was the first linguist to pay attending to some of their distinctive features.
All the categorizations mentioned above appear to be nonreversible because parts of address are discriminated on the footing of merely one facet of the word: either its significance or its signifier, or its map.
In modern linguistics, parts of address are discriminated harmonizing to three standards: semantic, formal and functional. This attack may be defined ascomplex
. Thesemantic
standard presupposes the grammatical significance of the whole category of words ( general grammatical significance ) . Theformal
standard reveals paradigmatic belongingss: relevant grammatical classs, the signifier of the words, their specific inflectional and derivational characteristics. Thefunctional
standard concerns the syntactic map of words in the sentence and their combinability. Therefore, when qualifying any portion of address we are to depict: a ) its semantics ; B ) its morphological characteristics ; degree Celsiuss ) its syntactic distinctive features.
The lingual grounds drawn from our grammatical survey makes it possible to split all the words of the linguistic communication into:
a ) those denoting things, objects, impressions, qualities, etc. & # 8211 ; words with the corresponding mentions in the nonsubjective world & # 8211 ;fanciful
words ;
B ) those holding no mentions of their ain in the nonsubjective world ; most of them are used merely as grammatical agencies to organize up and border vocalizations & # 8211 ;map
words, orgrammatical
words.
It is normally recognized that the fanciful parts of address are nouns, pronouns, numbers, verbs, adjectives, adverbs ; the functional parts of address are articles, atoms, prepositions, concurrences and average words.
The division of linguistic communication units into impression and map words reveals the interrelatedness of lexical and grammatical types of significance. In fanciful words the lexical significance is prevailing. In map words the grammatical significance dominates over the lexical 1. However, in existent address the boundary line line between fanciful and map words is non ever clear cut. Some fanciful words develop the significances peculiar to work words – e.g. seminotional words & # 8211 ; to turn, to acquire, etc.
Fanciful words constitute the majority of the bing word stock while map words constitute a smaller group of words. Although the figure of map words is limited ( there are merely about 50 of them in Modern English ) , they are the most often used units.
By and large talking, the job of words & # 8217 ; categorization into parts of address is far from being solved. Some words can non happen their proper topographic point. The most dramatic illustration here is the category of adverbs. Some linguistic communication analysts call it a odds and ends, a ashcan
( Frank Palmer ) , Russian academician V.V.Vinogradov defined the category of adverbs in the Russian linguistic communication as & # 1084 ; & # 1091 ; & # 1089 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1088 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1072 ; & # 1103 ;
& # 1082 ; & # 1091 ; & # 1095 ; & # 1072 ;
. It can be explained by the fact that to the category of adverbs belong those words that can non happen their topographic point anyplace else. At the same clip, there are no evidences for grouping them together either. Comparison: absolutely ( She speaks Englishabsolutely
)
and once more ( He is hereonce more
)
. Examples are legion ( all temporals ) . There are some words that do non belong anyplace – e.g. after all
. Talking about after all
it should be mentioned that this unit is rather frequently used by native talkers, and practically ne’er by our pupils. Some more dramatic illustrations: anyhow, really, in fact
. The job is that if these words belong nowhere, there is no topographic point for them in the system of words, so how can we utilize them right? What makes things worse is the fact that these words are barren of nominative power, and they have no direct equivalents in the Ukrainian or Russian linguistic communications. Meanwhile, native talkers use these words subconsciously, without recognizing how they work.
LECTURE 5: THE NOUN
1.General features.
The noun is the cardinal lexical unit of linguistic communication. It is the chief nominative unit of address. As any other portion of address, the noun can be characterised by three standards:semantic
( the significance ) ,morphological
( the signifier and grammatical catrgories ) andsyntactical
( maps, distribution ) .
Semantic
characteristics of the noun. The noun possesses the grammatical significance of thingness, substantialness. Harmonizing to different rules of categorization nouns autumn into several subclasses:
1. Harmonizing to the type of nomination they may beproper
andcommon
;
2. Harmonizing to the signifier of being they may beanimate
andinanimate
. Animate nouns in their bend autumn intohomo
andnon-human.
3. Harmonizing to their quantitative construction nouns can bedenumerable
anduncountable.
This set of subclasses can non be put together into one tabular array because of the different rules of categorization.
Morphologic
characteristics of the noun. In conformity with the morphological construction of the roots all nouns can be classified into: simple,
derived
( root + affix, affix + root & # 8211 ; thingness
) ; compound
( stem+ root & # 8211 ; armchair
) and composite
( the Hague ) . The noun has morphological classs of figure and instance. Some bookmans admit the being of the class of gender.
Syntactic
characteristics of the noun. The noun can be used un the sentence in all syntactic
maps
but predicate. Talking about noun combinability
, we can state that it can travel into right-hand and left-hand connexions with practically all parts of address. That is why practically all parts of address but the verb can move as noun clinchers
. However, the most common noun clinchers are considered to be articles, pronouns, numbers, adjectives and nouns themselves in the common and possessive instance.
2. The class of figure
The grammatical class of figure is the lingual representation of the nonsubjective class of measure. The figure class is realized through the resistance of two form-classes: the plural signifier: : the remarkable signifier. The class of figure in English is restricted in its realisation because of the dependent inexplicit grammatical significance of countableness/uncountableness. The figure class is realized merely within subclass of denumerable nouns.
The grammatical significance of figure may non co-occur with the fanciful measure: the noun in the singular does non needfully denote one object while the plural signifier may be used to denote one object dwelling of several parts. The remarkable signifier may denote:
a ) unity ( single offprint object & # 8211 ; a cat
) ;
B ) generalisation ( the significance of the whole category & # 8211 ; The cat is a domestic animate being
) ;
degree Celsius ) indiscreteness ( & # 1085 ; & # 1077 ; & # 1088 ; & # 1072 ; & # 1089 ; & # 1095 ; & # 1083 ; & # 1077 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1077 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1089 ; & # 1090 ; & # 1100 ; or uncountableness – money, milk
) .
The plural signifier may denote:
a ) the being of several objects ( cats
) ;
B ) the interior distinctness ( & # 1074 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1091 ; & # 1090 ; & # 1088 ; & # 1077 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1103 ; & # 1103 ; & # 1088 ; & # 1072 ; & # 1089 ; & # 1095 ; & # 1083 ; & # 1077 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1077 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1089 ; & # 1090 ; & # 1100 ; , pluralia tantum, denims
) .
To sum it up, all nouns may be subdivided into three groups:
1. The nouns in which the resistance of expressed discreteness/indiscreteness is expressed: cat: :cats
;
2.
The nouns in which this resistance is non expressed explicitly but is revealed by syntactical and lexical correlativity in the context. There are two groups here:
A. Singularia tantum. It covers different groups of nouns: proper names, abstract nouns, stuff nouns, corporate nouns ;
B.
Pluralia tantum. It covers the names of objects dwelling of several parts ( denims ) , names of scientific disciplines ( mathematics ) , names of diseases, games, etc.
3. The nouns with homogeneous figure signifiers. The figure resistance here is non expressed officially but is revealed merely lexically and syntactically in the context: e.g. Look! A sheep is eating grass. Look! The sheep are eating grass
.
3. The class of instance.
Case expresses the relation of a word to another word in the word-group or sentence ( my sister & # 8217 ; s coat ) . The class of instance correlatives with the nonsubjective class of ownership. The instance class in English is realized through the resistance: The Common Case: : The Possessive Case ( sister: : sister & # 8217 ; s ) . However, in modern linguistics the term & # 8220 ; possessive instance & # 8221 ; is used alternatively of the & # 8220 ; genitive instance & # 8221 ; because the significances rendered by the & # 8220 ; `s & # 8221 ; mark are non merely those of ownership. The range of significances rendered by the Genitive Case is the followers:
a ) Possessive Genitive: Mary & # 8217 ; s father & # 8211 ; Mary has a male parent,
B ) Subjective Genitive: The physician & # 8217 ; s reaching & # 8211 ; The physician has arrived,
degree Celsius ) Objective Genitive: The adult male & # 8217 ; s let go of & # 8211 ; The adult male was released,
vitamin D ) Adverbial Genitive: Two hr & # 8217 ; s work & # 8211 ; X worked for two hours,
vitamin E ) Equation Genitive: a stat mi & # 8217 ; s distance & # 8211 ; the distance is a stat mi,
degree Fahrenheit ) Genitive of finish: kids & # 8217 ; s books & # 8211 ; books for kids,
g ) Mixed Group: yesterday & # 8217 ; s paper
Nick & # 8217 ; s school can non be reduced to one karyon
John & # 8217 ; s word
To avoid confusion with the plural, the marker of the possessive instance is represented in written signifier with an apostrophe. This fact makes possible detachment of & # 8211 ; `s signifier from the noun to which it decently belongs. E.g. : The adult male I saw yesterday & # 8217 ; s boy
, where -`s is appended to the whole group ( the alleged group possessive )
. It may even follow a word which usually does non possess such a formant, as in person else & # 8217 ; s book
.
There is no cosmopolitan point of position as to the instance system in English. Different scholars stick to a different figure of instances.
1. There are two instances. The Common one and The Genitive ;
2. There are no instances at all, the signifier `s is optional because the same dealingss may be expressed by the & # 8216 ; of-phrase & # 8217 ; : the physician & # 8217 ; s reaching & # 8211 ; the reaching of the physician
;
3. There are three instances: the Nominative, the Genitive, the Objective due to the being of nonsubjective pronouns me, him, whom
;
4. Case Grammar. Ch.Fillmore introduced syntactic-semantic categorization of instances. They show dealingss in the alleged deep construction of the sentence. Harmonizing to him, verbs may stand to different dealingss to nouns. There are 6 instances:
1 ) Agentive Case ( A ) John
opened the door ;
2 ) Instrumental instance ( I ) The key
opened the door ; John used the key to open the door ;
3 ) Dative Case ( D ) John
believed that he would win ( the instance of the animate being affected by the province of action identified by the verb ) ;
4 ) Factitive Case ( F ) The key
was damaged ( the consequence of the action or province identified by the verb ) ;
5 ) Locative Case ( L ) Chicago
is blowy ;
6 ) Objective instance ( O ) John
stole the book.
4. The Problem of Gender in English
Gender plays a comparatively minor portion in the grammar of English by comparing with its function in many other linguistic communications. There is no gender Concord, and the mention of the pronouns he, she, it
is really mostly determined by what is sometimes referred to as & # 8216 ; natural & # 8217 ; gender for English, it depends upon the categorization of individuals and objects as male, female or inanimate. Therefore, the acknowledgment of gender as a grammatical class is logically independent of any peculiar semantic association.
Harmonizing to some linguistic communication analysts ( B.Ilyish, F.Palmer, and E.Morokhovskaya ) , nouns have no class of gender in Modern English. Prof.Ilyish provinces that non a individual word in Modern English shows any distinctive features in its morphology due to its denoting male or female being. Therefore, the words hubby
and married woman
make non demo any difference in their signifiers due to distinctive features of their lexical significance. The difference between such nouns as histrion
and actress
is a strictly lexical one. In other words, the class of sex should non be confused with the class of sex, because sex is an nonsubjective biological class.
It correlates with gender merely when sex differences of life existences are manifested in the linguistic communication grammatically ( e.g. tiger & # 8211 ; tigress
) . Still, other bookmans ( M.Blokh, John Lyons ) admit the being of the class of gender. Prof.Blokh states that the being of the class of gender in Modern English can be proved by the correlativity of nouns with personal pronouns of the 3rd individual ( he, she, it
) . Consequently, there are three genders in English: the neuter ( non-person ) gender, the masculine gender, the feminine gender.
LECTURE 6:
THE VERB
.
1.General features
Grammatically the verb is the most complex portion of address. First of all it performs the cardinal function in recognizing postulation – connexion between state of affairs in the vocalization and world. That is why the verb is of primary enlightening significance in an vocalization. Besides, the verb possesses rather a batch of grammatical classs. Furthermore,
within the category of verb assorted subclass divisions based on different rules of categorization can befound.
Semantic
characteristics of the verb. The verb possesses the grammatical significance of verbiality
– the ability to denote a procedure developing in clip. This significance is built-in non merely in the verbs denoting procedures, but besides in those denoting provinces, signifiers of being, ratings, etc.
Morphologic
characteristics of the verb. The verb possesses the undermentioned grammatical classs: tense, facet, voice, temper, individual, figure, finitude
and stage. The common classs for finite and infinite signifiers are voice, facet, stage and finiteness. The grammatical classs of the English verb find their look in synthetical and analytical signifiers. The formative elements showing these classs are grammatical affixes, interior inflection
and map tungsten
ords.
Some classs have merely synthetical signifiers (
individual, figure ) ,
others – merely analytical ( voice ) .
There are besides classs expressed by both synthetical and analytical signifiers ( temper, tense, facet ) .
Syntactic
characteristics. The most cosmopolitan syntactic characteristic of verbs is their ability to be modified by adverbs. The 2nd of import syntactic standard is the ability of the verb to execute the syntactic map of the predicate. However, this standard is non absolute because merely finite signifiers can execute this map while infinite signifiers can be used in any map but predicate. And eventually, any verb in the signifier of the infinitive can be combined with a average verb.
2.
Categorizations of English verbs
Harmonizing to different rules of categorization, categorizations can be morphological, lexical-morphological, syntactical and functional.
A.Morphologic
classifications..
I. Harmonizing to their stem-types all verbs autumn into: simple (
to travel ) ,
sound-replacive
( nutrient
–
to feed, blood –
to shed blood ) ,
stress-replacive
(
import
– to im
port, conveyance
–
to trans
port,
expanded
( with the aid of suffi
Xes and prefixes ) : cultivate, justif
Y, overcome,
composite
( correspond to composite nouns ) : to blackjack ) ,
phrasal
: to hold a fume, to give a smiling
( they ever have an ordinary verb as an equivalent ) . 2.According to the manner of organizing past tenses and Participle II verbs can be regular
and guerrilla
.
B.Lexical-morphological
classifi
cation is based on the inexplicit grammatical significances of the verb. Harmonizing to the inexplicit grammatical significance of transitivity/intransitivity verbs autumn into transitive
and intransitive.
Harmonizing to the inexplicit grammatical significance of stativeness/non-stativeness
verbs autumn into stative
and dynamic
. Harmonizing to the inexplicit grammatical significance of terminativeness/non-terminativeness
verbs autumn into terminative
and durative
.
This categorization is closely connected with the classs of Aspect and Phase.
C.Syntactic
classifi
cations. Harmonizing to the nature of postulation ( primary and secondary ) all verbs autumn into finite
and non-fi
nite.
Harmonizing to syntagmatic
belongingss ( valency ) verbs can be of obligatory
and optional
valency, and therefore they may hold some directivity or be devoid of any directivity. In this manner, verbs autumn into the verbs of directed
( to see, to take, etc.
) and non-directed
action ( to get, to mizzle, etc
. ) :
Syntagmatic categorization of English verbs
( harmonizing to prof.G.Pocheptsov )
V Vobj. She shook her caput
Vaddr. He phoned me
V2 & # 8211 ; V10 Vobj.-addr. She gave me
her pen
V11 & # 8211 ; V15 Vadv. She behaved good
V1 V2 & # 8211 ; V24 V16 & # 8211 ; V24 Vobj.-adv. He put his chapeau
on the tabular array
Vaddr.-adv. I won & # 8217 ; t maintain
you long
D.Functional
categorization. Harmonizing to their functional significance verbs can be fanciful
( with the full lexical significance ) , semi-notional
( average verbs, link-verbs ) , aides
.
3.
The class of voice
The signifier of the verb may demo whether the agent expressed by the topic is the actor of the action or the receiver of the action ( John broke the vase
–
the vase was broken ) .
The nonsubjective dealingss between the action and the topic or object of the action find their look in linguistic communication as the grammatical class of voice. Therefore, the class of voice reflects the nonsubjective dealingss between the action itself and the topic or object of the action:
Relationss of actions The class of voice
The class of voice is realized through the resistance Active voice: :Passive voice. The realisation of the voice class is restricted because of the inexplicit grammatical significance of transitivity/intransitivity. In conformity with this significance, all English verbs should fall into transitive and intransitive. However, the categorization bend
s out to be more complex and comprises 6 groups:
1. Verbs used merely transitively:
to tag, to rais
vitamin E ;
2.Verbs with the chief transitive significance: to see, to do, to construct ;
3. Verbs of intransitive significance and secondary transitive significance. A batch of intransitive verbs may develop a secondary transitive significance: They laughed me into understanding ; He danced the miss out of the room ;
4.Verbs of a dual nature, neither of the significances are the taking one, the verbs can be used both transitively and intransitively:
to drive place
–
to drive a auto ;
5.Verbs that are ne’er used in the Passive Voice: to look, to go ;
6. Verbs that recognize their inactive significance merely in particular contexts: to populate, to kip, to sit, to walk, to leap.
Some bookmans admit the being of Middle, Reflexive and Reciprocal voices. “
In-between Voice ”
– the verbs chiefly transitive may develop an intransitive center significance: That adds a batch ; The door opened ; The book sells easy ; The frock washes good.
“ Automatic Voice ”
: He dressed ; He washed
–
the topic is both the agent and the receiver of the action at the same clip. It is ever possible to utilize a automatic pronoun in this instance: He washed himself.
“ Reciprocal voice & # 8221 ; :
They met ; They kissed
–
it is ever possible to utilize a mutual pronoun here: They kissed each other.
We can non, nevertheless, speak of different voices, because all these significances are non expressed morphologically.
4.
The class of tense
The class of tense is a verbal class that reflects the nonsubjective class of clip. The indispensable feature of the class of tense is that it relates the clip of the action, event or province of personal businesss referred to in the sentence to the clip of the vocalization ( the clip of the vocalization being ‘
now ‘
or the present minute ) . The tense class is realized through the resistances. The binary rule of resistances remains the basic 1 in the correlativity of the signifiers that represent the grammatical class of tense. The present minute is the chief temporal plane of verbal actions. Therefore, the temporal duality may be illustrated by the undermentioned in writing representation ( the pointers show the binary resistance ) :
Present Past
Future I Future II
By and large talking, the major tense-distinction in English is doubtless that which is traditionally described as an resistance of yesteryear: :present. But this is best regarded as a contrast of past: : non-past. Quite a batch of bookmans do non acknowledge the being of future tenses, because what is described as the ‘
hereafter ‘
tense in English is realized by agencies of subsidiary verbs will
and shall.
Although it is undeniable that Wisconsin
ll
and shall
occur in many sentences that refer to the hereafter, they besides occur in sentences that do non. And they do non needfully happen in sentences with a future clip mention. That is why future tenses are frequently treated as partially modal.
5.
The Category of Aspect
The class of facet is a lingual representation of the nonsubjective class of Manner of Action. It is realized through the resistance Continuous: :Non-Continu
ou
s ( Progressive: :Non-Progr
essive ) . The realisation of the class of facet is closely connected with the lexical significance of verbs.
There are some verbs in English that do non usually occur with progressive facet, even in those contexts in which the bulk of verbs needfully take the progressive signifier. Among the alleged & # 8216 ; non-progressive & # 8217 ; verbs are believe, understand, cognize
, hatred, love, see, gustatory sensation, feel, possess, ain,
etc. The most dramatic feature that they have in common is the fact that they are & # 8216 ; stative
& # 8217 ; – they refer to a province of personal businesss, instead than to an action, event or procedure. It should be observed, nevertheless, that all the & # 8216 ; non- & # 173 ; progressive ‘ verbs take the progressive facet under peculiar fortunes. As the consequence of houseman
al heterotaxy verbs of non-progressive nature can be found in the Continuous signifier: Now I ‘m cognizing you.
By and large talking the Continuous signifier has at least two semantic characteristics –continuance
( the action is ever in advancement ) anddeterminateness
( the action is ever limited to a definite point or period of clip ) . In other words, the intent of the Continuous signifier is to function as a frame which makes the procedure of the action more concrete and stray.
LECTURE 7: Syntax. BASIC SYNTACTIC NOTIONS.
1.General features of sentence structure.
The grammatical construction of linguistic communication comprises two major parts & # 8211 ; morphology and sentence structure. The two countries are evidently mutualist and together they constitute the survey of grammar.
Morphology trades with paradigmatic and syntagmatic belongingss of morphological units & # 8211 ; morphemes and words. It is concerned with the internal construction of words and their relationship to other words and word signifiers within the paradigm. It surveies morphological classs and their realisation.
Syntax, on the other manus, trades with the manner words are combined. It is concerned with the external maps of words and their relationship to other words within the linearly ordered units & # 8211 ; word-groups, sentences and texts. Syntax surveies the manner in which the units and their significances are combined. It besides deals with distinctive features of syntactic units, their behaviour in different contexts.
Syntactic units may be analyzed from different points of position, and consequently, different syntactic theories exist.
2. Kinds of syntactic theories.
Transformational-Generative Grammar.
The Transformational grammar was foremost suggested by American bookman Zelling Harris as a method of analysing sentences and was subsequently elaborated by another American bookman Noam Chomsky as a man-made method of & # 8216 ; bring forthing & # 8217 ; ( building ) sentences. The chief point of the Transformational-Generative Grammar is that the eternal assortment of sentences in a linguistic communication can be reduced to a finite figure of meats by agencies of transmutations. These meats serve the footing for bring forthing sentences by agencies of syntactic procedures. Different linguistic communication analysts recognize the being of different figure of meats ( from 3 to 39 ) . The following 6 meats are normally associated with the English linguistic communication:
( 1 ) NV & # 8211 ; John sings
.
( 2 ) NVAdj. & # 8211 ; John is happy
.
( 3 ) NVN & # 8211 ; John is a adult male
.
( 4 ) NVN & # 8211 ; John hit the adult male.
( 5 ) NVNN & # 8211 ; John gave the adult male a book
.
( 6 ) NVPrep.N & # 8211 ; The book is on the tabular array
.
It should be noted that ( 3 ) differs from ( 4 ) because the former admits no inactive transmutation.
Transformational method proves utile for analyzing sentences from the point of their deep construction:
Flying planes can be unsafe.
This sentence is equivocal, two senses can be distinguished: a ) the action of winging planes can be unsafe, B ) the planes that fly can be unsafe. Therefore it can be reduced to the undermentioned meats:
a ) Airplanes can be unsafe
B ) Airplanes can be unsafe
Ten ( people ) fly planes Airplanes fly
Constructional Syntax.
Constructional analysis of syntactic units was initiated by Prof. G.Pocheptsov in his book published in Kyiv in 1971. This analysis deals with the constructional significance/insignificance of a portion of the sentence for the whole syntactic unit. The theory is based on the obligatory or optional environment of syntactic elements. For illustration, the component him
in the sentence I saw him at that place yesterday
is constructionally important because it is impossible to exclude it. At the same clip the elements there
and yesterday
are constructionally undistinguished & # 8211 ; they can be omitted without destructing the whole construction.
Communicative Syntax.
It is chiefly concerned with the analysis of vocalizations from the point of their communicative value and enlightening construction. It deals with the existent division of the vocalization & # 8211 ; the subject and rheme analysis. Both the subject and the rheme constitute the enlightening construction of vocalizations. The subject is something that is known already while the rheme represents some new information. Depending on the contextual enlightening value any sentence component can move as the subject or the rheme:
Who is at place? – John is at place. Where is John? & # 8211 ; John is at place.
Matter-of-fact
attack to the survey of syntactic units can briefly be described as the survey of the manner linguistic communication is used in peculiar contexts to accomplish peculiar ends.Speech Act Theory
was foremost introduced by John Austin. The impression of a address act presupposes that an vocalization can be said with different purposes or intents and hence can act upon the talker and state of affairs in different ways:
I merely province the fact ;
I want you to make something about it ( shut the window ) ;
It & # 8217 ; s cold here
I & # 8217 ; m endangering you ;
I & # 8217 ; m seeking for an alibi for non making something ;
I want you to experience guilty of it ;
Etc.
Consequently, we can separate different address Acts of the Apostless.
Of particular involvement here is the job of indirect address Acts of the Apostless: Are you go forthing already?
In our mundane activities we use indirect address acts instead volitionally because it is the best manner to act upon people, to acquire what we want and to be polite at the same clip.
Textlinguistics
surveies the text as a syntactic unit, its chief characteristics and distinctive features, different ways of its analysis.
Discourse analysis
focal points on the survey of linguistic communication usage with mention to the societal and psychological factors that influence communicating.
3. Basic syntactic impressions.
The syntactic linguistic communication degree can be described with the aid of particular lingual footings and impressions: syntactic unit, syntactic signifier, syntactic significance, syntactic map, syntactic place, and syntactic dealingss
.
Syntactic unit
is ever a combination that has at least two components. The basic syntactic units are a word-group, a clause, a sentence, and a text. Their chief characteristics are:
a ) they are hierarchal units & # 8211 ; the units of a lower degree serve the edifice stuff for the units of a higher degree ;
B ) as all linguistic communication units the syntactic units are of double nature:
content side syntactic significance
Syntactic unit = =
look side syntactic signifier
degree Celsiuss ) they are of communicative and non-communicative nature & # 8211 ; word-groups
and clauses are of non-communicative nature while sentences and texts
are of communicative nature.
Syntactic significance
is the manner in which separate word significances are combined to bring forth meaningful word-groups and sentences.
Green thoughts sleep furiously.
This sentence is rather right grammatically. However it makes no sense as it lacks syntactic significance.
Syntactic signifier
may be described as the distributional expression of the unit ( pattern ) . John hits the ball & # 8211 ;
N1 + V + N2.
Syntactic map
is the map of a unit on the footing of which it is included to a larger unit: in the word-group a smart pupil
the word & # 8216 ; smart & # 8217 ; is in low-level prenominal dealingss to the caput component. In traditional footings it is used to denote syntactic map of a unit within the sentence ( capable, predicate, etc. ) .
Syntactic place
is the place of an component. The order of components in syntactic units is of chief importance in analytical linguistic communications. The syntactic place of an component may find its relationship with the other elements of the same unit: his wideback
, aback
territory, to travelback,
toback
samarium.
Syntactic dealingss
are syntagmatic dealingss observed between syntactic units. They can be of three types & # 8211 ; coordination, subordination and postulation.
1. Syntactic dealingss.
The syntactic units can travel into three types of syntactic dealingss.
1.Coordination ( SR1 )
& # 8211 ; syntagmatic dealingss of independency. SR1 can be observed on the phrase, sentence and text degrees. Coordination may be symmetric and asymmetric. Symmetrical coordination is characterized by complete exchangeability of its elements & # 8211 ; pens and pencils
. Asymmetric coordination occurs when the place of elements is fixed: ladies and gentlemen
. Forms of connexion within SR1 may be copulative ( you and
me
) , disjunctive ( you or
me
) , oppositive ( rigorous but merely
) and causative-consecutive ( sentence and text degree merely ) .
2.
Subordination ( SR2 )
& # 8211 ; syntagmatic dealingss of dependance. SR2 are established between the components of
