PARTICIPLE IN THE MORPHOLOGICAL SYSTEM

MODERN RUSSIAN LANGUAGE

Plan

1. general characteristics participles: the presence of signs of a verb and an adjective. Various solutions to the question of the grammatical nature of the participle: an independent part of speech, a verbal non-predicative form, a special lexical and grammatical category of words.

2. Forms of participles, their meanings and features of use .

3. Formation of participles.

General characteristics of a participle: the presence of signs of a verb and an adjective. Various solutions to the question of the grammatical nature of the participle: an independent part of speech, a verbal non-predicative form, a special lexical and grammatical category of words.

Let us remember that in modern school grammar the participle is considered as a special form of the verb, although until 1995 there was another point of view, according to which the participle was defined as a special independent category words that have the characteristics of a verb and an adjective.

In university grammar there are also different, sometimes opposite points vision. One of them, who received wide use: A participle is an inconjugated form of a verb that has the properties of a verb and an adjective.

As a verb form, the participle has the following grammatical verbal meanings: type, transitivity and intransitivity, reflexivity and irrevocability, pledge, time; verbal control, compatibility with adverb.

However, the participle, being an inconjugated form of the verb, is devoid of the category of mood and person, and the category of voice is expressed incompletely and formally. By means of suffixes, active and active participles are distinguished. passive voice. It is also very important that participles are formed from the corresponding stems of the verb, i.e. stand with him in relation to productivity. Wed: po – yush – e (guitars) – sing – ut; sparkle - lice - e (snowflakes) – shine - t; read - nny (magazine) – lament; gon - im - y (leaf blown by the wind) - gon - yat.

As an adjective, a participle denotes the attribute of an object by action; changes in gender, number and case, consistent with the defined noun; when inflected, it has the same system of case endings as an adjective and performs in a sentence the syntactic functions characteristic of an adjective, acting as a determiner and, less often, a predicate. The similarity of participles and adjectives is also confirmed by the widespread phenomenon adjectivation of participles, those. in their transition to the category of adjectives. Wed: sparkling eyes(i.e. eyes that sparkle) and shiny, i.e. exceptional talent.

So, a participle is a verbal adjective formation that expresses a non-predicative attribute of an object (qualified action), is related to the verb in relation to derivation, has verbal features of aspect, transitivity, reflexivity, voice and a special category of tense, and has common features with the adjective grammatical features gender, number and case and appears in a sentence most often as an agreed definition. Wed: ringing song And crying girl, clear voice And crying baby, ringing echo And crying creature; crying - cry-ut.

Since determining the place of the participle in the morphological system of parts of speech is quite difficult, based on the variety of grammatical features it has, this is reflected in various solutions the question of the grammatical status of the participle (which we drew attention to at the beginning of the lecture).

The following approaches have existed and exist in Russian studies.

1. The participle is considered an independent part of speech (Prof. Ovsyaniko-Kulikovsky, Ivanov V.V., Tikhonov A.I., Volynets T.M. - Doctor of Philology, BSU).

2. According to formal characteristics, the participle is close to the adjective, which made it possible to include it in the composition of adjectives (Prof. V.A. Bogoroditsky and representatives of the MLS).

3. The participle is considered as a “hybrid verbal-adjective formation” (Academician V.V. Vinogradov) or as a “mixed” part of speech (Prof. A.M. Peshkovsky).

4. A participle is a special verbal form that has the characteristics of a verb and an adjective.

The intermediate nature of the participle is revealed most clearly when analyzing the grammatical categories of participles. It, as noted, does not have the categories of inclination and face. The species category differs nearby semantic features. This is manifested in the absence of some particular parts of the participles. species values, which are characteristic conjugated verbs and infinitive. The category of pledge has formal ways of expression - using special suffixes. The category of time is represented in the participle by only two forms - the present tense (only participles do not perfect form) and past tense (for both types of participles). The way to express time values ​​are the same formative suffixes that take part in the expression of collateral values.

Forms of participles, their meanings and features of use.

The participle in modern Russian has several varieties, which are determined by verbal grammatical meanings. According to the category of voice, active and passive participles are distinguished; according to the category of time - present and past participles, according to the category of aspect - imperfect and perfect participles.

2.1. Pledge forms of participles. Active participles denote a temporal attribute as an action that is performed or was performed by the actor himself: A lecturer giving a presentation.Passive participles denote a temporary sign as an action to which an object is or has been subjected by another actor: Speaker encouraged by listeners. Passive participles can appear in both full form (attracted), and in short (attracted). The differences between them, as well as between the full and short forms of the adjective, are important for indicating differences in the signified attribute.

Active participles can be reflexive or non-reflexive (cf.: detergent - washable). This depends directly on the presence of a given grammatical category in the verb, from which the participle is formed. Wed: mine - ut - washing, and mine - ut - xia - washable. This must be taken into account when forming participles.

2.2. Temporal forms of participle. The tense category of participles divides them into present and past participles. Participles do not have a future tense form. The meaning of the tense of participles is related to their syntactic role and differs between long and short forms.

The syntactic functions of participles are delimited according to their form: full participles (leaning) act as a definition, less often a predicate; short (indeclinable) exclusively in the meaning of the predicate: Frost will silverfaded (which?) field(P.); The dachas were boarded up(Quiet); The road to Simbirsk has been cleared by me(P.).

Unlike the conjugated forms of the verb, full participles, which are modifiers, have relative time, which is determined in relation to the tense of the predicate verb. Thus, present participles express the simultaneity of actions indicated by the participle and the predicate verb. For example: The boat, flapping its oars, floated along a dormant river - ... floated along a river that dozed (P.). The boy listened to the voices of birds heard through the forest – ... listened to the voices of birds that were heard through the forest. In the above sentences, the participles have the meaning of the past tense, the action of which occurs simultaneously with the action of the predicate verb. IN in this case It is possible to replace present participles with past participles without a noticeable change in meaning. (See convertible designs).

The imperfect and perfect past participles denote an action that preceded the action. expressed by a predicate verb: “What a devil girl!” - shouted the Cossack, who was sitting on the straw and dreaming of warming himself up with the remains of the tea (L.); We went to higher ground formed by nature and fortified with a palisade.

However, present and past participles can also have an absolute tense form: Mishka, who ran out onto the porch, demanded to be given a ride (L.T.); Tractors walking in front in a train resemble steppe beetles...

Short forms, possible only with passive past participles (much less often with present passive participles), are used exclusively as a predicate. The tense indicator for such participles is the verb connective: in the past and future tenses - was And will, and in the present – ​​zero: I am tormented by a new desire for me (P.); He was not born a sufferer (T.); May her death be avenged!(Oshanin).

The use of short passive participles of the present tense is not typical oral speech, and in writing and books it is limited poetic language. For example: You were loved by me and kept for dear…(P.).

Formation of participles.

Several words can be formed from the same verb grammatical types participles: active and passive, present and past tense. The number of participial forms of a verb depends on its type and transitivity/intransitivity.

Let's consider the question of the formation of participles.

1. Active and passive participles of the past and present tense are formed from imperfect transitive verbs (read– reading, reading, being read, being read).

2. From transitive verbs of the perfect form active and passive participles of only the past tense are formed (read– read, read).

3. From intransitive verbs the imperfect form forms the active participles of the present and past tenses (go out– coming out, coming out).

4. Only active past participles are formed from perfective intransitive verbs (go out– released).

Related information.

The following formations traditionally belong to the participles in the Russian language.

• ushch(spelling also - yushch) or - asch(spelling also -box), For example: walking, trembling, setting, influencing, rotating, building active participles of the present tense."
• Participles formed using suffixes - Vsh or - w, For example: visiting, influenced, rotated, built, wrote, scared, came. Such formations are called " active past participles".
• Participles formed using suffixes -eat (-ohm) or - them, For example: rotated, studied, formed, moved, carried. Such formations are called “passive present participles”.
• Participles formed with suffixes ending in - n or -T, For example: studied, educated, beaten, busy. Such formations are called “passive past participles”.

As will be shown below, the given designations for participles are to some extent conditional: the semantic and syntactic properties of these formations do not correspond in all cases internal form traditional terms; here these terminological labels are used in strict accordance with the morphological form of the participles, that is, in accordance with the type of suffix. In particular, how are active participles of the type interpreted? under construction And under construction, that is, participles that simultaneously contain suffixes characteristic of active participles, and postfix -xia, used in a passive sense. For the complex nature of such formations, see.

Participles combine semantic and grammatical features characteristic of verbs, on the one hand (lexical meaning of the stem; control models and, more broadly, the ability to attach dependent clauses, forming independent clauses; grammatical categories of voice, aspect and tense, see) and for adjectives , on the other hand (the ability to act as an attribute of a name and - for part of participles - to form a predicate in combination with a linking verb; concordant categories of gender, number, case and animacy, jointly expressed by endings according to the adjective model; the ability to agree with the name according to these categories when used attributively; some participles are also characterized by the contrast between short and long forms typical of adjectives, see), see also the articles Verb, Adjective. For this reason, participles are sometimes classified as “hybrid” forms in part-speech terms or treated as an independent part of speech (cf. the description of them as a “mixed part of speech” by A. M. Peshkovsky [Peshkovsky 1928/2001: 104] and widespread in typology the concept of “mixed category”), see article Parts of speech.

Here and below, however, participles are considered as morphological forms of verbs. The main reason for this interpretation is that every participial form is in a paradigmatic relationship with the forms of a certain verbal (rather than adjectival) lexeme; for example, form setting enters into paradigmatic relationships with word forms of the verb come in(such as comes in, came in, came in, coming in), and not any adjective.

A separate participle of a verb is understood as the totality of all word forms that have common ground, including the participle suffix, and differing in adjectival categories (for example, studied, studied, studied etc.). A consequence of this interpretation is that participial forms include short forms participles ( studied etc.), despite the fact that they cannot act in a sentence as an attribute of a noun.

So, when we talk about a “separate participle” of a particular verb, we mean a whole fragment of the inflectional paradigm of the verb, which has approximately the same internal structure as the paradigms of adjectives (cf. the concept of “adjectival declension”). However, as a representative of such a fragment, the full form of the nominative singular masculine is usually used for simplicity; for example, it is said that the above word forms are participle word forms studied– passive past participle of the verb study.

2. Communion as a means of relativization

Participial phrase (or single participle in the absence of dependents), used in the position of definition to a name, in most cases we correlate in meaning with some independent clause (otherwise “predicative group”, or “elementary predication”), which includes the finite form of the verb from which the participle is formed, and the noun that is modified by the participle. So, for example, designs setting sun And a chicken carried away by a hawk, from are correlated with the following simple sentences respectively:

(3) The sun is setting.

(4) The hawk carries away the chicken.

This property of correlating the participial structure with an independent clause is explained by the fact that participles, like other verb forms, always indicate a certain situation, real or unreal.

In the first case (the participial structure refers to a real situation), the situation denoted by the participle must take place at a certain point in time. Thus, sentence (1), repeated here for convenience under number (5), means that at the moment of observation there is a situation that can be designated as the sun is setting.

(5) Now the Hedgehog and the Little Bear sat motionless under the elm tree and looked at setting sun. [WITH. Kozlov. Is it true that we will always be there? (1969-1981)]

In the second case, the participial structure refers to a unreal situation, that is, to a situation localized not on the time axis along with other situations designated in the context, but in one of the “imaginary worlds,” as in the following example:

(6) Let's imagine person, lying on the beach. [L. Ya. Ginzburg. Notebooks. Memories. Essay (1920-1943)]

However, in the case of unreal semantics, the participle refers to a situation that can be indicated by an independent clause ( man lying on the beach).

Thus, with the help of a participle used as a concordant modifier of a noun, the referent of that noun is characterized by its role in a certain situation, and the corresponding situation can usually be indicated by a clause containing that noun. From the above it follows that participles are one of the means of relativization in the Russian language. With this interpretation, the participial phrase (as well as a single participle used attributively) can be considered as a type of relative, or relative (cf. English “relative”) clauses (see Relative sentences).

3. Active and passive participles

In a number of cases, the attributive participial clause turns out to be correlated in meaning with two independent structures that differ in voice, that is, in the syntactic position of the actants. So, for example, the participial clause from example (7) can be associated with both an independent clause in the active voice (8) and an independent clause in the passive voice (9).

(7) Character, created by Chaplin, becomes one of the main characters of the new circus... [Yu. K. Olesha. At the Circus (1928)]

(8) Chaplin created the character.

(9) The character (was) created by Chaplin.

It may be noted that the passive construction (9) itself contains a short form of the same participle created, which is used in the attribute construction being analyzed (7). In this sense, correlating the attributive construction (7) with the independent clause (9) would create an undesirable circularity. Instead, participial constructions of this kind are usually related to whichever of two possible independent clauses uses an active voice construction. Thus, construction (7) and similar ones are considered cases of relativization of the direct object. This allows us to interpret the corresponding participles as passive, which is in accordance with generally accepted practice. With this approach, it turns out that the formation of passive participial relative clauses serves simultaneously to relativize and express the category of voice (passivization).

In traditional Russian grammars, when determining participles, it is usually not the syntactic approach presented above that prevails, but the semantic approach [Grammatika 1953: 506], Grammar 1980: 665 (§1577)]. With this approach, definitions are usually based on the statement that participles combine the meaning of processivity, characteristic of verbs, and the meaning of attribute, characteristic of adjectives; sometimes it is said that with the help of participles an action (process) is represented as a sign of an object. Within this approach, the contrast between active and passive participles is also usually carried out on semantic rather than syntactic grounds, cf.

“Depending on whether the attribute is represented by the participle as active, that is, as characterizing the action performed, or as passive, that is, characterizing the action experienced, all participles are divided into active and passive<разрядка источника>"[Grammar 1980: 665 (§1577)].

This semantic interpretation is generally consistent with the understanding adopted here, but for a number of reasons it should still be considered vulnerable. Indeed, the formulations “action performed” and “action experienced” refer directly to the semantic roles possessed by the participants in the corresponding situations (for example, Agent and Patient). However, the properties of participles are actually derived not from semantic roles directly, but from the properties of the basic diathesis of a particular verb, that is, from its typical relationship between semantic roles and syntactic positions. So, for example, for verbs endure, burn, break The basic diathesis is one in which the subject corresponds to the role of Patient. Despite the fact that, for example, a person suffering,burnt house or broken elevator we can say that these objects are characterized “by the action experienced” (and not by the “produced”) action, researchers still unanimously interpret the corresponding participles as real.

A separate problem in the light of the above is represented by participles with suffixes - ushch(-yushch), -asch (-box), -Vsh And - w formed from reflexive verbs having a passive meaning:

(10) Tobacco factory under construction in Dagestan over time, it could also become an investor in the production of tobacco leaves in the region and its consumer... [“Life of Nationalities” (2004)]

(11) Culture least of all chemical a process studied by Prigogine.["Emergency Reserve" (2003)]

Participial phrases of this type can be correlated in meaning with sentences in which finite clauses are used return forms in the passive sense, cf. for the last two examples:

(12) In Dagestan under construction tobacco factory.

(13) (some/this one) chemical process studied Prigogine.

As you can see, the defined nouns from examples (10) and (11) are correlated in meaning with the subjects of constructions (12) and (13), in which reflexive forms are used in a passive meaning. Thus, forms like participles under construction, studied from the given examples should be interpreted as active participles related to the subparadigm passive voice, the value of which is expressed by the return postfix -xia. Therefore, in principle, a situation is possible in which, within the paradigm of one verb, coexists, for example, ( studied) and , relating to the subparadigm of the passive voice, containing a postfix -xia(studying).

With the approach adopted here to the separation of active and passive participles, it is discovered that, firstly, the process of formation of participles does not lead to the appearance of a postfix in word forms -xia, and secondly, active and passive participles are clearly distinguished by the set of suffixes used in their formation.

4. Present participles and past participles

In Russian grammar, the existence of present participles and past participles is generally accepted. The basis for these traditional designations is most clearly seen in examples such as the following:

(14) - Where are you? see kissing lovebirds? “Only two old men,” said Dmitry Mikhalych. [F. Svetov. My museum opening (2001)]

(15) I I hear clicking and smacking openable iron beer caps. [F. Knorre. Stone Wreath (1973)]

(16) What is he thinks O missing gold? [YU. O. Dombrovsky. Faculty of Unnecessary Things, Part 5 (1978)]

(17) Do you remember those shot Shultz brothers? [YU. O. Dombrovsky. Faculty of Unnecessary Things (1978)]

In the first two examples given, situations expressed by participles are interpreted in approximately the same way as finite forms of the present tense would be interpreted (cf. lovebirds kiss,beer caps open), that is, as taking place at the moment of observation. In the next two examples, the participles have interpretations close to those that would characterize the finite forms of the past tense of the same verbs (cf. the gold is gone,the Shultsev brothers were shot), that is, participles refer to situations that took place before the moment of observation. Thus, in the first two cases we have present participles, in the second two cases we have past participles.

At the same time, present and past participles are not always used in direct accordance with what tense form would be used if the desired meaning were expressed by the finite form of the verb. Moreover, there is no direct correspondence between the choice of present/past participles and whether the situation they denote takes place in the present or in the past of the Speaker. Consider the following two examples:

(18) The first three readers, those who called to the editor and correct those who responded to questions, will receive a thousand rubles each. ["Evening Moscow" (2002)]

(19) Beyond the village of Olya saw working old people and teenagers in the water . [IN. Gubarev. Kingdom of Crooked Mirrors (1951)]

In the first case, the “past participle” refers to a situation in the future; If this situation were indicated by a finite form of the verb, most likely the future tense form of the verb would be used (cf. first three readers to call and answer). In the second case, the “present participle” refers to a situation in the past; If this situation were indicated by a finite form of the verb, most likely the past tense form of the verb would be used (cf. old people and teenagers who worked in the water). This discrepancy between the categorical type (in some sense code name) of the participle and its temporal interpretation arises due to the fact that in the above sentences word forms are used as main predicates that indicate situations in the future ( will receive) and in the past ( saw) respectively. From these examples it is clear that in order to establish the temporal reference of participles, not only their own categorical meaning, that is, reference to the present or past in relation to the moment of speech, can be essential, but also the relationship with another action (such grammatical meanings are usually called taxis). So, in example (18), the situations described by the participles who called and answered can occur after the moment of speech, but before the situation described by the verb will receive. In example (19), the situation described by the participle working, occurred before the moment of speech, but at the same time, simultaneously with it, the situation described by the verb also occurred saw.

When discussing participles used as a noun modifier, it is convenient to use the concept of a supporting form, first introduced in [Nedyalkov, Otaina 1987/2001: 299] when describing the taxic meanings of gerunds (see also the article Participle). The reference form (in relation to the attributively used participle) will be called the vertex verbal word form of the clause, which directly includes the name modified by the participle. Thus, in sentence (14) the supporting form for the participle kissing is the predicate of the hierarchically closest clause – form you see, and in sentence (18) the supporting form for participles those who called And those who responded is the predicate will receive.

Unlike the participle - by definition a non-finite form - the supporting form is often an independent predicate, as in examples (11)–(16) above. However, the support form can in principle be dependent, in particular, non-finite, as in the following example:

(20) The night sky was lit up with fireworks, arranged distraught, screaming "Korea! Korea!" crowd. ["Izvestia" (2002)]

In this case, the supporting form for participles distraught And screaming is a form of another participle – arranged, for which, in turn, the supporting form is illuminated. Regardless of whether a particular supporting form is independent finite, dependent finite or non-finite, its temporal reference is established without taking into account the properties of the dependent participial phrase. On the contrary, to determine the aspectual-temporal interpretation of a participle, the temporal reference of the supporting form can play a significant role, as in examples (18)–(19).

Thus, the semantic load of the opposition between “present participles” and “past participles” is generally not identical to the opposition of finite forms of the present and past tense (see also the article Time and below). This problem is discussed separately for active (see Active participle / clause 3. Contrast of active participles of present and past tense) and passive (see Passive participle / clause 3. Contrast of passive participles of present and past tense) participles.

Discussing such problems, A.V. Isachenko comes to to the following conclusion: “the traditional terms we use “present participle” and “past participle” are conventional designations of forms and do not say anything about the general grammatical<разрядка источника>the semantics of these forms themselves” [Isachenko 1965/2003: 542]. This view is radical: it is difficult to agree that the traditional terms “nothing” say anything about the grammatical semantics of present and past participles. However, it should be remembered that the attribution of a particular participle to the number of participles of the past or present tense is consistently based on formal sign(determined by the type of suffix), and not on the basis of meaningful correlation with finite forms of the past or present tense.

5. Participles and other attributive verbal formations; problem of adjectivation of participles

5.1. Participles and other attributive verbal formations

In addition to the participles themselves in the traditional sense, many other units formed from verbs, for example adjectives like diligent, creeping, stale, decomposition readable and so on. However, such formations are usually not included in the paradigms of the corresponding verbs, that is, they are not considered participles (some of these formations are sometimes called "pseudoparticiples", see Pseudoparticiples). In addition, there are verbal lexemes formed using the same suffixes as generally accepted participles, but for one reason or another, they stand out from the verbal paradigms and are treated not as participles, but as verbal adjectives (often homonymous with the participles themselves); problems associated with such formations will be discussed in.

The criteria that make it possible to distinguish between participles themselves and other verbal formations of the adjectival type are rarely stated explicitly (see, however, [Plungyan 2010]). The main difference between participles and verbal adjectives is that participles are part of the paradigm of the corresponding verbs, while other verbal adjectives are associated with verbal lexemes only derivationally, word-formatively. Thus, the search for criteria that distinguish participles themselves and verbal adjectives should be carried out among those features that are used to distinguish between inflection and word formation. These include, in particular:

Separately, we should mention the paradigmatic criterion sometimes considered in this context - the presence / absence of parallelism between the set and meanings of grammatical categories of finite forms and participles / verbal adjectives (aspect, tense, voice), see.

5.1.1. Productivity

In general, participles themselves are more productive than other verbal attributive formations. However, two types of participles occupy a special place here.

5.1.2. Syntactic correlation

Real participles are able to “inherit” most of the verb syntactic characteristics in a regular manner. Thus, usually participles retain the fundamental ability to combine with the same circonstants as the finite forms of the corresponding verbs, and the set of active valences on actants in participles differs from the corresponding set for finite forms only in the absence of valences on the actant that is subject to relativization (on the subject with active participles and on the direct object with passive participles), and on the subject (for passive participles; “instead of” the valence on the subject with passive participles, the valence on the agentive object in the instrumental case is fixed, cf. my neighbor bought a car And car bought by my neighbor). Methods for encoding actants are discussed in the article Syntax of participial phrases. No other attributive verbal formation demonstrates comparable syntactic parallelism with finite forms: in most of them the number of possible dependents - both actants and circonstants - turns out to be reduced more radically compared to finite forms of verbs, cf. schoolboy trying to solve a problem, But * schoolboy diligently solving a problem; a snake crawls between the stones, But * snake crawling between stones; fish lies in the sun, But * fish lying in the sun; teenagers willingly read magazines, But * magazine readily read by teenagers.

5.1.3. Semantic regularity

For participles (as for inflectional forms of verbs), the lexical meaning normally coincides with the lexical meaning of the finite forms of the same verbs, which can be interpreted as the maximum degree of semantic regularity. In other verbal attributive formations, the lexical meaning usually differs from the verbal one in essential components. This can happen either due to more or less idiomatic increments, which is especially typical for verbal adjectives, homonymous participles (cf. brilliant performance, considered(n)the hours are gone, the voice has fallen), or due to the presence of relatively specific components of semantics that characterize entire word-formation types of verbal adjectives (cf. the semantics of “propensity to intensively perform an action” in adjectives like talkative, grouchy or " increased ability be exposed to" for adjectives like malleable, brittle, see [Plungyan 2010]).

Using the criterion of semantic regularity together with the criterion of syntactic correlation (see), we can say that noun phrases in which the vertex is modified by a participle or participial phrase can normally be correlated - without adding or deleting any lexical material - with simple sentences, in which the predicate is expressed by a finite synthetic form of the same verb (see). This is not typical for other verbal formations. So, for example, if there is seagull flying over the waves(participle), then it is true that gull flies over the waves; against, flying squirrel(verbal adjective) is ‘a squirrel that (in principle) flies’, that is, ‘a squirrel that can fly’ (but not necessarily ‘flies’ or ‘flew’).

5.1.4. Paradigmatic

The traditional names of the four participles seem to indicate the presence in the system of participles of those oppositions that are also characteristic of finite forms of verbs. There is a point of view according to which the presence of grammatical categories typical for verbs (aspect, tense and voice) is the main difference between participles and all other verbal adjectival formations [Peshkovsky 1928/2001: 128]. In fact, this parallelism is partly imaginary, since the opposition of present and past participles does not coincide in content with the opposition of the same grammes in finite forms of the verb, and the opposition of real and passive participles does not completely coincide with the opposition in voice in finite forms (see about this issue and article Collateral).

The combined use of the first three criteria discussed above (productivity, syntactic correlation, semantic regularity) generally makes it possible to contrast the four classes of “real participles” with other verbal formations of the adjectival type (see also); in particular, these criteria make it possible to exclude from the list of participles all verbal adjectival units, in the formation of which suffixes other than the four mentioned above are used.

However, it turns out to be practically impossible to use these criteria when assessing individual uses of such units, which include suffixes typical of participles. The first difficulty is operational: to use the listed criteria, it is necessary to compare actually recorded uses with imaginary ones, the properties of which are not directly observable. So, for example, in the case of isolated (without dependent) use of a verbal formation with a suffix typical of a participle, the question inevitably arises as to whether such a form could be used with verbal dependents and whether it would be possible in this case to say that it's the same unit. The second difficulty is substantive: it lies in the fact that even “real participles” refer to a certain situation, in particular, to an action, as a sign of a particular object; in this sense, participles obviously have a tendency to weaken the dynamic components present in the semantics of the verb. Thus, the difference between proper participles and verbal adjectives is associated with the degree of weakening of verbal dynamic features: in verbal adjectives they are weakened even more than in participles. The next section is devoted to this problem.

5.2. Adjectivation of participles

In very many cases, units that outwardly coincide with undoubted participles are partially deprived of the properties of semantic and syntactic correlation with finite forms of the verb. This situation is described using the term adjectivation of participles, which is understood as the loss of part of the verbal semantic and syntactic properties, leading to a weakening of the connection of the adjectival formation with the verbal lexeme, and ultimately to the transition of a particular formation to the class of adjectives. Consider the following couple of examples:

(21) Tom and his comrades, offended relatives and parents decide to leave home. ["Questions of Psychology" (2004)]

(22) Shekhtel valued this work very much, and there is very offended his letter, when, already in Soviet time, everyone was honored with awards for the theater’s anniversary, but they didn’t remember him. ["Izvestia" (2002)]

Both of these sentences use word forms that are formally structured as passive past participles of the verb offend. It can be noted that in (22) all the conditions characteristic of the situation of relativizing a direct object with the help of a passive participle are met; in particular, the condition for the meaningfulness of this sentence is that at some point in the past the situation described by the sentence occurred Relatives and parents offended Tom and his comrades. It is impossible to construct a similar correlative statement for the second sentence, cf. * letter offended. In this case, using the characteristic offended denotes some features of writing that are not associated with any time-localized situation described by the verb offend.

5.2.1. Signs indicating adjectivation of participles

Specific adjectivation patterns vary for participles different types and are described in the appropriate sections (see Active present participle, , Passive present participle,). What is common, however, is that adjectivation is primarily a gradual process of semantic development. Particular manifestations of this process may include, among other things, the following symptoms.

1) Lack of syntactic correlation (see the example just discussed offended letter), that is, the inability to act as a means of relativization. The application of this criterion, however, sometimes encounters certain difficulties. Indeed, the phrase offended letter it is fundamentally impossible to expand to an independent proposal. However, there are also very numerous cases when such a development is possible in principle, but in this case the constructed finite sentences turn out to be clumsy and unnatural. So, for example, the noun phrase ringing sound(23 occurrences in the Corpus) can probably be "expanded" into a full clause the sound is ringing, but this use does not seem entirely natural (there are only 3 examples in the Corpus, where in the finite form of the verb ring subject would be used sound).

2) Loss of meaning components associated with the localization of the situation in time and space: washable wallpaper, increased requirements– in these phrases, while maintaining their usual interpretation, it is impossible to use circumstances of time and place: # wallpaper washable every week, # increased requirements last year).

3) Loss of the ability to attach dependents, characteristic of the corresponding verbal lexemes (cf. the difficulty of an agentive complement in combination common disease – ? disease common among Europeans or direct object in combination awesome movie – ? stunning movie). At the same time, the absence of any typical dependent participle for a verb in a specific word usage cannot in itself be considered a sign of adjectivation, since in finite forms of verbs dependent ones - including those corresponding to valences - may be absent.

4) Development of the ability to combine with adverbs of measure and degree ( very, too, so much) in case the corresponding verbs do not demonstrate such ability ( Very knowledgeable person / *the man knows very much).

5) Individual shifts in lexical meaning, indicating a departure from the verb paradigm. For example, secured‘possessing wealth, not knowing need, comfortable’, next‘next in line after something’, brilliant‘outstanding, excellent’, decisive‘main, most important’. However, shifts in lexical meaning can characterize not individual adjectival participles, but entire groups of similar type participles (see articles devoted to individual types of participles: Active present participle, Active past participle, Passive present participle, Passive past participle).

5.2.2. Signs indicating the preservation of the status of the sacrament

Along with manifestations of adjectivation (see), we can list some signs that indicate the preservation of the status of a participle; Some of these features are mirror images of those just listed.

It is fundamentally impossible to draw a clear boundary between “more participles” and “already adjectives” that have ceased to be word forms of verbs. The ability to adjectivate is an integral property inherent in the very nature of Russian participles; almost any Russian participle capable of demonstrating it to one degree or another. In the sections devoted to individual types of participles, the main ways of adjectivation characteristic of the corresponding types are named.

For practical purposes, in particular when making calculations, the decisions made in the Subcorpus with homonymy removed will be used: here most word usages are assigned one interpretation - they are parsed either as participles or as adjectives. However, one should be aware that any binary markup in this area is fundamentally conditional. Indicative, for example, in this regard are the following two examples from the Subcorpus with the homonymy removed: both of them contain the form flowering, while in the first case it is parsed as the active present participle of the verb blossom, and in the second – as an adjective flowering:

(23) Even a wasteland can be turned into a blooming garden if it is hereditary; and an ownerless blooming garden will turn into a wasteland. [YU. Davydov. Blue Tulips (1988–1989)]

(24) After darkening for a few seconds, the arena turned into a blooming garden. [AND. E. Keogh. Illusions without illusions (1995-1999)]

6. Grammatical categories of participles and syntactic functions of participles

In all word forms related to one or another participle, the same set of grammatical features characteristic of verbs is implemented (see). These grammatical features are expressed outside the ending, that is, at the base of the participle (including the participle suffix itself), using a reflexive postfix (if present) and in rare cases analytically(see below).

Inflectional categories of participles are somewhat conventionally called those categories that are realized with the help of inflections (endings) in participial word forms; the set of these categories is close to the composition of inflectional categories of adjectives (see).

6.1. Verb categories in participles

This section examines how the following verbal categories are represented in participles:

6.1.1. View

Being forms of the verb, that is, entering the paradigm of the verbal lexeme, participles retain all the classifying categories of the verb, in particular the category of aspect (see Aspect): every participle is formed from a perfective verb or from an imperfective verb. Whether a verb belongs to the perfective or imperfective form significantly influences the composition of possible participles: past and present participles are regularly formed from imperfective verbs, and only past participles from perfective verbs.

The prevailing idea in the literature is that participles “have consistent meanings of verbal types throughout the entire category” [Peshkovsky 1928/2001: 128]. Being generally correct, such a representation creates the illusion that the set of particular aspectual meanings of specific participles will coincide with the set of particular aspectual meanings of the “corresponding” finite forms of the present and past tense, which is not entirely accurate in two respects - 1) one or another of the aspectual interpretations of the participle may be absent in the corresponding finite form (see) and 2) on the contrary, the aspectual interpretation present in the finite form may be absent in the participle (see).

6.1.1.1. Aspectual interpretation of participles, absent in the corresponding finite forms

In a number of cases, participles receive aspectual readings that are absent in the “corresponding” finite forms. The most striking case of this kind is the presence in passive past participles of not only actional (dynamic) but also static interpretations, absent or weakened in the corresponding finite forms. This problem was developed in detail in the studies of Yu. P. Knyazev and E. V. Paducheva, mainly on the material of the use of participles as part of the predicate (in their composition, short forms of participles can receive a perfect reading) [Knyazev 1989], [Knyazev 2007: 486–490] , [Paducheva 2004: 495–503]. However, attributive uses of passive past participles also allow a statistic interpretation:

(25) The secret of “revitalizing” the moai, completely lost for so many centuries, may well be used today - for example, in construction when installing power line supports. [“Technology for Youth” (1989)] – *The secret of “revitalizing” the moai has been completely lost for so many centuries

Another case of the appearance of aspectual meanings in participles that are absent in the corresponding finite forms is the ability of passive past participles of SV verbs to be used in limited multiples, and not in total value in combination with circumstances of multiplicity [Kholodilova 2011: 84]:

(26) Name A.N. Afanasyev is known to every Russian person, because the most beloved and memorable book of our childhood, read and retold many times, is called “A.N. Afanasiev. Fairy tales" (Yandex, [Kholodilova 2011: 84])

With the composed finite forms SV and NSV, the general circumstance of multiplicity is impossible, cf. * read and retold many times.

6.1.1.2. The participle lacks an aspectual interpretation possible for the corresponding finite forms

Another type of discrepancy between the aspectual potential of participial and finite forms is the situation when the participle lacks certain aspectual readings that are possible for the corresponding finite forms. This includes, among other things, the inability of the passive participles of the past tense NSV “to denote an action in the process of its occurrence,” or rather their specialization in expressing “general factual, limited multiple and other retrospective meanings” [Knyazev 2007: 489]. The few examples recorded in the Corpus in which such participles are used in other meanings, for example, iterative (27) or conative, refer to texts of the 18th–19th centuries and mostly sound archaic [Kholodilova 2011: 82].

(27) ... Proof of the size of these storehouses are the duties, collected in Alexandria annually with imports and exports, which, despite their cheapness, exceeded 37,000,000 livres. [N. I. Novikov. On trade in general (1783)]

In addition to the above, it can be noted that in a number of cases, participles turn out to be comparable in the set of fundamentally accessible aspectual readings with the corresponding finite forms, but differ from them in the nature of the restrictions on the implementation of these meanings or in the frequency distribution of forms with different aspectual interpretations (see [Knyazev 1989] , [Kholodilova 2011: 85–86]).

6.1.2. Deposit and repayment

In participles, the reflexive postfix always has the form -xia, but not - sya, contrary to general rules distribution of options -xia / -s(see Recurrence / clause 1.3. Postfix options).

Combination of suffixes of passive participles and postfix within one word form -xia in the Russian literary language is impossible (regardless of the meaning of this postfix).

With the approach adopted here, the actual process of forming participles from verbs whose finite forms do not have a postfix -xia, is never accompanied by the appearance of this postfix. For such formations, the category of voice is manifested in the opposition of active and passive participles. In particular, short forms of passive past participles are used in the formation analytical forms liability (see Pledge).

The situation is somewhat more complicated with participles of verbs, the finite forms of which contain forms with a reflexive postfix.

For those transitive (irreflexive) verbs in which it is possible to form finite forms of the passive with the help of a reflexive postfix, participles that have suffixes of active participles are also found within the passive subparadigm. Thus, for example, the verb consider, having finite forms of the passive voice ( is being considered, was considered etc.), exist as actual active participles ( looking at, looking at), and active participles belonging to the subparadigm of the passive voice, marked with a reflexive postfix ( under consideration,considered). Moreover, the formation of the latter is described as consisting of two relatively independent processes: passivization, marked by a postfix, and the formation of real participles using participle suffixes.

Finally, for the majority of reflexive verbs, in which the postfix is ​​not associated with marking the category of voice (and is fixed in all finite forms), the formation of participles also does not affect the “reflexivity / non-reflexivity” feature (cf. laugh And laughing, laughing; study And student, student etc.). However, there are two types of exceptions:

· passive participles like agreed upon, correlated with a reflexive finite verb ( agree), cm. ;

· dialect formations like hard worker(from work), cm. .

6.1.2.1. Irreflexive passive participles correlated with a reflexive verb

In the Russian language there are participles containing suffixes of passive participles (primarily the past tense), which correlate in meaning with reflexive verbs(see, as well as discussion in [Knyazev 1989: 193–196], [Knyazev 2007: 533–551] and especially in [Kholodilova 2011: 40–48]). This model of correlation is most obvious for those cases when finite forms of the corresponding verb without reflexives simply do not exist, cf. agreed upon, which is comparable in meaning to agree(cf. * stipulate), or when such reflexive verbs themselves are non-correlative, that is, not connected by regular relations with the corresponding non-reflexive ones, cf. crazy(associated with go crazy, but not with interfere), agreed upon(associated with reach an agreement, but not with negotiate), confused(associated with get confused, but not with lose). Adjacent here are participial formations that are close in meaning primarily to reflexive verbs, although they, in turn, are deducible from correlatives irreflexive verbs according to one of the productive models. So, enamored refers to the situation described by the verb fall in love, but not necessarily fall in love. Finally, there are also passive participial formations, which in a certain context are correlated in meaning precisely with reflexive verbs; yes, normal combed will be used in relation to a person who himself combed his hair(although this is not necessary) broken may refer to a causative situation described by a transitive verb smash, but in a certain context it can acquire decausative semantics characteristic of a verb crash(see Reflexivity / clause 2.3. Decausative):

(28) Often, with such intensive use, various breakdowns occur: a broken joystick, scratched or completely broken if the screen falls, the speakers fail . (Yandex), example from [Kholodilova 2011: 44]

Some of these formations satisfy key criteria used in distinguishing participles from other verbal adjectives (see); Moreover, they are characterized by a certain degree of productivity, as evidenced by their extensive recording in conversational and informal speech (stuffed; head over heels; question concerningWindows[Kholodilova 2011: 44–46]). Thus, one of their possible interpretations is to consider these formations as passive participles of reflexive verbs. With this approach, in this marginal case, when forming participles, the reflexive indicator is removed, just as it happens when forming action names (cf., for example, desire, effort, touch And strive, try, touch).

6.1.2.2. Dialectal and vernacular formations of the type hard worker

In dialect and substandard speech, some formations are recorded that look like real participles of the present tense, devoid of a reflexive indicator, but correlated in meaning with reflexive verbs: hard worker(= worker), issuing(= outstanding), partly suitable(= suitable) and even washing(= washable):

(29) I want to choose wallpaper for the kitchen, they say washable wallpaper- the best option for the kitchen. (forum http://peredelka-forum.ru)

Status similar forms not entirely clear. Apparently, such formations penetrate into texts in literary Russian through the imitation of dialect speech or vernacular, and we are talking about the use of single forms, and not about a productive process. In fact, in such cases, it is not the actual dialect participles that end up in literary texts, but the adjectives developed on their basis, often stylistically colored.

6.1.2.3. Interpretation of reflexivity and pledge in participles

So, in the normal case, the formation of participles in the Russian language does not affect the category of “reflexivity / non-reflexivity”, inherited from generating verbs. Exceptions concern marginal cases when the formation of participles is accompanied by the removal of the reflexive indicator from the word form.

(33) I wish I could rest as you should I would like to get treatment, maybe he would have lived and worked some more... [I. I. Kataev. Heart (1928)]

(34) To her would like to get married, for anyone, but she goes to the shooting range... [G. Shcherbakova. Ah, Manya... (2002)]

However, it is significant that among the participles combined with would, the absolute majority are active past participles; Thus, such analytical participial formations turn out to be parallel to finite forms subjunctive mood(which from a formal point of view is a combination of particles would with the past tense form of the verb). This leads us to assume that such combinations are to some extent drawn into the system of forms of the Russian verb.

Combinations of active past participles with a particle would noted in the literature; it is usually said that they are of a marginal nature and that therefore they should not be included in the participle system of the Russian language, cf. “found only in a few writers and are not the norm of literary language” [Grammatika 1953: 510].

Typically, in the examples discussed in such cases, the situation expressed by the reference form refers to the irrealis zone, and the particle would as part of a participle phrase it only repeatedly (redundantly) expresses the semantics of unreality. So for example in the following example would, apparently, can be omitted as part of the participial phrase, since the scope of the marker extends to this participial phrase would from the main clause:

(35) But would be found in this case, the person would agree sacrifice your life for the sake of endlessly watching this amazing film? [WITH. Alexievich. Zinc Boys (1984-1994)]

Wed. constructed: But in this case there would be a person agreed sacrifice your life?

In example (31) above, unreality is not marked in the main clause, but the meaning of the main sentence is such that we are talking about a certain category of information, the identification of which is planned, but has not yet been implemented; With the help of a participial phrase, this information is characterized through its role in some possible future situation. In such cases, the participle with the particle would usually easily interchangeable with the present participle, which has a “timeless” meaning, cf. constructed:

(36) At the same time, everything possible is done to identify information promoting identification and detention of persons involved in the operation of the transmitter.

That participle without a marker would can “carry a charge of subjunctiveness,” as can be clearly seen from the following example:

(37) And on these terrible, soft blue mornings, clicking my heels through the desert of the city, I imagined a man lost reason because he would begin to clearly sense the movement of the globe. [IN. V. Nabokov. The Spy (1930)]

Here is the supporting form for the participle imagined sets the context of one of the “possible worlds”, so that the situation described by the participle (loss of reason) belongs to the zone of unreality. However, the regular active participle form is used; It is noteworthy, however, that this participle itself serves as a supporting form for the subordinate clause, which already uses a finite form, while the form of the subjunctive mood ( would start). Thus, without being formally marked on the basis of the subjunctive, the participle may well correspond to the semantics of finite forms of the subjunctive mood.

So, in the cases considered, the particle would as part of a participial phrase it is optional. In other words, it should be recognized that ordinary participles, without combination with a particle would, in principle, can refer to situations that in an independent clause would be expressed using forms of the subjunctive mood. This is exactly the idea that L.P. Kalakutskaya comes to after analyzing examples like I will read any book as long as it comes from his pen.. She notes that such structures are replaceable with designs like I would read any book from his pen and that “the meaning of such constructions is fully covered by the meaning of the usual use of the verbal mood” [Kalakutskaya 1971: 11].

However, sometimes using a particle would as part of a participial phrase it seems grammatically obligatory. This is observed when a certain participant in a situation expressed by a reference form is characterized using a participial phrase through the role that he would play in some other situation, and this other situation turns out to be an imaginary modification of the situation expressed by the reference form.

(38) The collar of the white shirt was intercepted with a dark lace: a detail, in other circumstances would seem elegant, on the threshold of the village school, looked at least strange - as if the teacher had completely decided to hang himself... [M. Dyachenko, S. Dyachenko. Magicians can do anything (2001)]

(39) Lena's steps, during the day would go out in the noise of the street, as if in a carpet, merciless slaps were now heard. [T. Nabatnikova. Cat's Birthday (2001)]

Particularly noteworthy is the use in such cases of circumstances that explicitly indicate differences between the properties of the situation expressed by the reference form and the “imaginary” situation: in other circumstances in the first example, during the day in the second (the condition for the meaningfulness of the second sentence is that the situation Lena's steps sounded like merciless slaps does not take place during the day).

It is interesting that such uses are fully consistent with the interpretation of participles as one of the means of relativization, in which, in particular, a certain independent clause is assigned to the participial phrase (see). So, for example, in order for the last sentence to be meaningful, it is necessary that the following constructed statement with a finite form of the subjunctive mood be true:

(40) During the day, Lena’s steps would fade into the noise of the street.

Moreover, for the cases described, the active past participle with the particle would turns out to be the only somewhat acceptable strategy for relativization using participles (constructed examples with ordinary, non-subjunctive examples are strikingly different in semantics from the fixed construction: Steps,during the day, the streets faded into noise...;footsteps disappearing during the day in the noise of the street...).

So, participles in the Russian language are incompatible either with the meaning of imperative or with the grammes of the imperative. In a number of cases, ordinary participles can express situations that in an independent clause would be expressed by forms of the subjunctive mood (thus, the semantic opposition of the indicative and subjunctive moods is partially neutralized in the participle zone). At the same time, cases of the use of structures that can be interpreted as active participles of the subjunctive mood are recorded (these are combinations of ordinary active participles of the past tense and particles would). Moreover, in a number of cases this construction turns out to be the only possible participatory relativization strategy (however, it is worth remembering that in appropriate communicative situations other means of relativization can be used; moreover, it is quite possible to imagine that in these situations Speakers may statistically avoid using constructions with relativization).

6.1.4. Time

The traditional names of Russian participles seem to indicate that they express the category of time. It should be remembered, however, that the semantic opposition of present and past participles (rules for choosing participles of one time or another) is not identical to the opposition of present and past tense forms in finite forms of the verb, see. Strictly speaking, the tense of participles is not exactly the same category as the ordinary tense (finite forms) of a verb. Within the system of participles, time behaves like a classifying category, opposing present and past participles, see about them Real participle / clause 1. Contrasting the active participles of the present and past tenses and the passive participle / clause 1. Contrasting the passive participles of the present and past tenses).

6.2. Inflectional categories of participles

When we talk about inflection of participles, we mean that fragment of the paradigm of verb forms that is united by the commonality of the participial stem. Thus, the forms of participles playing, coming or mentioned all synthetic word forms in which the stems are found are recognized playing, coming And mentioned- accordingly, and not only those of these forms that are capable of acting in an attributive function (although it is precisely this function that is used in determining participles).

Above, the contrast between active and passive participles, as well as past and present participles, was also introduced based on their use in the attributive function (see,). However, traditional participle notations apply to all participial forms with the same stems; so, for example, all word forms with the stem mentioned-(not only full forms mentioned, mentioned, mentioned etc., but short forms mentioned, mentioned, mentioned And mentioned) are considered forms of the passive past participle.

If the stems of participles express some categories characteristic of verbs (see), then with the help of inflections of participles inflectional categories typical of adjectives are expressed: gender, number, case and animacy; Also, passive participles, in addition to full (attributive) forms, characteristic of all participles without exception, also have short (predicative) forms, see the possibility of their formation for participles of different types in).

The formation of synthetic or analytical degrees of comparison in participles proper, which is characteristic of many adjectives, is usually impossible. The possibility of such formations is one of the manifestations [Isachenko 1965/2003: 540] (for example, more loved, more appreciated[Kholodilova 2011: 11], more flourishing species, the most eminent scientist[Bogdanov et al. 2007: 534]).

6.3. Syntactic functions of participles

This section will examine the syntactic functions that participial clauses can perform in a sentence. Here we will use the calculus proposed in for adjectival lexemes and including 5 types of uses, organized into an ordered semantic map. If we arrange these five types in order of increasing predicativeness, then we should consider sequentially:

1) applied restrictive uses ( monkey infected with poliovirus type 2 strain does not get sick), cm. ;

2) applied non-restrictive uses ( Irina, blinded by hatred, did not even look at him), cm. ;

3) depictive uses ( he himself returned loaded), cm. ;

5) actual predicative uses ( the door was open), cm. .

At the same time, the issue of using full or short forms of participles will be discussed.

6.3.1. Common uses: restrictive and non-restrictive

As follows from what was used at the beginning of this article, any participle can act in an attributive position, that is, as an agreed definition. Like other adjectives, participles can be used as restrictive and non-restrictive (appositive) attributes. In the first case, with the help of a participle, the set of referents denoted by the vertex noun (with other definitions depending on it) is narrowed:

(41) A monkey infected with a strain of poliovirus type 2 did not get sick, but a monkey infected with a strain of poliovirus type 3, isolated on the 16th day of illness, did. ["Questions of Virology" (2002)]

With the restrictive use of participles in them in least degree the predicative principle appears, since the meaning of the corresponding forms is not included in the zone of assertion (for example, the fact that two different monkeys were infected with two different strains of viruses is not included in the zone of assertion in the given example), and the situation denoted by the participle is called in order to clarify the reference certain objects (in the given example, monkeys). Restrictive participles and participial phrases cannot be linearly separated from the noun phrase with which they relate.

In the second case, that is, with the appositive (non-restrictive) use of participles, some characteristic of the modified name is reported, while no narrowing of reference is observed. In particular, as with other modifiers, participles that modify proper names with singular reference or finite pronouns can only be interpreted non-restrictively:

(42) Irina, blinded by hatred, did not even look at him. [IN. Tokarev. Your own truth (2002)]

Typically, non-restrictive definitions are used to convey some background, side information; often in such cases, additional ones are established between the content of the participial clause and the content of the main clause semantic relations– causal, concessive, etc. In such cases, intonational isolation of the participial clause is observed; From written sources it is difficult to establish exactly in which cases such separation is assumed, however, to a certain extent, cases of prepositive use of participial clauses are indicative: in contrast to restrictive prepositive participles and participial phrases, non-restrictive participles and participial phrases in writing are separated from the modified noun phrase by a comma:

(43) Struck by Venizelos’s determination, King Constantine believed that this mobilization would not, after all, be carried out against the Central Powers. [A. K. Kolenkovsky. Dardanelles operation (1930)].

Unlike restrictive participles and participial phrases, non-restrictive participles and phrases can be linearly “broken off” from their vertex names (at the same time, they still enter into agreement relations with them).

(44) The pines creaked dully, swayed by the wind, and only the hard-working woodpecker was hammering and hammering somewhere above, as if he wanted to break through the low clouds and see the sun... [P. Kozlov. Is it true that we will always be there? (1969-1981)]

6.3.2. Depictive uses

Non-restrictive uses (see) also include the so-called “depictives”, in which predicativeness is even more pronounced. Depictives are such uses of structures that are attributive in nature when:

a) there is a certain referent that is a semantic actant in the main predication, that is, in the predication headed by a supporting verb;

b) the attributive form (secondary predication) does not form a single component with the corresponding name;

c) in this case, the attributive form describes a certain situation that takes place at the moment of the action expressed by the supporting verb.

The definition from is used here, see also).

Like adjectives, participles can be used as part of descriptives. Like adjectives, participles in depictives can be used either in the same case form as the noun phrase denoting the corresponding referent in the main clause (45), or in the form instrumental case(46), for depictive uses of the instrumental case, see Instrumental case / clause 2.3.12. Moreover, in both cases they agree with the central participant in the categories of gender and number:

(45) He himself returned loaded like a train porter. [YU. Nagibin. Rebel Island (1994)]

(46) Serve the tolma watered juice that formed during stewing. [Recipes national cuisines: Armenia (2000-2005)]

Apparently, case-agreeing depictives are gradually falling out of use: participial depictives in the instrumental case are becoming predominant. For factors governing the choice between these two options, see, among others, [Rakhilina, Kuznetsova in press].

The so-called depictive uses of participles are in many ways similar. complementary uses (such as I saw him leaving the house), cm. .

6.3.3. Complementary uses

The complementary function of participles is spoken of in cases where participles fill the semantic valence of verbs of perception or, less commonly, of mental activity.

(47) She saw his tough, bold directness, his inspiration; saw him reciting poetry; I saw him drinking laxatives. [IN. Grossman. Life and Fate (1960)]

With the complementary use of participles, one of the referents participating in the situation denoted by the participle is realized as a syntactic actant of the main verb; so, in (48) Matte occupies the position of direct object in the supporting form count. In this respect, such constructions are similar to depictive participial constructions (see). The main difference between these two types of structures concerns the fact that when used depictively, the referent of the name turns out to be not only a syntactic, but also a semantic actant of the main predication, and the situation denoted by the participle is not included in the actant structure of the supporting form. So, in example (45) the actant of the verb come back is He, but not the situation described by the participle loaded(the consequence of this property is that usually the participial phrase in a descriptive can be omitted without violating grammatical correctness). With complementary use, on the contrary, the actant structure of the supporting form includes the situation, but not the referent of the name. So, in example (48) Matte is not a semantic actant of the verb count(although it is its direct complement); verb count has a sentential actant that could be expressed by the construction Stein is... in the top five. Omitting the participial phrase in such constructions leads to grammatical incorrectness (* This gave reason in those years to consider Stein) or to a significant change actant structure support form ( I saw him reciting poetry= ‘saw him recite poetry’, ¹ ‘saw him’).

In modern Russian, participles used in the complementary function almost always take the form of the instrumental case and agree with “their” participant in gender and number, as in the examples given.

In the texts of previous periods, in the complementary participial construction with verbs of perception, the prevailing strategy was in which the participle agreed in case with “its” nominal group, that is, with the group with which the participle is connected in meaning. Considering that we are talking mainly about the situation of subordinating the participle to transitive verbs, in fact, in such constructions the accusative case form of the participle was used:

(49) Pushkin, seeing him fall, threw the pistol up and shouted: “Bravo!” [IN. A. Zhukovsky. Letter to S.L. Pushkin (1837)]

In modern texts, such a construction is used extremely rarely, but isolated examples of use are still recorded:

(50) But one day I saw her standing in the horse yard, and her feet were splashed with mud. [YU. Azarov. Suspect (2002)]

How quickly the usage in this fragment of grammar changed is illustrated by the data given in the following table. Here is the number of examples from the Corpus for the query: verb see(in any form) + pronouns He, she or They in the accusative case + participle in the accusative or instrumental form. The “garbage” was manually removed, that is, examples in which the participle still does not perform a complementary function.

Table 1. Participles in the complementary function of a verb see according to texts different eras: agreed participles and instrumental participles

According to the data given in the table, it is clear that the turning point occurred in the middle of the 19th century - from about this time, case-consistent participles in the complementary function of the verb see quickly fall out of use. In addition, the data in Table 1 show that over time the overall frequency of complementary uses of participles (at least with the verb see) is reduced (pairwise differences between periods are statistically significant, χ2 test, in both cases p<.05).

With verbs of mental activity (such as, for example, count, believe, assume etc.) at all stages of the development of the Russian language, reflected in the Corpus, participles in the complementary function were used only in the instrumental case:

(51) For a long time we considered him kidnapped by those people who were looking for you and your wife here [V. T. Narezhny. Bursak (1822)]

In all the cases listed so far (that is, with restrictive and non-restrictive usage (see), as well as as part of depictive (see) and complementary constructions), participles are used almost exclusively in their full form (for rare and generally archaic exceptions, see [Kholodilova 2011: 24]).

6.3.4. Predicative uses

Finally, participles can be part of the predicate, that is, used predicatively. This class of uses includes combinations with a copular verb be and semi-linked verbs ( become, seem and so on.).

As in the case of adjectives, only in this syntactic position are short forms truly used, however, the relationship between short and long forms should be discussed separately for different types of participles. In addition, the very ability to act as part of a predicate participle varies significantly. All types of participles behave differently in the predicative position:

6.3.4.1. Active past participles in predicative position

Active past participles in literary language in the predicative position are used to a limited extent. At the same time, not a single reliable use of short forms of such participles is recorded in the Corpus (cf. * the fire was extinguished etc.).

As for the full forms of active past participles, they are occasionally used in the predicative position, but mostly these are participles of intransitive verbs SV, denoting a change in state, and used without dependent ones. For such participles, we can usually talk about a certain degree of adjectivation (see (see and Real past participle / clause 4. Adjectivation of real past participles): they have stative semantics and denote the resulting state that occurs as a result of reaching the natural limit of the situation, as in the following two examples:

(52) Thus, in the crowns of approximately 50% of trees after ground fires there are needles was yellowed. ["Forestry" (2004)]

(53) I don’t even really know the name of that river. It was muddy shallow. She crawled like a snake between the slippery shores. [E. Khaetskaya. Blue Dragonflies of Babylon/The Finding of Enkidu (1997)]

As with other types of compound nominal predicate, in this context, with an explicit copula, both instrumental forms (52) and nominative case forms of the participle (53) are possible; The first possibility is realized more often.

6.3.4.2. Active present participles in predicative position

The use of active present participles as part of a predicate with a linking verb be almost always speaks of some degree of adjectivation ( the museum was amazing, the news was stunning). However, (few) cases of using active present participles in this position are discussed in [Bogdanov 2011: 108–111], cf. the following example given in this work:

(54) People at the factory wasreading, “Star” was loved and willingly subscribed to it. (from the Internet)

A.V. Bogdanov notes that in this position, participles cannot have ordinary verbal dependents [Bogdanov 2011: 111], which in the usual understanding is precisely one of the manifestations of adjectivation.

Active present participles, however, are used somewhat more freely with semi-linked verbs, and in such contexts the restriction on the presence of dependents no longer applies, that is, the corresponding formations are no longer necessarily used in adjectival meanings:

(55) At the same time, she got stuck and raised her upper body so that seemed worthwhile on the hind legs. [YU. O. Dombrovsky. The monkey comes for his skull (1943-1958)] – cf. ??? was worthwhile on hind legs

The actual active participles of the present tense in modern Russian do not have short forms. The possibility of the formation of such forms in units that have the morphemic structure of real participles of the present tense is a manifestation of their adjectivation (see), cf., for example, the mention of constructions like He is very knowledgeable in [Isachenko 1965/2003: 543], [Bogdanov 2011: 109].

6.3.4.3. Passive present participles in predicative position

Short forms of present passive participles can, in principle, be used as part of predicates with a linking verb be, however, in modern language they are rarely used in this way and usually sound archaic:

(56) Their liturgical regulations, texts, literature, legal and canonical traditions were determined and forever determined by Byzantium. [AND. Meyendorff. Spiritual and Cultural Renaissance of the 14th Century and the Fate of Eastern Europe (1992)]

Full forms of present passive participles are not used predicatively in modern Russian. The corresponding forms can be used in combination with a copula, but this always indicates a certain degree of adjectivation (see):

(57) Our parking lot was guarded, for employees, but the guard was either asleep or did not see the criminal, or maybe he was at the same time with him. [IN. Golyakhovsky. Russian doctor in America (1984-2001)]

In this example, we are not talking about describing the situation conveyed by the verb guard, but about classifying a specific parking lot as protected. In the 18th and, partly, the first half of the 19th century, full forms of present passive participles could be used predicatively and convey dynamic situations (as in the following two examples), but in modern Russian such constructions are not used:

(58) ... Ingria, Ancient Russian Province, after many years unjustly under the Swedish yoke was held… [A. I. Bogdanov. Description of St. Petersburg (1751)]

(59) Villagers everywhere are fighting off our troops and slaughtering the detachments that are sent out of necessity to find food (Denis Davydov. 1812 (1825))

6.3.4.4. Passive past participles in predicative position

Passive past participles, unlike other types of participles, are used predicatively very often. Combinations of short forms of these participles with verb forms be form analytical forms of the passive voice, see article Voice. The question of the status of constructions with copula and full forms of passive past participles is complicated; see the discussion of constructions like the door must be open / the door must be open in Voice / Analytical forms of the passive voice and copular constructions.

6.3.5. Generalization

Thus, participles demonstrate a wide range of syntactic functions, from purely attributive (see) to purely predicative (see). The first pole is characterized by the use of consistent long forms, the second - short forms; some intermediate functions can be performed by the instrumental case forms of full participles.

7. A set of participial forms depending on the grammatical characteristics of the verb

As mentioned above (see), the full set of possible participles of Russian verbs includes four varieties:

• active present participles;
• active past participles;
• present passive participles;
• passive past participles.

It should be added to this that in those transitive verbs that allow the formation of reflexive passive forms (that is, in a subset of imperfective verbs, see Voice), along with the actual active participles, actual participles of the subparadigm of the passive voice, expressed by a reflexive postfix (such as under construction), cm. .

In articles devoted to specific participles (Active present participle, Active past participle, Passive present participle, Passive past participle), particular restrictions on the formation of certain participial forms are described. However, some general characteristics of such restrictions should be noted immediately. These are restrictions associated with the valence characteristics of the verb (see), and restrictions associated with the aspectual characteristics of the verb (see).

7.1. Restrictions associated with the valency characteristics of the verb

The first group of restrictions is related to the valency characteristics of the verb.

7.1.1. Restrictions on the formation of active participles

Since real participles are a means of relativizing the subject (see), normally they cannot be formed from verbs that do not have syntactic valency on the subject in the nominative case, that is, from impersonal verbs ( dawn, get cold, get dark, shiver, feel sick, believe, think etc.).

Sometimes, however, deviations from this limitation are recorded. So, for example, sometimes real participles are used from meteorological verbs that are traditionally considered impersonal (see Impersonality / clause 1.2. Restrictions on inflection and word formation characteristic of impersonal verbs).

(60) But, lying down at his feet and not even looking at his master, but looking at evening garden, the dog immediately realized that his owner was in trouble. [M. A. Bulgakov. The Master and Margarita (1929-1940)]

Perhaps this is due to the fact that such verbs actually have limited use with an expressed subject, mainly in literary prose:

(61) Some force pushed him out into the empty, quiet yard without soldiers, and he wandered into the garden, behind a fenced fence of bushes, where it got dark before his eyes in the shadows apple trees and cool it was getting dark overgrown with thick grass Earth. [ABOUT. Pavlov. The Matyushin case (1996)]

Another class of fixed deviations is the use of active participles from verbs with the meaning of presence or absence, in the finite forms of which there is no subject in the nominative case; With the help of such active participles, the participant is sometimes relativized, which in finite forms would be coded in the genitive case:

(62) “Leva, how dear you are to me” (he asks me three kopecks missing for a glass of beer). [E. Gerstein. Extra love (1985-2002)] – cf. ok, three kopecks were not enough for a glass of beer, but??? three kopecks were not enough for a glass of beer

However, such uses are apparently on the verge of the literary norm or beyond its limits.

7.1.2. Restrictions on the formation of passive participles

Since passive participles are a means of relativizing the direct object (see), they cannot be formed from verbs that do not have syntactic valence for the direct object, that is, from intransitive verbs. There are a few exceptions to this restriction, see about them Syntax of participial phrases / paragraph 3. Syntax of phrases with passive participles.

In addition, impersonal verbs in which the only participant is formalized in the accusative case do not form passive participles; Thus, impersonal verbs themselves do not form passive participles, such as vomit, shiver, Wed *vomiting, *chilling. Moreover, in some cases, participial constructions can be correlated in meaning with impersonal sentences if they impersonally use ordinary transitive verbs, cf. the following two examples:

(63) Through stuffy ears, through the tightly and tightly stretched membranes, Lerka’s voice still made its way to him from afar. [IN. Astafiev. Sad detective (1982-1985)]

(64) The barrel obediently froze, Snap screamed with such force that my ears were blocked. [D. Dontsova. King Pea Dollars (2004)]

7.2. Limitations related to verb type

The second group of restrictions is associated with the absence of present participles in perfect verbs; (cf. the absence of active or passive present participles in the verb draw, in the presence of corresponding participles from the verb paint: drawing, being drawn). This limitation logically follows from the absence of finite forms of the present tense in these verbs.

7.3. Generalization: a possible set of participial forms from different classes of verbs

Thus, depending on their characteristics, Russian verbs are, in principle, capable of forming different quantities participles:

1) Transitive imperfective verbs are capable of forming all four participles ( drawing, drawing, drawn, drawn). In addition, as part of their passive subparadigm, characterized by the presence of a postfix -xia, two more active participles are possible (present and past tenses, respectively: drawing, drawing).

2) Transitive verbs of the perfect form can only form active and passive past participles ( drawn, drawn) .

3) Intransitive imperfective verbs are, in principle, capable of forming active participles of the present and past tenses ( sitting, sitting).

4) Intransitive perfective verbs are capable of forming only active past participles ( sat down).

5) Impersonal verbs of both types do not normally form participles.

It has been repeatedly noted in the literature that the theoretical possibilities of forming participles of different types are not realized in Russian verbs to the same extent. In order to clearly illustrate this thesis, let us turn to the calculations for the Subcorpus with the homonymy removed. The following table shows the total number of full forms of participles of different types depending on the type and transitivity of the verb.

Table 2. Frequency of full forms of participles of various types depending on the type and transitivity of the verb

	Transitive verbs
valid present
valid past
suffering present
suffering past

When looking at this table, the following becomes clear.

1) Significantly ahead in frequency of all other types of participles are passive past participles of SV verbs ( killed, found, published etc.), even if you do not take into account the predicative use of short forms (see).

2) While only past participles are grammatically possible for SV verbs, present participles clearly predominate quantitatively for NSV verbs. Thus, the category of “participle tense” turns out to be very closely related to the type of verb; Wed with the system of gerunds, in which the same tendency is manifested almost absolutely (for NSV verbs, past participles are on the verge of the grammatical norm, see Participle / clause 2.1. Choice of participial suffix).

Bibliography

• Bogdanov S.I., Voeikova M.D., Evtyukhin V.B. and others. Modern Russian language. Morphology. Preprint (working materials for the textbook). SPb.: Faculty of Philology and Arts of St. Petersburg State University. 2007.
• Grammar 1953 – Vinogradov V.V. (Ed.) Grammar of the Russian language, vol. 1-2. M.: USSR Academy of Sciences. 1953.
• Grammar 1980 – Shvedova N.Yu. (Ed.) Russian grammar. Volume I. M.: Science. 1980.
• Dobrushina N.R. Particle semantics would And b// Kiseleva K.L., Plungyan V.A., Rakhilina E.V. (Ed.) Corpus studies on Russian grammar. Digest of articles. 2009. pp. 283–313.
• Zaliznyak A.A. Grammar dictionary of the Russian language. M.: Russian dictionaries. 2003 (1st ed. – M. 1977).
• Zeldovich G.M. Synthetic passive of the perfect form -xia: why is it (almost) not there? // Questions of linguistics, 2. 2010. pp. 3–36.
• Isachenko A.V. The grammatical structure of the Russian language in comparison with Slovak. Morphology, I-II. Second edition. M.: Languages ​​of Slavic culture. 2003 (Reprint of the Bratislava edition. 1965. 1st ed.: 1954–1960).
• Knyazev Yu.P. Actionality and statality: their relationship in Russian constructions with participles ending in - n, -T. München: Otto Sagner. 1989.
• Knyazev Yu.P. Grammatical semantics. Russian language in typological perspective. M.: Languages ​​of Slavic cultures. 2007.
• Nedyalkov V.P., Otaina T.A. 1987. Typological and comparative aspects of the analysis of dependent taxis (based on the material of the Nivkh language in comparison with Russian) // Bondarko A.V. (Ed.) Theory of functional grammar. Introduction. Aspectuality. Temporal localization. Taxis. L. 1987. pp. 296–319.
• Paducheva E.V. Dynamic models in the semantics of vocabulary. M.: Languages ​​of Slavic culture. 2004.
• Pertsov N.V. On the inflectional status and features of inflection of reflexive passive forms of the Russian verb // Moscow Linguistic Journal, 9(2). 2006. pp. 29–50.
• Peshkovsky A.M. Russian syntax in scientific coverage. – 8th ed., add. – M.: Languages ​​of Slavic culture. 2001 (1st ed. – M. 1928).
• Rakhilina E.V., Kuznetsova Yu.L. Russian descriptives // Acta linguistica petropolitana. In the press.
• Sazonova I.K. Russian verb and its participial forms. M.: Russian language. 1989.
• Soloviev N.V. Russian spelling. Spelling reference book. SPb: Norint. 1997.
• Chvany C.V. Syntactically derived words in a lexicalist theory // Selected essays of Catherine V. Chvany. Columbus: Slavica. 1996. P. 43–54.
• Schultze-Berndt E., Himmelmann N.P. 2004. Depictive secondary predicates in crosslinguistic perspective. Linguistic typology, 8. 2004. P. 59–131.
• van der Auwera J., Malchukov A. A semantic map for depictive adjectivals // Schultze-Bernd E., Himmelmann N.P. Secondary predication and adverbial modification: the typology of depictives. Oxford. 2005. P. 393–421.

Main literature

• Bogdanov A.V. Semantics and syntax of verbal adjectives. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of philological sciences. M.: Moscow State University. 2011.
• Vlahov A.V. Future participles in Russian. Final qualifying work of bachelor of philology. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State University. 2010.
• Vyalsova A.P. Types of taxis relations in modern Russian (based on participial constructions). Abstract of dissertation. ... K. philol. Sci. M. 2008.
• Godizova Z.I. Aspectual and temporal meanings of the perfect participle. Abstract of dissertation. ...cand. Philol. Sci. St. Petersburg 1991.
• Grammar 1953 – Vinogradov V.V. (Ed.) Grammar of the Russian language, vol. 1-2. M.: USSR Academy of Sciences. 1953. pp. 506–521.
• Grammar 1980 – Shvedova N.Yu. (Ed.) Russian grammar. Volume I. M.: Science. 1980. pp. 665–671.
• Demyanova E.M. The relationship between the time of the predicate and the time of the attribute-participle with suffixes - ushch-, -yushch-, -asch-, -box- at the morphological level // Dissertationes Slavicae. Sectio Linguistica, 22. Szeged. 1991. pp. 11–17.
• Ivannikova E.A. About the so-called process of adjectivation of participles // Questions of historical lexicology and lexicography of East Slavic languages. M.: Science. 1974. pp. 297–304.
• Isachenko A.V. The grammatical structure of the Russian language in comparison with Slovak. Morphology. I-II. Second edition. M.: Languages ​​of Slavic culture. 2003 (Reprint of the Bratislava edition. 1965. 1st ed.: 1954–1960).
• Kavetskaya R.K. Observations on the temporal meanings of real participles of the modern Russian language // Proceedings of the Historical and Philological Faculty of Voronezh State University, 29. Voronezh. 1954. pp. 137–151.
• Kavetskaya R.K. Syntactic functions of constructions with the active participle in modern Russian // Proceedings of Voronezh State University, 42(3). Voronezh. 1955. pp. 83–85.
• Kalakutskaya L.P. Adjectivation of participles in modern Russian literary language. M.: Science. 1971.
• Kalakutskaya L.P. Time of participles // Russian language at school, 1. 1967. pp. 62–68.
• Knyazev Yu.P. Actionality and statality: their relationship in Russian constructions with participles ending in -н, -т. München: Otto Sagner. 1989.
• Kozintseva N.A. Taxis functions conveyed by participles and participial phrases in the Russian language // Bondarko A.V., Shubik S.A. (Responsible editor) Problems of functional grammar. Semantic invariance/variability. SPb: Science. 2003. pp. 175–189.
• Krapivina K.A. Participial taxis in Russian. Graduate work. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State University. 2009.
• Krasnov I.A. The transition of participles into adjectives in the modern Russian literary language. Cand. diss. M. 1955.
• Lisina N.M. Active participle as a component of the semantic structure of a sentence // Sentence and its structure in language (Russian language). M. 1986. pp. 74–83.
• Lopatin V.V. Adjectivation of participles in its relation to word formation // Questions of linguistics, 5. 1966. pp. 37–47.
• Lutsenko N.A. On the characterization of some personal and participial forms as members of the aspectual paradigm of the verb // Scientific notes of the University of Tartu, 439. Questions of Russian aspectology, 3. 1978a. pp. 102–110.
• Lutsenko N.A. On the study of the aspect and other categories of participles (notes on the state and prospects) // / Scientific notes of the University of Tartu, 439. Questions of Russian aspectology, 3. 1978b. pp. 89–101.
• Osenmuk L.P. On the distinction between passive past participles and homonymous verbal adjectives // Russian language at school, 2. 1977. pp. 81–85.
• Paducheva E.V. On the attributive contraction of subordinate predication in the Russian language. In: Machine translation and applied linguistics, 20. M. 1980, pp. 3–44.
• Peshkovsky A.M. Russian syntax in scientific coverage. – 8th ed., add. – M.: Languages ​​of Slavic culture. 2001 (1st ed. – M. 1928). pp. 12–133.
• Plungyan V.A. Participles and pseudoparticiples in the Russian language: about the boundaries of variability. Paper read 26 February 2010 (Oslo). 2010.
• Rozhkova A.Yu. Participles and gerunds as markers of the level of speech competence of the speaker (based on the material of the sound corpus of the Russian language). Graduate work... master's in linguistics. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State University. 2011.
• Rusakova M.V., Sai S.S. 2009. Competition between active participles of the past and present // Kiseleva K.L., Plungyan V.A., Rakhilina E.V. (Ed.) Corpus studies on Russian grammar. Digest of articles. M.: Probel-2000. 2009. pp. 245–282.
• Sazonova I.K. 1989. Russian verb and its participial forms. M.: Russian language. 1989.
• Kholodilova M.A. Competition of subject relativization strategies in the Russian language: a corpus study. Course work. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State University. 2009.
• Kholodilova M.A. Relativization of the O-participant with the passive in Russian. Final qualifying work of a 4th year student. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State University. 2011.
• Kholodilova M. A. Competition of strategies for relativizing the subject in the Russian language // Acta Linguistica Petropolitana. Proceedings of the Institute of Linguistic Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 8(3). 2011, pp. 219–224.
• Kholodilova M. A. Competition of the main strategies for relativizing the subject in the Russian language // Acta Linguistica Petropolitana. Proceedings of the Institute of Linguistic Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences. In the press.
• Chuglov V.I. Categories of voice and tense in Russian participles // Questions of linguistics, 3. 1990.
• Fowler G. Oblique passivization in Russian. The Slavic and East European Journal, 40(3). 1996, pp. 519–545.

It was the pronouns that were used in the query in order to exclude the usual agreed definitions included in the noun phrases.

In a number of Russian dialects, constructions like he left, however, they are not represented in the literary language.

This limitation actually has an exception, cf. discussion of type examples The work was hard and time-consuming(Yandex). in [Kholodilova in print].

Complex adjectives that include participles as their second component can also have the ability to form short forms, see about this (using the example of the form deeply moving) V .

As a marginal formation from these verbs, we can also mention the active past participles, which are included in the paradigm of the passive voice, marked with the indicator - Xia, that is, forms like drawn, read, written. These forms are even more marginal than the corresponding present and past participles of NSV verbs. This marginality logically follows from the rarity and controversial acceptability of the reflexive passive of SV verbs itself, that is, such constructions as, for example, the book will be read with great interest by both a microbiologist and a young man who has never seen a single scientific book(about the controversial status of the latter, see, in particular, [Pertsov 2006], [Zeldovich 2010], the example given is also discussed there). However, the corresponding participial formations are rarely recorded in the texts. As M.A. Kholodilova notes, with such formations modifiers like suddenly, by myself(yourself, yourself, yourself)yourself, probably because these modifiers do not combine well with the normative passive past participles of the corresponding verbs, cf. one piece that peed itself on the subway(an example from Yandex given by M. A Kholodilova) and even more dubious one piece,written by himself on the subway[Kholodilova 2011: 77].

/>

The participle is an independent part of speech, possessing both the characteristics of a verb: tense, reflexivity and aspect, and the characteristics of an adjective: gender, number and case. We can say that it is a verbal adjective or a special form of a verb, as few linguists claim. Participles are also divided into active and passive.

Participles along with dependent words form participle phrases.

Participle conjugation

The participle changes according to the characteristics of both the verb and the noun. It changes by type, by tense, by number, by case, by gender in the singular.

Examples

• verb "paint" - participle "painted"
• verb "go" - participle "going"
• verb “to exist” - participle “existing”
• verb "to live" - ​​participle "living"

see also

Notes

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

See what “Participation (part of speech)” is in other dictionaries:

This term has other meanings, see Part of speech (meanings). This article needs to be completely rewritten. There may be explanations on the talk page... Wikipedia

This term has other meanings, see Particle. Particle service part speech that introduces different meanings, shades into a sentence or serves to form word forms. Contents 1 General properties of particles 2 Particle discharges ... Wikipedia

This term has other meanings, see Union. A conjunction is an auxiliary part of speech that connects parts together. complex sentence, or homogeneous members of the sentence. Classification by structure simple (as if) ... ... Wikipedia

An adverb is an independent part of speech that is not inflected or conjugated. Indicates a sign of action (driving fast, rotating slowly), a sign of a condition (very painful), a sign of another sign (extremely cold), rarely a sign of an object (eggs... ... Wikipedia

A participle is an independent part of speech or a special form of a verb. There are participles, for example, in Russian and Hungarian, as well as in many of the Eskimo languages ​​(Sirenix). Participle is an independent part of speech, which has both characteristics ... Wikipedia

This term has other meanings, see Communion. This article or section describes a certain linguistic phenomenon in relation only to the Russian language. You can help Wikipedia by adding information... Wikipedia

Participle- (tracing sheet Latin participium) non-finite form of the verb (verboid), denoting a sign of a name (person, object) associated with an action, and used attributively (“flaming fire”, “broken jug”). The participle combines the properties of the verb and... ... Linguistic encyclopedic dictionary

participle- 1. A significant part of speech, denoting a sign of an object by action (i.e., a procedural sign) and expressing this meaning in the grammatical categories of voice, tense, gender, number and case. Participle is a syncretic part of speech that unites... ... Dictionary linguistic terms T.V. Foal

Wiktionary has an entry for “participle.” Participle is a polysemantic term. Participle (calque from Latin participium) in grammar is a part of speech or a special form of the verb Communion (Holy Mysteries, Eucharist, holy ... Wikipedia

Part of speech (calque from Latin pars orationis) is a category of words in a language, determined by morphological and syntactic features. In the languages ​​of the world, first of all, the name is contrasted (which can be further divided into a noun, adjective, etc.... Wikipedia

Books

• Russian language. 7th grade. Textbook in 3 parts. Federal State Educational Standard, Granik Henrietta Grigorievna, Borisenko Natalya Anatolyevna, Bondarenko Stella Morisovna, Vladimirskaya Galina Nikolaevna. Textbook included new teaching and learning center, which implements the idea of ​​continuity of education from 1st to 9th grade and ensures the achievement of the main goal of studying the Russian language - the education of cultural…
• Practical grammar in Russian lessons In 4 parts. Part 2, A. G. Zikeev. This book will be produced in accordance with your order using Print-on-Demand technology. The manual includes exercises aimed at developing lexical, word-formation,…

A participle is a special, unconjugated form of a verb. Indicates the attribute of an object by action: * boy sings - singing

Grammatically, the participle combines the characteristics of a verb and an adjective. From the verb at the participle the categories of voice, aspect, tense. From the adjective forms of change: by gender, number, case - these are concordant categories.

Passive participles
Verb signs of participle

Passive participle – denotes the attribute of an object by action on this object, i.e. with the passive participle, the word being defined is the object.

*we are reading a book – book (object) readable

Signs from adjectives

A participle, like an adjective, has concordant forms of gender, number and case.

The agreement of a participle with a noun is expressed by a participle. The participle (like the adjective) has adjectival endings.

I.p. (there is) a big \ read[ing] book
R.p. (no) big [oh] \ read [oh] books
D.p. (give) a big \readable book

Like adjectives, participles have full and short forms (only for passive ones).
Complete ones have the same adjectives as complete ones, changing according to numbers, gender and cases. In the sentence they are an agreed upon definition.
Short ones are like nouns, i.e. substantive type.
* the jug is broken (“table”), the cup is broken[a] (“fox”),
broken[s] (“tables”), saucer broken[o] (“window”).

Brief f. Passive participles change according to gender and number, but not according to cases. They have lost changes in cases, because are not used as an agreed definition, but only as a predicate *houses built[s] (were, will be)

Formation of active participles

Passive participles

NAST. VR (transitive verbs, non-continuous verbs):
from verb I reference: EAT
from verb II reference: IM

Passive participles are not formed from all verbs:

1) prefixed verbs in -АТ, -ИВАТ, -ВАТ 1st productive class: *decide – solved, swim up – swim up

2) prefixless verbs in -OVAT of the 3rd productive class: *explore – researched

3) prefixal verbs of motion: *bring – brought

4) unproductive verbs ending in -VAT

PAST VR.: from the bases of the infinitive (trans., sov.v.) + -NN-/-ENN-, -T-

-NN- : Spanish if the base is on a vowel) + on AT (1st cont.cl.), -OVAT (3rd cont.cl.): *create + nn = created
read + nn = read
seen + nn = seen

-ENN- : Spanish if the stem is a consonant (except P)) + IT (4th prod.cl.):
*buy + enn = purchased
carry away - une With+ enn = carried away
bake – baked + enn = baked

-T-: from verbs of the 5th cont. on -NUT: *promote no– advanced
from verbs with base inf. for the vowel E, I, O, U, Y:
* beat – bi + t = beaten
wash – soap – we + t = washed
grind – molo + t = ground

Present tense	EM/OM (from I), MI (from II)
Past tense	ENN, NN, T

In Russian lessons we all studied the participle. However, linguists still do not have a common opinion on what a participle is. Some consider it a special form of the verb, others define the participle as an independent part of speech. Let's try to figure out what a participle is: the Russian language and its answers.

Definition of participle

Conventionally called a participle special form verb, which denotes the attribute of an object or object by action, and answers the questions: which?, which?, which?, which?. In addition, the participle combines the characteristics of both a verb and an adjective.

Participle and adjective

Participles have many similarities with adjectives. Participles are inflected - agree with the noun in gender, number, case. The initial form of the participle has the same characteristics - masculine, singular, Nominative case. For example, reflective, coloring, flying. Participles, like adjectives, can have a short form.

Short Communion

What is a short participle is another question that linguists ask when arguing whether it is an adjective or a special part of speech. One way or another, the modern Russian language distinguishes two forms of participle - short and full. The short participle answers the questions: what has been done?, what has been done?, what has been done?, what have been done?.

For example, spilled - spilled, lost - lost. In a sentence, short participles are always a predicate: “the shop has been closed for several hours.”

Short participles are formed from full form by adding zero ending, as well as the endings “a”, “o” and “s”. For example, built – built; beveled - beveled.

Participle and verb

The participle has common morphological properties with verbs - reflexivity, transitivity, aspect and tense. Moreover, unlike the verb, the participle does not have future tense forms. But only participles that are formed from imperfective verbs have present tense forms. For example, sit – sitting.

Most difficult moments are associated with the question of what a past participle is, namely with their formation. The following rules must be remembered:

• Active past participles are formed from the infinitive with the addition of the suffixes “vsh” or “sh”, as well as the endings of adjectives. For example, hide - hidden; endure - endured.
• Passive past participles are formed from the infinitive with the addition of the suffixes “nn”, “enn” and “t”, as well as the endings of adjectives. For example, do – done; contribute – contributed; shoe - shod.

Participle in a sentence

In a sentence, participles are a definition, less often part of a compound nominal predicate. Participles with dependent words: nouns, adverbs or adjectives form a participial phrase. In a sentence, it is usually separated by commas: “a dog running along the road”

It is customary to distinguish two types of participles: active and passive.

What is a passive participle

Passive participles denote a feature that is present in an object after the influence of another object or object. For example, a problem solved by a student is a problem that the student solved; lost fight by a boxer - a fight that a boxer lost.

What is a real participle

Active participles denote a characteristic that is created by the actions of the object or object itself. For example, a suffering man is a man who suffers; a running horse is a horse that runs.

It is worth remembering that a participle can be translated into an adjective or verb with dependent words. For example, a lying boy is a boy who was lying; a proven friend is a true friend. Sometimes from participles you can form short adjective: charming smile - a smile is charming.

What is communion in church

The word “communion” can mean not only a part of speech, but also the church rite of communion or the Eucharist.

During this rite, the believer must taste wine and bread, which symbolizes the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ. Communion or communion is done to come into close contact with God, which brings blessing.

At different times they received communion different numbers of times. In the Middle Ages, Christians observed the Eucharist every day, and since the 19th century, this rite was performed twice in a lifetime - after birth and before death.