- Typology of errors in students' written works
Speech errors- errors in the use and functioning of linguistic means.
Grammatical errors- errors in the structure, in the form of a language unit.
Speech errors - this is a violation of the requirements for correct speech, the norms of literary language (= you can’t say that).
Speech impediments - violation of the requirement of communicative expediency of speech, violation of recommendations related to the concept of good speech (rich, accurate, expressive) (= this can be expressed, but there is a better option).
Unlike a grammatical error, which violates the structure of a linguistic unit, a speech defect is associated with the unsuccessful use of correctly formed words or sentences. This is a functional error (in use), not a structural error (in education). To detect a speech defect, a context is necessary; without it, it is impossible to notice an error in use, since the linguistic unit itself is composed and formed correctly.
Logical errors
Logical errors are associated with errors in the logic of presentation.
I. Violation of a clear order of thoughts and parts of work in the absence of an internal plan:
Inappropriate and compulsive repetition of the same position;
Duplication of interpretations and conclusions;
Displacement of microthemes;
Unmotivated juxtaposition of different parts of the work;
Students' inattention to highlighting paragraphs;
Inability to use the red line to reflect and design the logical-compositional division of the constructed text.
II. Logical skip:
Lack of connection between thoughts; - inept transition from one position to another; - undefined connection of various subtopics.
Parsing difficulties
Intonation is the same valid way of expressing syntactic meanings in a language as word order. Never refuse to read a sentence or text, even silently, to see its semantic boundaries, in order to become generally familiar with its content and syntactic structure. The most acceptable form of carrying out such reading is the presentation of sentences in speech bars, or syntagmas.
Syntagmas in a language are not fixed in a certain way, such as word combinations formed as a result of the semantic-syntactic distribution of words. Syntagmas arise spontaneously in the process of speech. Their highlighting in the text is determined by the language system, prompted by social and individual speech practice, and occurs more intuitively, gradually, than according to strict language rules. Hence the conclusion about the need for preliminary reflection on a text or sentence in order to identify the most likely volume of syntagmas.
The text itself (its content, syntactic structure and rhythm and melody) suggests the boundaries of speech beats: At Lukomorye / there is a green oak; // golden chain / on that oak tree: // both day and night / the learned cat / keeps walking / around the chain; // goes to the right - / starts a song, / to the left - / tells a fairy tale //.(A. Pushkin.) One oblique line separates syntagmas, two lines - phrases as larger units that are relatively complete in meaning. A different division will make it difficult, and what’s more, it will make the connection of words unperceivable and unnatural.
One can assume another option for dividing this passage into syntagmas - by enlarging the syntagmas: There is a green oak near the Lukomorye; / golden chain on that oak tree: / day and night, the learned cat / keeps walking around the chain / ...
If you look at syntagmas from the side of syntax, then, perhaps, you can predict more or less probable combinations of words, components of a verbal character and phrases that can be perceived as speech tacts. Syntagmatic groups (or rows) in a stream of coherent speech can be composed, for example, of a subject and a predicate located next to each other ( dawn rises), definition with the word being defined ( in the cold darkness), a syntactically indivisible phrase ( grandfather and mother), a predicate verb with a circumstance extending it ( walked ahead of everyone), not a very common isolated member ( another room, / almost twice as large, / was called the hall), phraseological turn ( I feel / in seventh heaven /). It is more difficult to establish syntagmas in a text with homogeneous members, perhaps because the syntagmatic pause in this case is intersected by the intonation of the enumeration. In addition, series of words related by the method of composition are more difficult to fix in memory. Therefore, it is advisable to distinguish each of the homogeneous members as a separate syntagma: He retained / the sparkle of his azure eyes, / and the sonorous laughter of children, / and lively speech, / and proud faith in people, / and a different life.(M. Lermontov.)
As we see, a syntagma is a word, a phrase, and a more extensive segment of speech, united by meaning, syntactically and intonationally.
(Based on materials from A.S. Brovko Difficulties of syntactic analysis. Kyiv "Osvita", 1991. - pp. 70-71)
Three main ways to connect words in a phrase
Concordant application and compound nominal predicate
Distinguish the nominal part of a compound nominal predicate from the agreed application (single and common)
This cliff is a giant. A giant cliff loomed over the river.
To distinguish between such cases, you should remember: 
One-part and two-part sentences
The subject and predicate form the grammatical center, grammatical basis offers. Sentences whose grammatical basis consists of both main members are called two-part.
There are, however, also such sentences, the grammatical basis of which consists of one main member - either the predicate or the subject. Sentences whose grammatical basis consists of one main member are called one-piece.
- Ways of expressing the subject and the main types of the predicate
Synonymy of complex and simple sentences
Below are examples of simple complex sentences, synonymous with complex sentences placed under simple ones. Compare the examples in pairs. First, if you compare them, you will see that synonymous relationships are possible between them. Secondly, a subordinate clause as part of a complex sentence is always more independent than a phrase complicating a simple sentence.
Simple sentence
1. Book, taken by you from the library, must you like it.
2. Becoming a librarian Victor Petrovich first of all directed order in the catalogue.
3. After reading this book, You'll get great pleasure.
4. I didn't have time to receive subscription and had to study in the reading room.
Difficult sentence
1. Book, which you took in library, must you like it.
2. When Viktor Petrovich became librarian He first of all directed order in the catalogue.
3. If you will read this book then get great pleasure.
4. I did not make it in time get a subscription so had to study in the reading room.
As a result of comparing the corresponding examples of samples, you will notice stylistic differences (simple sentences with partial adverbs are more bookish, sentences with homogeneous predicates are more colloquial than the corresponding complex sentences).
Synonymy of personal and impersonal sentences
Impersonal offers- sentences that do not and cannot have a subject, for example: Already quite dawn (L. T.); His shivered (L. T.); Outside deserted (S.-Sch.); It's like this here stuffy (P.); To you not in sight such battles!(L.).
As can be seen from the examples, the predicate of impersonal sentences can be expressed by different parts of speech. Most often it is expressed by impersonal verbs ( dawn, chill, dawn) and adverbs -O, denoting the state ( stuffy, deserted).
Exercise 1.
Replace personal sentences with impersonal ones. Underline the main parts of the sentence. Notice how the meaning of the statement changes as a result of the substitution.
Sample:
Snow covered the road. - The road was covered with snow.
1. The thick and bitter smell of tobacco smoke hit my nostrils (Shol.). 2. The storm tore off the nets that the fishermen had set under the shore and carried them out to sea (Ob.). 3. The incessant wind blew dry snow from the ice (Paust.).
Task 2.
Read the sentences. Come up with the opposite meaning for each of them: for the affirmative - negative, for the negative - affirmative. Write the sentences in pairs, indicating in brackets whether the sentence is two-part or one-part. Underline the main members.
Sample
There is someone in the room (two-part). - There is no one in the room (single-part).
1. I was on vacation. 2. There was no dew in the morning. 3. We didn't have a thunderstorm. 4. It was frosty at night. 5. There were no mushrooms in the forest this summer. 6. Last year there was a good harvest.
Syntax assignments in USE KIMs
In part A (the first part of the KIMs), let’s pay attention to task A 5 (in the 2009 KIMs project, also task A4) The task sounds like this: indicate the grammatically correct continuation of the sentence.
While working on the review,
1) the main idea is not immediately determined.
2) the student gave an assessment of what he read.
3) the artistic originality of the text is analyzed.
4) do not replace the evaluation of the text with a retelling of the content.
In order to construct a correct sentence, reason as follows: what is the main action? Who performs the main action? What additional action? Let's answer the first question: what is the main action? The correct answer is number 4: don't replace - main action . By what entity is it performed? It is assumed that there is, there may be a subject You. This is the intended subject You " performs the main action - don't change... And the additional action is working. The relationship between the main and additional actions can be easily determined by the phrase: The ruble fell, ringing and bouncing. What is the main action of the subject? What did Pyatak do? Fell. What about the additional action? Jingling and bouncing.
In order not to make a mistake in choosing the correct sentence structure, read the article on page 117 " Approaching this station... my hat flew off"[D.E. Rosenthal. How can I say it better? M., Prosveshchenie.-1988.-P. 176]
This phrase is a parody (from a humorous story by A.P. Chekhov) and suffers not only from spelling illiteracy (“this instead of this), but also stylistic helplessness: it violates the rule that the action denoted by the gerund relates to the subject. In the above example we are talking about the actions of two objects in the grammatical meaning of the word: about me (I was approaching the station) and about the hat (it flew off). It is easy to verify the incorrect construction of this sentence if you rearrange the adverbial phrase, which is usually freely located in the phrase: “As I approached this station, my hat flew off.”
Compare also the incorrect use of gerunds in sentences: “When saying goodbye to friends, one of them told me...”; “On my way back home, I was caught in the rain.” Examples from student works: “Living and moving in an aristocratic society, Onegin developed the skills, habits and views inherent in this society”; “Reading these lines from the novel “How the Steel Was Tempered”, one gets the impression that the author expresses our thoughts and feelings” and etc. In such cases, adverbial phrases should be replaced by adverbial clauses.
Deviations from the literary norm found among classic writers are either Gallicisms (turns of phrase that arose under the influence of the French language, where such constructions are permissible), or the result of the influence of folk speech). For example:... Having the right to choose a weapon, his life was in my hands(A.S. Pushkin); Passing a familiar birch grove on the way back in the spring for the first time, my head began to spin and my heart began to beat with vague sweet anticipation.(I.S. Turgenev).
Participial phrases are not used in impersonal sentences like “Approaching the forest, I felt cold” (this sentence has a logical subject to me, but there is no grammatical subject to which the action expressed by the gerund could be attributed). Therefore, proposals like the following seem outdated:... Convinced that he could not understand this, he became bored(L.N. Tolstoy); Having read the story carefully, I think that there are no editorial amendments in it(M. Gorky).
It is possible to use the adverbial phrase in an impersonal sentence with an indefinite form of the verb, for example: When performing this exercise, you need to be guided by the instructions given in the task.
Tough syntax question
Write what questions in this section caused you difficulties!
For example:
- How to distinguish between conjunctions and allied words?
Answer: A conjunctive word, unlike a conjunction, not only serves as a means of communication between the subordinate clause and the main one, but at the same time is a member of the subordinate clause; the conjunction only connects sentences, but is not a member of the sentence, for example: The convoy... set off, When the sun was setting (Chekhov) (union); I don't know, When father will return (conjunctive word).
- How to put punctuation marks in direct speech accompanied by original words, for example: - You say: “Forgive me!” - did he turn to his brother?
Answer: As you know, direct speech can (optional) be highlighted using two characters - quotation marks and a dash. This option should be used in this case. It is more expedient to highlight the first direct speech with a dash, and the second with quotation marks, and then the writing will take the following form:
- You say: “Forgive me!” - he turned to his brother.
This eliminates the repetition of quotation marks, in which the closing quotation marks (if they are not given a different external design, which is not used in ordinary writing) simultaneously serve as an indication of the end of the first and second direct speech.
However, there is some inconvenience with this version of punctuation: the text can be understood in such a way that the author’s words he turned to his brother
for 4th year students of FFiZh
Syntax as a communicative level of grammar. Subject of syntax as section
grammars. The connection between syntax and vocabulary and morphology.
System of syntactic units. The question is about the syntaxeme as the minimum syntactic unit.
A phrase as a syntactic unit. Phrase and word. Collocation and
Classifications of phrases. Grammatical meaning of phrases.
Types of grammatical connections in phrases.
The sentence as the basic syntactic unit. Signs of an offer.
Structural-semantic types of simple sentences.
Basic grammatical categories of a sentence.
Sentence and utterance as units of language and speech. Types of sentences by purpose
statements.
Semantic structure of a sentence: dictum and mode.
Formal grammatical structure of a sentence. Predicative basis. Concept of
structural diagram of the sentence.
The concept of sentence members as structures of semantic components. Varieties
secondary members by the number of connections with other members of the proposal. Semantics
determinants.
Structural-semantic (traditional) classification of minor members. Syncretism.
Subject, its semantics, methods of expression.
The predicate, its role in the structure of the sentence. Types of predicate.
Types of one-part verbal (personal) sentences. Their functions in the text.
Impersonal and infinitive sentences. Their structure, semantics and role in the text.
Nominative sentences. Varieties of nominative sentences.
Complete and incomplete sentences. Question about elliptic sentences.
Input and plug-in structures. Appeal, its functions in the text.
The concept of isolation. Conditions of separation. Isolated members of a sentence with
non-semi-predicative meaning.
The concept of semi-predicativity. Varieties of isolated semi-predicative members
The concept of homogeneity, indicators of homogeneity. Classes of coordinating conjunctions. Homogeneous and
heterogeneous definitions.
Complex sentence as a syntactic unit. Classification of complex sentences.
Complex sentences. General characteristics of the BSC, structure, classification.
Subordinating connection in a complex sentence (features, varieties, means of communication).
Complex sentences of undivided structure.
Complex sentences with dissected structure.
Non-union complex sentence. The question of BSP in syntactic science. N.S. Pospelov about
specifics of the BSP. Communication facilities in the BSP.
Structural and semantic types of BSP.
proposals. Means of communication in a complex sentence.
Organization of a polynomial complex sentence. Complex syntactic structures:
Complex syntactic whole. Structure. Types of SSC. SSC and paragraph.
Types and means of communication of proposals in the SSC.
Methods of transmitting someone else's speech.
Basic principles of Russian punctuation. Punctuation marks and their functions.
Actual division of the proposal. Means of actual division. Consistent and
parallel structure of the text.
Word order functions. Word order in phrases and sentences. Inversion. Parcellation.
Syntax is a word of Greek origin, translated “together”, “simultaneously”, “construction, arrangement”. Thus, this is the doctrine of juxtaposition, the construction of forms of language in the form of a connected text.
Grammar = syntax (phrase, sentence) + morphology (word).
A word is a lexical and morphological unit. phrases and sentences are more complex syntactic structures that have the ability to undergo unlimited complication.
Morphology is the study of paradigm in language (inflection). Syntax is the study of syntagmatics ( compatibility), laws of combining different forms.
^ Syntactic paradigmatics - a set of syntactic units united by relations of interchangeability or interchangeability. (I'm sick / I'm in pain).
Basic syntax concepts:
Syntactic position. In a sentence there is only one specific syntactic position for a specific form. (Sasha saw Katya, incompatibility).
Syntactic relations are relations of coordination (correlation). Subject and predicate - there is no main thing, they coordinate.
Relationships essay (equality).
Relationships of subordination (dependence).
Hierarchy as a type of relationship, a relationship of inclusion, one level is included in another, more complex one. + relationships of subordination (relationships of unity of command), vertex node and dependent node.
Syntax dependency
^ 4 aspects of syntax.
1) Formal-structural(refers to the plane of expression). Categories of syntactic forms (simple/complex, types of subordinate clauses, etc.).
2) ^ Semantic aspect . From a content point of view, a syntactic page is divided into a surface structure (form structure) and a deep structure (subtextual meaning, author's intentions). From the point of view of semantic syntax, the preposition performs a naming function, also being a name. Proposition constitutes the structure and meaning of a situation. Each sentence has 2 types of nominative meaning proposition(that part of the meaning that conveys the state of affairs in the world, the objective content of the sentence) and mode(that part of the meaning that shows the speaker’s attitude to what is being communicated, the subjective beginning). Mode: explicit (verbalized) + unexplicit (non-verbalized).
^ Types of explicit modes : 1) perceptual (sensory perception); 2) mental (intellectual, mode of belief, doubt, knowledge, ignorance, societies of assessment). 3) emotive (emotions); 4) volitional (expression of will) 5) speech-mental action.
^ Elements of the semantic structure of a sentence: action producer agent; predicate – what is communicated about the subject of speech; object - an element of an action, a situation, what the action is directed at; instrumental - an instrument of action; mediativ - by means of which, means; destination; counterparty is a participant in a symmetrical relationship.
3) ^ Communication aspect . This implies an actual division of speech, a theme-rhematic division.
4) Pragmatic aspect. The subject of the characteristic is the communicative purpose for which we pronounce. The basis- speech act theory, idea of John Austin, Sirle monograph - 2 Speech acts”, Arutyunova, Zvegintsev. The subject of analysis is a sentence in a utterance situation. The means of constructing a statement are analyzed - the locutionary aspect (language of the unit). The purpose of analysis is the illocutionary aspect, the result is the perlocutionary aspect.
^ Typology of illocutionary meanings : question, answer, informing, warning, criticism, threat, assurance.
Speech acts: 1. Direct (rude, evaluative, categorical). 2. indirect.
2 Collocation
Syntactic union significant words
- subordinating the connection between these significant words
- nominative function (this is not a communicative unit)
phrase - a grammatic unity formed by combining two or more words belonging to the significant parts of speech and serving as a designation of a single undivided concept or representation.
Red pencil – two-part sentence = e Red pencil – phrase
In the first case, word order conveys such a characteristic as predicativeness. In the second case, the sign has nothing to do with real time, its manifestation and location.
In the first case, a specific object in a specific time (here and now).
The absence of predicativity deprives the word of communicativeness.
The phrase and the word (word form) bring together the trace of the saint:
1. not a communicative unit, included in speech only as part of a sentence
2. does not have predicative meanings, message intonation
3. acts as a nominative means of language
4. has a system of forms, and an initial form, which is established according to the initial form of the main word
differences:
more complex word structure
includes at least 2 significant words (main or core and dependent), formed on the basis of subordinate connections
A phrase enters a sentence through its main word, which in a sentence can be a dependent word of another phrase
in contrast to words, they give a detailed name for objects and phenomena, while limiting their range by indicating certain holy properties
Soc-e vile and tale: “The earth is round”
essay writing, i.e. homogeneous rows: “Cheerful, cheerful”
a paired combination of words that forms a composite nomination: father and mother (parents), day and night (days)
soch-e-tov, between which semi-predicative relations arise (noun-mean + participial/adverbial phrase): “The house rising outside the window blocks the sun” = the house rises outside the window.
Connecting structure: “We had to make sure of this, and soon" - an connecting part of information that is additional to the main content of the sentence. (attachment relations)
Shakhmatov – a parallel point of view: the phrase does not exist as a self-unit; any combination of words is a phrase; the term collocation has a broader meaning.
Is it worth distinguishing between a sentence and a word as syntactic units?
In the works Shcherby, Shakhmatova it is necessary to distinguish them.
U Fartunatova they are considered in one row: completed (sentences) and unfinished phrases.
Trubetskoy says that there are predicative syntaxes (prepositions) and non-predicative syntaxes (words).
Peshkovsky One-word constructions are also classified as phrases.
^ Classification of phrases according to the nature of syntactic relationships:
Attributive– relationships in which an object or phenomenon is determined from the point of view of its external or internal quality, sacredness, affiliation.
Attributive-qualitative meaning (hard work, porcelain teapot)
Attributive-quantitative (second number, two friends)
Attributive-subjective (the artist’s singing, the clank of wheels)
Attributive-possessive (fox tail, my house, grandfather’s house)
Attributive-objective (defense of the fatherland, price of bread)
Attributive-temporal (travel in winter, a habit from childhood)
Attribute-target (drawing table, cough medicine)
Object- the relationship between the action, state or sign called in the word and the object towards which the action is directed or associated.
object of direct application of action (build a house, dig beds)
Object of desire, search, achievement, removal (to crave happiness, to wish good luck, to fear meeting)
Object of coverage (eat berries, drink water)
Object of speech perception (speaking to a friend)
Object of emotional relationship (enjoy music, enjoy spring)
Tool object (writing with a pen, digging with a paw)
Recipient object (write to mother, give to child)
Circumstantial– relative, in which an action, state or sign is determined in terms of its quality or the conditions of its manifestation
qualitative-circumstantial meaning (look closely, look with regret)
measures and quantities (weigh a kilogram, cost a hundred rubles)
spatial (rest in the village, turn right)
temporary (learning from childhood, sitting until dark)
causal (cry for joy, say rashly)
targeted (to do out of spite, to say as an excuse)
conditions (to carry out if funds are available, to escape in case of flooding)
acquiescent (to walk despite the rain, to clear up despite the prediction)
replenishing relatives (to be considered an eccentric)
the dependent word is expressed as a noun in R.p.
R.p. with the meaning of the subject (birds singing (=bird singing), thunderclap)
R.p. chatsi of the whole (mountain peak (=mountain peak), chair leg)
R.p. supplies (student notebook = student notebook)
R.p. definitive (man of feat = heroic man)
R.p. in the function of the object, i.e. object on which the action is directed (reading a book)
Relation of the subject to the manager (plant director)
R.p. content (purpose of travel)
Complementary relationships (replenishing) –
relationships, measures, quantities (basket of flowers, kilogram of flour)
dependent word expressed noun in Tv.p.:
defining relations
the meaning of the accompanying feature (hair with gray hair – gray hair)
object relations
etc. togetherness (cat and kittens)
etc. spreads a verbal noun (dispute with a neighbor)
Connection:
Mandatory – the absence of a dependent word creates structural and semantic incompleteness
Optional - dependent component is optional
Coordination– the form will subordinate the connection, which is expressed by assimilating the form of the dependent word to the form of the core word in gender, number and case.
Word order is preposition of the dependent word.
Subsubstantive connection (core word - noun\ substantivized word (delicious second)
Coordination:
Complete (in gender, number and case) – beautiful girls
Incomplete (not all gram forms are likened): our doctor\ appendix.
Control– the species will subordinate the connection, which is expressed by joining the main word of the noun in the cosv case with or without a preposition (to build a house capable of feats, a walk in the forest, on the sly from parents)
There are different types of control:
Verb: make jam
Substantive: playing with fire
Adjective: visible from above
Pronoun: someone in white, someone you know
Numerical: two houses, five days
Narechnoye: long before dawn, up the path
Impersonal-predicative: sorry for a friend
Comparative: long before dawn, above your head
Word order - postposition of the head of the word
Control:
Strong – necessary connection between the case form of the name and the dictionary or grammatical form of the verb (move down the mountain, angry at everyone, alone with yourself):
cases with interchange verbs or direct control (V.p. without preposition)
R.p. parts (drink milk, read a book)
R.p. denial (not loving a friend)
the preposition repeats the prefix of the verb (to reach the forest, to get down from the tree)
numeric (three boys)
Weak - the connection is not necessary, when the case is not obligatory and the lexicon or gram of St. control words is not predicted (to come for things, harm to health, invitation to dinner)
Adjacency– the type will subordinate connections, with unchangeable words and word forms acting as dependent components, for example:
adverb: turn right
infinitive: ask to come
gerund: to go out of breath
comparative: work better
indeclinable adj: flared skirt
As part of the adjacency, the following phrases are distinguished:
verb: to sleep soundly
substantive: hat on one side
adjective: friendly, caring
numbered: twice two, third from left
with impersonal predicative words: it’s a pity, it’s desperately needed
There are connections:
strong: he weighed a lot - mandatory distribution
weak: he reacted very joyfully - no distribution necessary
parallelism (application)– appositive combinations, consisting of two entities that have the same case form. (winter sorceress, old hunter, Russula mushroom, female astronaut, Gorki village, boy-woman, unfortunate hotonic, girl named Katya).
personal:
substantive (warm day, roof of a house, old man with glasses, meeting alone, desire to please)
adjectival (red with embarrassment, very inquisitive, well-known, white speckled)
with a numeral as the main word (two students, two friends, the first on the list)
with a pronoun as the main word (one of the students, someone else, any of the listeners)
verbal (read a book, read aloud, want to travel, speak while smiling)
adverbial (adverbial): very fun, far from family
with sks as the main word (it hurts my arm, I'm sad)
Simple phrase includes two components, between which there is one type of syntactic relationship.
^ Complex phrase consists of three or more components, between which there are two or more types of syntactic connections. free phrases – each component retains independence due to sufficient information content (each member functions independently): work in the garden, wait for an answer.
Unfree– the completeness of the lexical meaning of one of the components is weakened or it is informatively insufficient (close cohesion of the components and the functioning of such a word as one member of the sentence): five tables are considered allies, start building, master of speech
^ Syntactically indecomposable combinations of words :
1) quantitative-nominal combinations: head word - Gen.p., main word - (I.p., R.p. with the preposition before, with, about, over\with nar in the middle degree more, less):
Five years fell on the soldiers' shoulders
Few weeks disasters pass by
More than half of people screamed immediately
One hundred trees each the estate is growing
We're off the bones looked at each other
Each of us will stand at the very edge of the site
pronoun in I.p. + pronoun\number\adj in I.p.
All this will seem like a masterpiece of nature to you.
His movement was something feverish.
3 Offer.
The sentence is the basic unit of syntax, since it is in the sentence that the most essential functions of language are found: cognitive or expressive (language as a tool, an instrument of thinking) and communicative (language as a means of communication).
The modern definition goes back to the structural-semantic direction, the founder of which was Vinogradov.
Offer – a unit that represents a specific situation.
Offer– a means of expressing theme-rhematic relations.
Offer – one of the forms of expression.
Offer- this is an integral unit of speech, grammatically designed according to the laws of a given language, which is the main means of formation, expression, and communication of thought (Vinogradov)
According to a number of characteristics, a simple sentence is contrasted with units of a lower syntactic level.
Word and sentence.
Functionally, a sentence is always larger than a word in its syntactic form. Nominative proposal ^ Wind. in the context of Tyutchev’s poem (1) Wind. Everything around is humming and swaying, Leaves are spinning at your feet... performs a different function than a word wind in its dictionary meaning (movement of air flow in a horizontal direction), realizing the nominative function in the phrases western, gusty, sea wind. Form named after case in a sentence not only names the phenomenon, but also reports its observability: it acts as independent, indefinable. Wed. with offer (2) The wind sleeps and everything goes numb. Just to fall asleep..., in which the state of the wind is characterized by the word sleeping in the present tense. Together with the intonation of the completed message, the word form wind in example (1) conveys existential meaning, i.e. has a modal-temporal meaning of real relevance (observability) to the moment of speech, which turns it into a sentence, into a communicative unit, as in example (2)
Word and phrase.
A sentence is also different from a phrase. Let's compare the use of the phrase Starlight Night from F. Tyutchev: (3) Quiet, starry night, The moon shines tremulously, Sweet are the lips of beauty On a quiet, (4) starry night.
Example (3) is similar to a one-word sentence ^ Wind, because denotes a certain situation, and in example (4) the phrase becomes dependent on the predicate sweet position, it as a whole, like the word, performs the function of nomination. The phrase implements attributive relations (what night?), which are expressed by the connection of complete agreement. Offer Starry night is a message about a real fact in the present tense. Here, relations that are different from those in the phrase are realized: the name of the phenomenon + its characteristics, i.e. the pairing of two concepts between which relationships of mutual dependence predetermined by syntactic positions are established (predicative).
Statement and proposal.
Statement– any linear segment of speech that performs a communicative function (dialogue from Pushkin “Eugene Onegin”).
Formulated as separate sentences, interjection utterances are not divided into sentence parts: Really? Really?
In modern consideration of the proposal, the relation is very relevant sentence - statement. It should be taken into account that a statement and a proposal are phenomena of the same order, but not identical. MM. Bakhtin believed that statement- this is a sentence addressed to someone, connected with previous and subsequent texts that determine the speaker’s intention, overgrown with extra-textual meanings. That's why They're calling. is both a sentence and a statement, and a sentence Boy reading a book contains two statements: boy reads, boy reads a book.
Unlike a sentence (as a unit of language and speech), a statement entirely belongs to the sphere of speech: it belongs to a certain sender, is aimed at a certain recipient, produced at a certain point in time, committed for a certain purpose, correlates with a certain fragment of reality (situation), fulfills a certain communicative function and turns out to be appropriate (meaningful) precisely in a given speech situation.
A sentence, a unit of grammar, usually corresponding to a complete statement and capable of acting as a separate message (text of minimal length). A sentence consists of words appearing in morphological forms and in a linear order, which are provided for by the grammar of the language.
Aspects of logical, psychological, formal and grammatical definition of a sentence.
Boolean(Buslaev): a sentence is a judgment expressed in words, it can express a question, an emotion. Sentences different in composition and structure can express the same judgments (I'm having fun. I'm having fun).
Psychological(Potebnya, Ovsyannikov-Kulikovsky): A sentence is a word, or such an ordered combination of words, which is associated with a special movement of thought, known as
predicates. The main feature of a sentence is predicability (verb in personal form). But! Noun – impersonal and infinitive.
Logical-psychological direction(Shakhmatov): A sentence is a message expressed by a combination of ideas - a predicative connection.
^ Formal-grammatical direction (Fortunatov, Peshkovsky): A sentence is a complete phrase.
Signs of an offer.
Offer- this is a statement that is based on an abstract grammatical pattern (a certain scheme, model). This grammatical pattern has a typical grammatical meaning. All sentences constructed according to this pattern have this meaning. This value is called predicativity.
Predicativity– the relationship of the content of a sentence to reality, expressed in the forms of tense, modality and person.
Time
Temporal definiteness: associated with a verb in the indicative mood, a participle in the passive form
Temporal uncertainty
The indirect form of expressing time is the infinitive.
To the basic meaning of temporal certainty and uncertainty, various temporary shades or connotations are added to the sentence (from time to time - phraseology, regular repetition).
The offer has intonation design(completeness; intonation of a message, question, motivation..) Therefore, intonation is one of the constant characteristic features of a sentence.
It is a means of highlighting the semantic center.
The sentence is constructed according to an abstract pattern, scheme. ^
Structural diagrams
form the basis of different sentences - the main members of sentences are identified and on this basis the structure of the sentence is determined as two-part or one-part, characterization of the distribution of main members by secondary ones, identification of syntactic completeness/incompleteness of the structure, characterization of types of complication.
4. MODALITY.
an integral part of predicativity. Modality expresses the speaker's attitude towards what is being communicated in the sentence.
Determining the content of the modality category:
Broad view:
contrasting statements according to communicative purpose
opposite high on the basis of affirmation/negation
gradation of modal values in the range “real-unreal”
subjective-modal meaning
^ Objective modality - a mandatory feature of any statement.
- real(indicative)
- surreal(subjunctive, modal verb, short adjective with modal meaning: “need to start”, “need to start”).
Meaning real modality characterized by temporal certainty. Meaning unreal modality– uncertainty.
In a sentence, lexico-grammatical forms of predicate expression can be used in a figurative meaning - transposition(transfer of meaning of grammatical form).
Everyone lower their collars (inf will command the knuckle)
a) real modality - forms will express the following:
Present time (it is working)
Past time (he worked)
Bud.time (it will work)
Subjunctive mood (conditional) – would (he would work)
Desirable mood - would it work
The meaning of incentive (commands the knuckle) - let it work!
Obligation - he must/obliges to work
The complete paradigm is sevenfold. Consists of forms of change of the predicate from the point of view of change of forms of temporal meaning.
In this system of form changes, the commonality in dictum(proposition, invariant). The opposition/difference between them forms mode.
The meaning of objective modality is a mandatory feature of an utterance. This value is optional, maybe. enclosed in a “modal shell” - subjective modelability.
^
Semantic scope of subjective modality:
1) evaluation value
A) intellectual (rational, logical)
B) emotional (irrational)
C) aesthetic (beautiful - ugly)
D) ethical (truth - false)
2) expression (expressiveness) – expressive components (“Libra of the unsteady heart”)
^
Means of expressing subjective modality
1) introductory words and components
2) modal particles: What an event! -surprise, Maybe go for a walk - guess
3) interjections (ah, oh, alas)
4) word order (he will listen to you)
5) special syntactic constructions (she say yes and say no to wait)
^
Affirmation/denial modality
On the basis of affirmation, negation of a sentence are contrasted on the basis of whether the connection between the subject of speech and its predicative attribute is affirmed or denied:
The day was cool - will approve the proposal
It wasn't him - they deny it
Negative Suggestions:
generally negative(negation refers to the predicate): “Father did not come”
partial negatives(negation refers to some other component of the sentence): “He gave me not a letter, but a small note” (the object is negated)
Means of expressing negative modality:
negative word NO
negative particles NOT, NOR
negative pronouns NOBODY, NOTHING
modal predicative words with a negative meaning (impossible, impossible)
Some sentences with a negative particle do NOT take on an affirmative meaning. This happens when:
a double negative gives a statement as part of a compound verbal tale: “The breadth of her interests could not help but amaze me”
It’s impossible + not – double negative: “it’s impossible not to notice that...”
Who/what/how + not in exclamatory sentences: “Who in the old Tanya, poor Tanya, would not recognize the princess now” (anyone would recognize)
Sentences with combinations who neither, where nor, whatever - intensifying, not negative: “Whoever you are, my sad neighbor, I love you as a friend of my youth” (=any, everyone)
In the subordinate part of the SPP: “no matter where you turn, there are children everywhere”
Sentences in the affirmative form may contain expressive negation (I will feed the dog!), a discrepancy between the plan of expression and the plan of content.
Predicativity– a specific relationship between the subject of speech/subject and its modal temporal feature. In this understanding of predicativity, modality is part of it.
According to the communicative orientation, statements are distinguished declarative, interrogative and incentive sentences.
By the presence or absence of emotional coloring - exclamation and non-exclamation. Voskl sentences are characterized by exclamation intonation, the presence in their composition of interjections, pronouns and adverbs (which, such, as, so, that for), acquiring the properties of emotional-enhancing particles.
According to the nature of the communicative nature of the question, the sentences can be divided into:
proper interrogative– the speaker sets the goal of obtaining some information from the interlocutor.
Improper interrogatives are not aimed at obtaining information:
Interrogative and incentive– contain a wish, request, advice, etc. (Perhaps you should go to the hut, Savely? You will read something to us, won’t you?)
Interrogative-rhetorical- sentences containing affirmation or negation (Well, who among us is not happy about spring?)
^ Incentives – the speaker expresses a request, advice, order, warning, wish, etc., i.e. encourages the interlocutor to take some action.
Incentive sentences always have the meaning of unreal modality. Simple interrogative and declarative sentences are contrasted with imperative ones as sentences that have the meaning of both real modality (more often) and unreal (less often).
Means of expression: forms will command the direction of the word, will induce particles (let, yes, come on...)
5. Word order and actual division of sentences.
Depending on the communicative goal pursued by the speaker, the same lexical composition of a sentence can acquire different meanings:
1) due to word order
2) due to actual division
^
Communicative/actual division
– division into a given (original) topic and a new (known) rheme.
Words and phrases - according to grammatical rules and laws peculiar to a given language - are combined into sentences.<...>
* Vinogradov V.V. Selected works. Research on Russian grammar. M., 1975. S. 254-294.
A sentence is a grammatically formed unit of speech according to the laws of a given language (i.e., further indivisible into speech units with the same basic structural features), which is the main means of forming, expressing and communicating thoughts. Language as a tool of communication and exchange of thoughts between all members of society uses the sentence as the main form of communication. The rules for using words in the function of sentences and the rules for combining words and phrases in a sentence are the core of the syntax of a particular language. On the basis of these rules, different types or types of sentences characteristic of a given specific language are established. The sentence expresses not only a message about reality, but also the speaker’s attitude towards it.
Each sentence, from a grammatical point of view, represents the internal unity of its verbally expressed members, the order of their arrangement and intonation.<...>
Analysis of the main grammatical categories found in the structure of a sentence and defining it, for example, the categories of tense, modality, predicative combination of words, etc., shows the specificity of the sentence, its fundamental differences from the judgment, despite its close connection with it. A judgment cannot exist outside of a sentence, which is the form of its formation and expression. But if a judgment is expressed in a sentence, this does not mean that the purpose of any sentence is to express only a judgment.
The type of sentence does not remain static. It can have different variants, which arise on the basis of modification and subsequent abstraction of certain components of the sentence, on the basis of enrichment and improvement of its structure. Thus, the historically established structure of a nominal two-part (or two-part) sentence primarily varies depending on the composition of the predicate, which can be expressed by different nominal categories (noun, adjective, numeral, pronoun) or a nominal adverb and include a copula, semi-nominal or semi-auxiliary verb. For example: Cosmopolitanism is nonsense, cosmopolitan is zero, worse than zero(Turgenev. “Rudin”); All this was dumped in storerooms and everything became rotten and torn(Gogol. “Dead Souls”); You will be a hero in appearance and a Cossack in soul(Lermontov. “Cossack lullaby”); She was known as an eccentric(Turgenev. “The Noble Nest”). Those varieties of nominal sentences that contain so-called semi-nominal verbs like to remain - to remain, to be considered, to seem, to appear, to appear, to be called etc., approach the verbal type of sentence, are verbal-nominal.
The compound - nominal and at the same time verbal character - is even more pronounced in sentences with a complex predicate, which includes, in combination with a noun or adjective, verbs of movement or state (such as come, return, walk; work, live, sit, lie and so on.). For example: No one is born a hero, Soldiers mature in battle(L. Oshanin. “Soldiers mature in battle”).<...>
The distinction between two main types of sentences - two-part and one-part - has become firmly established in the scientific syntax of the Russian language.<...>
The question of the forms and types of grammatical construction of one-part sentences requires further in-depth study. It is extremely important to understand the specific features of their structure in relation to the main types of two-part sentences. It goes without saying that it would be inappropriate to strive to find “subjects” and “predicates” or any of their “equivalents” in all types of one-part sentences. However, in some of their forms one can find morphological correspondence to one of the main members of a two-part (two-part) sentence. For example, a sentence The hail hit the rye is in synonymous grammatical connection with a two-part sentence The hail beat the rye. Therefore beat is perceived as the predicate of a one-part sentence expressed in the impersonal form of the verb. The morphological category of impersonality, characteristic of the verb, seems to sanction a special syntactic form of the predicate, not correlative with the subject. Vaguely personal proposals (They say they ask you not to smoke etc.) and generalized personal sentences (If you like to ride, you also like to carry sleds) also functionally and syntactically (in the presence of peculiar semantic and stylistic shades) differ little from two-part concrete-personal verbal sentences (cf. I sit and think - I sit and think; You see your mistakes - You see your mistakes and so on.). In indefinite personal sentences, the 3rd person plural form of the verb denotes a personal action carried out by an indefinite number, an indefinite set of persons; in generalized personal sentences, the 2nd person form expresses an action associated with the collective person, with any person in general.<...>
We have to admit the existence of such sentences, the purpose of which is not to express a judgment, but to express a question and motivation as special varieties of thought.<...>
When studying the rules for composing sentences, syntax must first of all find out how words and phrases, combining in the structure of a sentence as its members, form a sentence - this basic syntactic unit of linguistic communication - and what are the characteristic constructive and grammatical features of a sentence. In our domestic grammatical science, two general characteristic features of a sentence in the Russian language have been put forward, although the relationship and interaction of these features remains not entirely defined to this day. This is the intonation of the message and predicativeness, i.e. the relation of the expressed content to real reality, manifested in the totality of such grammatical categories that define and establish the nature of the sentence as the main and at the same time primary grammatically organized unit of speech communication, expressing the speaker’s attitude to reality and embodying a relatively complete thought. The presence of both of these signs is mandatory for an offer.
<...>Words and phrases, connected in a sentence for the most part through the same techniques of coordination, control and adjacency that are characteristic of word connections within a phrase, without the appropriate organization of their intonation means do not yet constitute messages. Intonation means establish and determine the communicative meaning of words in a sentence, determine the division of the sentence and ensure its internal unity. Thanks to intonation, not only combinations of words, but also individual words can acquire the meaning of sentences.<...>One can doubt that in every sentence, even in a conversational sentence of a sharply emotional, grammatically undifferentiated nature like: Well well! That's it! Vania! Still would! Here you go! Ah ah ah! etc., a predicative combination of subject and predicate is expressed, but there is no doubt that these expressions or statements are characterized by the intonation of the message. The intonation of a message is thus an important means of formalizing a sentence and acts as one of the constant characteristic features of a sentence. It is in this feature that one of the fundamental differences between a sentence and a phrase lies.
The difference in intonation largely determines the main functional and at the same time modal types of sentences - narrative, interrogative and incentive sentences.<...>
The main intonational means that perform the main functions in the organization of a sentence are stress and melody.<...>Intonation, however, does not exhaust and does not determine the grammatical essence of the sentence and, with its variations, does not determine or create the entire variety of types of sentences in the Russian language.<...>
Intonation itself, i.e. outside the verbal content, outside the relationship of speech to reality, it does not express dissected, complete, logically constructed thoughts. Intonation is not a means of forming and embodying a thought; without words it can be expressive, but it is not meaningful, i.e. does not serve as a material shell of thought. We can say about the intonation of a message that it is only a form of expression of a more or less closed unit of speech (sentence). However, intonation is not at all a form of grammatical construction of a sentence. True, intonation can serve as a means of transforming words and phrases into sentences and can perform a predicative function, but intonation is not characterized by objective semantic content.<...>In forms of communication such as written speech, intonation often fades into the background.<...>
The structure of the sentence is associated with its own special syntactic categories, based on morphological categories, but going far beyond them: the categories of tense and modality, as well as - in a broad syntactic sense - the category of person, i.e. those categories that express the relationship of the message to reality and are subsumed under the general concept of “predicativity”; these categories can be characteristic of the sentence as a whole - regardless of the presence of a verb in its composition. Thus, verbless one-part sentences containing only one single concept or idea, appropriately related to reality (for example: Freezing. Quiet! Attention! etc.) are units of speech communication, grammatically organized on the basis of the same categories of modality and time.
Among one-term (or single-component) sentences in the Russian language there are sentences whose function is reduced to a simple affirmation or denial, an expression of agreement or disagreement, or a general expressive-modal assessment of the previous utterance. These are sentences that are based on affirmative or negative words. Yes And No, modally colored words and particles (such as: really? hardly! maybe! Certainly! probably! etc.), interjections and words close to interjections. The inner essence of the modal function of words like yes, no, definitely etc., is clearly reflected in the fact that sometimes in dialogical speech they become peculiar substitutes for the verbal predicate with its inherent meanings of time, person and mood, for example: Did you have a vacation last year? - Last year, yes; Do you agree to stay with your mother? - Yes, with your mother, but no with Petka. At the same time, the word Yes may be part of a complex sentence as one of its main components: - Is there a breeze in the alley? - Yes, because the leaves are shaking; - Do you owe him, or what? - That’s my problem, yes.
Suggestions like yes, no, of course etc., often very expressive, express the modal qualification of the message and sometimes contain an incentive to some action, therefore, they also express the syntactic category of modality.<...>Therefore, modal words-sentences have always been considered as a special type of sentences,<...>not having and not being able to have any members of the proposal - main or secondary. And yet they have modal meanings. Sentences of this type are used primarily in dialogical speech, in responses and interrogative remarks of interlocutors. They can, as echoes of internal dialogue, be used in monologue speech, when confirming what has already been said, when contradicting oneself and in other similar cases.
Here are some illustrations: [Podkolesin] (with a smug smile). But it should be extremely embarrassing if they refuse.[Kochkarev] Still would!(Gogol. “Marriage”); - Well, you have few sins. - Oh, after all, - Levin said, after all, - “reading my life with disgust, I tremble and curse, and complain bitterly...” Yes.(L. Tolstoy. “Anna Karenina”).
Thus, the meaning and purpose of the general category of predicativity that forms a sentence is to relate the content of the sentence to reality. This is the difference between the word winter with its characteristic lexical meaning and sentence Winter in this Pushkin verse: Winter. What should we do in the village?<...>
The general grammatical meaning of the relation of the main content of a sentence to reality is specified in the syntactic categories of modality, as well as tense and person. It is they who give the sentence the significance of the main means of communication, turning the building material of language into living, effective speech.<...>
The relationship of the message contained in a sentence to reality is, first of all, modal relationships. What is being communicated can be thought of by the speaker as real, present in the past or present, as being realized in the future, as desirable, required from someone, as invalid, etc. The forms of grammatical expression of various kinds of relations between the content of speech and reality constitute the syntactic essence of the category of modality. The category of modality determines the differences between different modal types of sentences. In addition to the forms of verbal moods, the category of modality is expressed by modal particles and words, as well as intonation.<...>The modality of infinitive sentences is determined by the form of the infinitive itself and intonation, and is enhanced and differentiated by particles. The modal meanings of these sentences are also characterized by the fact that they denote an action that will take place in the future or should be taken by the will of the speaker. For example: [Sofia] I wish I could bring you and my aunt together, so that I could count all my acquaintances(Griboedov. “Woe from Wit”); One minute, one more minute to see her, say goodbye, shake her hand(Lermontov. “Princess Mary”); Do not grow grass after autumn; Flowers do not bloom in the snow in winter(Koltsov. “Russian Song”); When is it time to limp here? Here, my brother, there is no time for lameness anymore(Sholokhov. “Quiet Don”).
In the so-called infinitive-nominal sentences, the completeness of the entire sentence is conveyed by intonation, expressing a subjective-modal attitude to the action: Is it possible to! sell me! - For kissing me, a fool...(Lermontov. “Masquerade”); [Sasha] She became very nervous.[Karenin] Don't sleep for two nights, don't eat.[Sasha] (smiling). Yes, you too...[Karenin] I'm another matter(L. Tolstoy. “The Living Corpse”).
The category of time is closely related to the category of modality. A sentence as a form of communication about reality includes the syntactic meaning of time. This meaning is created not only by the forms of the tenses of verbs, short adjectives and the category of state (with the help of a copula), but also by verbal forms of the mood (cf., for example, the connection of forms of the imperative mood with verbal forms of the future tense), and also, with certain intonations, by the form infinitive; in messages about the present or the past, depicted as present, the meaning of time is also expressed by the absence of a morphological form with a grammatical meaning of time. The syntactic meaning of time, created by the situation and context of speech, is also inherent in such sentences as Fire![meaning: 1) “shoot!”, 2) “light a fire” or “bring fire!” and 3) “fire is visible”]; Brr!(meaning: “cold” or “I’m cold”); It's time, it's time! Silence. Just a minute! And etc. In question-answer sentences that make up a paired unit, the meaning of time in the answer is often predetermined by the preceding interrogative sentence.
Since a sentence, as the main form of speech communication, serves both as a means of expressing thoughts for the speaker and as a means of understanding the expressed thought for the listener, the structure of the sentence also includes different ways of expressing the syntactic category of a person.<...>In the Russian language, the grammatical category of person, associated with the characteristic of the relationship of speech to the speaker (or speakers), to the interlocutor (or interlocutors) and to the third person that can be discussed, is expressed mainly by the forms of pronouns and verbs. In strictly defined types of sentences, the attitude towards a person can also be expressed through special intonations (demands, incentives, requests, orders or reproaches, desires, etc.). For example: Be a citizen! Serving art, live for the good of your neighbor(Nekrasov. “Poet and Citizen”); Farewell, free elements!(Pushkin. “To the Sea”); And, of course, what about the bills?(Krylov. “Demyanov’s ear”); Quite a lot of nonsense lies(Pushkin. “The Captain’s Daughter”); And to you, bride seekers. Don't bask and don't yawn(Griboedov. “Woe from Wit”). Wed. sentences like: Thank you. Out! Away! Down with the warmongers! Water! and so on.
Apparently, the most direct, constant and immediate expression of the category of predicativity is the modality of the sentence. If predicativity expresses a special relation of speech to reality or the correlation of speech with reality (cf. the word war and suggestions: War! War? War. Devastated fields. Even more terrible are the ruins of cities), then the category of modality dissects and differentiates this general function of the sentence, denoting a specific quality of attitude to reality - on the part of the speaker.
As for the syntactic category of time, it, one way or another, directly or indirectly, makes itself felt in every sentence. But - in the absence of morphological methods of expression - it does not find direct expression in intonation, as a category of modality; in this case, it can be derived from the modality, as if included in it, just as this happens in the forms of the verbal mood, for example, imperative, which potentially contains a relationship to the objective future time or the desired present, subjunctive, which contains the negation of a fact in the past, sometimes emphasizing the unrealized possibility of its manifestation, sometimes the desirability of the flow of action in the present or its execution in the future, even the infinitive, in which the syntactic meaning of time accordingly follows from the various modal functions of this form.
In connected speech, the relation of a sentence to time can also be determined or expressed by context and situation. For example: Ka-a-k! You bribe me!(Saltykov-Shchedrin. “Provincial Sketches”); And everywhere on the floor - How much iron is there!(Tvardovsky. “More about Danila”); Eh, I'm smoking! Like from a hellhole!(Bubennov. “White Birch”); What to do and how to deal with a neighbor, So that from singing push him away?(Krylov. “Treater and Shoemaker”). The category of person as a structural element of a sentence is potential. It is expressed, in addition to the personal forms of the verb, also by the forms of personal pronouns, for example, the dative case in combination with the infinitive, and in some constructions, for example, infinitive or nominal, adverbial and interjectional with imperative meaning, by intonation. It goes without saying that in so-called impersonal or subjectless sentences the category of person is revealed negatively.<...>
Here are some examples of various syntactic expressions of the 2nd person category: Are you not interested in us now, Timofey Vasilyevich?(A. Zharov. “Accordion”); You should lie down... What's wrong with you?(Krymov. “Tanker “Derbent””); Here! Behind me! hurry up! hurry up! More candles and lanterns(Griboedov. “Woe from Wit”).<...>
In any sentence the category of predicativity finds its full or partial expression. The ways of its expression, associated with the syntactic categories of person, tense and modality, are morphological, constructive-syntactic and intonational-syntactic.<...> Come on! Good night! “Fire! screaming... fire!(Krylov. “Wolf in the kennel”); Execution tomorrow morning(Pushkin. “Poltava”); [Agniya] The weather! Even surprising! And we are sitting(Ostrovsky. “Not everything is Maslenitsa for the cat”); [Neschastlivtsev] Where and from where?[Happy] From Vologda to Kerch...(Ostrovsky. “Forest”); [Bakin] However, it's time to get down to business(Ostrovsky. “Talents and Admirers”); I'm running at full speed On the side of the sled - and Sasha is in the snow!(Nekrasov. “Sasha”); Finally, the carriage is at the porch. The aunties get out of it and bow to their father(Saltykov-Shchedrin. “Poshekhon Antiquity”); Citizens, for guns! To arms, citizens! ( Mayakovsky. "Revolution"); [Julia] Where are we going?[Fedor Ivanovich] To the dam... Let's go for a walk... There is no better place in the whole county... Beauty!(Chekhov. “Leshy”); What courage one must have to, for example, perform operations or cut up corpses! Terrible!(Chekhov. “Name Day”).
The variety of forms and ways of expressing predicativity, different types of combination and interweaving of syntactic categories of time and modality, wide possibilities for expressing the speaker’s attitude to reality through modal intonations, the emotional-volitional influence of the speaker on the listener and his emotional-volitional reaction to the listener through the same intonations. certain facts, phenomena of reality - all this is found in the variety of specific linguistic forms (or types) of sentences in the modern Russian language.<...>
The correlative members of a sentence, connected by predicative relations, are the subject, expressed by the nominative case of a noun or pronoun (as well as a substantivized word), and the predicate, expressed by the personal form of the verb, the short form of the participle, adjective or other morphological means.
Sentence members are syntactic categories that arise in a sentence based on the forms of words and forms of phrases and reflect the relationships between the structural elements of the sentence. There is a connection and even interaction between parts of speech and members of a sentence, but there is no parallelism. The syntactic essence of a word or an indivisible phrase as a member of a sentence is determined by the function that it carries in the structure of the sentence.
In the structure of a sentence, the same form of a word, depending on its relationship to other words, can perform the functions of different members of the sentence. It is not always possible to fully comprehend these functions in terms of different types of phrases. Phrases, entering the structure of sentences, undergo transformations here. They are grouped near the main constructive centers of the proposal, i.e. around its predicative core. For example, in the sentence This man is smart combination Withmind acts as a predicate. Its syntactic equivalent is the short form of the adjective smart The predicative function of this expression can be directly derived from the attributive one: a man with intelligence. However, in the structure of the proposal A man with intelligence will not be lost phrase a man with intelligence from a semantic point of view, it is not decomposable and generally performs the function of the subject. One word Human as a subject is in itself too abstract and vague (cf. A smart person will not be lost And A smart person will not be lost). But cf. individualization of the word Human by means of a demonstrative pronoun this and isolation combinations Withmind in a sentence: This man, with intelligence, talent, and great passions, lived a bright, interesting life. In a sentence WITHconceived with the mind, but done without the mind combination Withmind serves to characterize the action and no longer acts as a definition, but as a so-called circumstance of the manner of action with the predicate. Its synonymous equivalent is the adverb smart. Finally, in a sentence Heart and mind are not in harmony(which is a modification of the famous Griboyedov aphorism “The mind is not in harmony with the heart”) Withmind acts as a complement, since here it denotes an accomplice in the action, i.e. an object compared with the subject of the state, with the subject heart.
On the other hand, in dialogical speech there are sentences that are a monosyllabic replica of a bright modal coloring, an expressive assessment of the interlocutor’s message (for example: Certainly! Still would! No matter how it is! Really? and so on.). Naturally, such undivided expressive one-word sentences are not overgrown with other words or members, since the forms of syntactic connection here do not even have morphological support for themselves. In relation to such proposals, the concept of “sentence members” is generally inapplicable.
The grammatical division of a two-part (two-part) sentence in the Russian language is determined (and even predetermined) by the stability of the so-called nominative sentence structure in the family of Indo-European languages. The subject has a completely definite and strictly stable form of expression: it can be expressed by the nominative case of a noun and an objective-personal pronoun (or by a substantivized “equivalent” of a name - a word or a whole phrase, for example, in Gogol’s “Sorochinskaya Fair”: - Have you heard what people say? - he continued with a bump on his forehead, casting his gloomy eyes sideways at him), quantitative-nominal combination, infinitive ( The Rooks Have Arrived; Where are you going? To offend and deceive him would be both sinful and pathetic.).
<...>The form of the predicate (where morphologically possible) is similar to or coordinated with the form of the subject. The morphological ways of expressing the predicate in the Russian language are very diverse. The role of a predicate can be not only verbs in personal forms, as well as in the form of an infinitive, participle, and in isolated cases - gerunds, but also a full and short adjective, a pronoun, a numeral, a noun in the nominative and indirect cases with and without a preposition, an adverb , interjection. The predicate can be simple and compound or complex; The role of the predicate is often played by entire phraseological units, set phrases, sometimes even complex sentences, for example, in the aphorism attributed to A.P. Chekhov: “Love is when something seems to be what is not there”(cf. in the story by Yu. Trifonov “Students”: Somewhere from an old writer: “Love is when you want something that doesn’t exist and doesn’t happen.” It has always been this way - Montagues and Capulets, Madame Bovary, Anna Karenina. For them, love was life, and life was torment. And the tragedy of their suffering is that, fighting for their love, they fought for life. This was the case before, in ancient times. “Love is when you want something that is not there, but that will definitely be”). <...>
The linguistic form of a sentence is not determined entirely by its grammatical composition - the relationship of subject and predicate. In fact, a sentence exists as a certain unity of its composition, intonation and word order. Let's use a simple example to substantiate and develop this idea. Offer The train has arrived conceals the possibility of different meanings if you change the order of words and vary the so-called logical stress. So, The train has arrived(with emphasis on the grammatical predicate) - this is a message about the arrival of a train; The train has arrived(with emphasis on the subject) - this is a message that the train has arrived. When words are rearranged, new shades appear: The train has arrived(some train that was not discussed, that was not expected); The train has arrived(the one that was needed, that they were waiting for).<...>
The essence of logical stress is to emphasize a particular word or phrase in a given sentence.<...>Any word of a sentence (or a whole phrase - if it is emphasized by intonation), bearing a logical emphasis, can become a predicate, a predicate.<...>With the appropriate use of intonation means, a logical (or psychological) predicate can be expressed by any word of a sentence. Associated with this is the possibility of expressing a number of thoughts, sometimes completely different, through the same lexical-syntactic composition of a sentence. When the logical emphasis is shifted, the same “formal-grammatical sentence” is divided in different ways into parts that differ in the degree of importance and “novelty” of the message: one of these parts expresses the given, already known content of the thought, the other expresses something new, revealed and communicated in speech. The part of the sentence highlighted by emphasis becomes the most important member in a given connection and in a given situation, the verbal expression of a logical or psychological predicate (“psychological predicate”), and all other members of the sentence must express the subject (or subject) in relation to this predicate. From this point of view, the grammatical doctrine of the main and minor members of a sentence establishes only an external, formal scheme for the structure of a sentence, since in the same sentence the subjects and predicates of different judgments find different expressions. For example, it is indicated that, thanks to stress, the expression of a predicate can become an object with its attributes.<...>
There are noteworthy attempts to free the study of the corresponding range of phenomena from bare formal-logical interpretation. Thus, the Czech linguist V. Mathesius proposed to distinguish between the general formal-grammatical, structural division of a sentence and its “actual division”, expressing the immediate, specific meaning of a given sentence in the appropriate context or situation.<...>With actual division, one should first of all highlight the “starting point” or “base” of the statement, i.e. that in a given situation, in the given conditions of communication, speech, is known or at least obvious and from which the speaker proceeds, and the “core of the utterance,” i.e. what the speaker expresses in connection with or in relation to the “starting point”. The connections of one and the same sentence in its formal structure with a specific situation and context can be very different. Consequently, depending on the differences in possible situations and context, the actual division of a sentence can be very diverse. Very often, these differences in the comprehension of the same sentence are expressed in variations in the order of words, and, accordingly, in the order in which the base and core of the statement follow each other. In a declarative sentence, the usual word order is starting with the statement of the stem (i.e., what is known) and moving towards the core of the statement; this order can be called objective. But when, as a result of specific emotional motivation (due to the speaker’s excitement, inner interest, his desire to emphasize something, etc.) - there is a need to grammatically express the emotion, the speaker’s attitude to the subject of the message, then a subjective word order is formed. In this case, the speaker begins with the core of the statement and only then adds its basis, revealing only at the very end of the speech the connection with the situation or context. Such a subjective order of word arrangement, placement of the core of the statement and its basis is normal in interrogative, imperative and exclamatory sentences. Actual division is the main factor determining the order of words in a sentence, as well as its division into intonation-semantic groups.<...>
According to this view, the different semantic load of the members of a sentence, expressed by word order, logical stress, etc., lies in the fact that they denote either something given, known to the listener, serving as the starting point of the utterance, or something communicated as new, the main thing in the statement; new is what the message is made for - its meaning, purpose.<...>
The basic principle of ordinary word arrangement in calm business speech is to put in first place the member of the sentence (or group of them) that expresses the given, and then that which is reported as new. However, in language there are often deviations from this arrangement of words, the essence of which is that the new precedes the given. This achieves a stronger emphasis on the new, hence greater expressiveness of speech. This word order is especially characteristic of emotionally charged speech, and is also used as an emphatic device for stylistic purposes. This emphatic word order can be not only reverse, but also direct, if the subject expresses not the given, but the new. Wed. A misfortune happened to them And They had an accident and so on.<...>
The subject and predicate as the main members of the sentence are contrasted with the secondary ones: definition, complement and circumstance.<...>
In the secondary members of the sentence, the various grammatical relationships that are found between words in the structure of phrases are, as it were, synthesized, generalized according to function. In sentence structure, phrases are connected and arranged in a strictly defined hierarchical perspective. Serving to explain the main members of the sentence - subject and predicate, secondary members can, in turn, be defined and supplemented by secondary members that explain themselves. For example: The moon makes its way through the wavy fogs, It pours a sad light onto the sad meadows(Pushkin. “Winter Road”); In the languor of hopeless sadness, In the worries of noisy bustle, a gentle voice sounded to me for a long time, And I dreamed of sweet features(Pushkin. “To A.P. Kern”); Tired of long storms, I did not at all listen to the Buzz of distant reproaches and praises(Pushkin. “The Desire for Glory”).<...>
Syntactic features of secondary members of a sentence are formed and developed on the basis of firmly established morphological categories and their functional-syntactic complexity in a system of different types of phrases. This is how the category of definition was established, the morphological core of which was qualitative and relative adjectives. No less definite are the morphological foundations of the category of addition: the forms and functions of the indirect cases of nouns and pronouns in cases where the objective meaning of the name is not absorbed by shades of a defining and adverbial nature and does not dissolve in them. The morphological basis of the syntactic category of adverb is made up of adverbs and functionally close forms of indirect cases of nouns (usually with a preposition), when the meanings of adverbial relations are fixed in them.<...>
In the verbal social practice of conversational exchange of thoughts, in connection with a specific situation, in the presence of facial expressions and gestures as auxiliary means of expression, with great expressive power of intonations, such structural types of sentences are formed in which there is no verbal expression of any individual members that are clear from the context and situations. For example: There is not a single soul in the hallway. He's in the hall; next: no one(Pushkin. “Eugene Onegin”); [Osip] Where to here?[Bear] Here, uncle, here(Gogol. “The Inspector General”); [Khlestakov] What, only two dishes?[Servant] Only with(ibid.); “Which faculty are you at?” she asked the student. “Medical(Chekhov. “Name Day”); - Hot water! - he says to her as he walks. - And a clean robe, but you’ll wash this one today(Panova. “Satellites”).
Such sentences, in the verbal fabric of which one or more members are “missing”, are usually called incomplete. However, most often such sentences cannot be grammatically supplemented without violating the syntactic norms of the modern Russian language.<...>When taking into account all means of expression, situation and context, when taking into account the structural and grammatical features of the so-called incomplete sentences, almost each of them will turn out to be “complete”, i.e. adequate for its purpose and properly fulfilling its communicative function.<...>
The syntax of the Russian language usually distinguishes between a simple sentence and a complex sentence. In fact, what is called a simple sentence is sometimes a very complex structure. A simple sentence not only has various forms of its construction, different types, but it can be complicated by the presence of separate and homogeneous members.
Homogeneous are those members of a sentence expressed in individual words or whole phrases that not only perform the same syntactic function within a given sentence, but are also united by the same relationship or the same affiliation to the same member of the sentence.
For example, in the sentence During the day, dry, fine snow fell on the frozen ground...(Gorky. “Mother”) adjectives dry And small, each of which directly relates to the word snow as its definition, are homogeneous definitions. In a sentence Coarse, wet snow lazily swirls around the newly lit lanterns and falls in a thin, soft layer on the roofs, horses’ backs, shoulders, and hats.(Chekhov. “Melancholy”) nouns in the accusative case ( on)roofs,(equine)backs, shoulders, hats form a group of homogeneous additions that are in the same syntactic relationship to the predicate lies down(for something).
Homogeneous members of a sentence may not be combined into a single sequential chain of enumeration, but rather located in groups united through conjunctions.
The main ways of expressing the homogeneity of sentence members are coordinating connections (through connecting, disjunctive, adversative and comparative conjunctions), enumeration intonation and connecting pauses.
For example: The ocean walked before my eyes and swayed, and thundered, and sparkled, and faded, and glowed, and went somewhere into infinity.(Korolenko. “Without language”); The forest rang, groaned, crackled(Nekrasov. “Sasha”).
A simple sentence, regardless of the presence of homogeneous members in it, is united by the generality, the unity of its predicative core. After all, even in a sentence with several homogeneous predicates, these predicates refer to a single subject common to all of them. The difference between simple and complex sentences is structural. A simple sentence is organized through a single concentration of forms of expression of the categories of time, modality and person; in a complex sentence there may be several structural centers of this kind organically connected with each other.
The internal unity of thought, expressed by a complex sentence using intonation, as well as means of syntactic communication, solders these parts into one syntactic whole, into the unity of the sentence. A complex sentence as a whole has a meaning that is not derived from the simple sum of the meanings of its parts, which in their construction are close to simple sentences.
The building material for a complex sentence is not a word or a phrase, but a simple sentence. A complex sentence is a sentence that represents a single intonation and semantic whole, but consists of parts (two or more) that, in their external, formal grammatical structure, are more or less of the same type as simple sentences. Although the parts of a complex sentence are similar in external structure to simple sentences, as part of the whole they do not have the semantic and intonation completeness characteristic of the category of sentence, and, therefore, do not form separate sentences.
For example, Chekhov’s story “Rothschild’s Violin” begins with such a complex sentence, which is made up of four parts, connected by conjunctions and allied words, and which forms a single semantic and intonation whole: The town was small, worse than a village, | and almost only old people lived in it, | who died so rarely, | which is a shame.<-..>
As a method of initial orientation, you can use the traditional division of complex sentences into complex, complex and non-conjunctive.<...>
Compound sentences are complex sentences, the parts of which are united using conjunctions by connecting, comparative, disjunctive or adversative relations. Despite the apparent equality of the parts, they form a structural, syntactic and semantic unity in which the individual parts are interdependent. The means of connection and at the same time interdependence of the individual parts of a complex sentence are coordinating conjunctions, intonation, as well as the structural relationship of these parts.<...>
1) In the distance the mill still flaps its wings, and it still looks like a little man waving his arms(Chekhov. “The Steppe”).
In addition to the commonality of tense forms in both sentences, the connection between the parts is also established by the use of the pronoun she in the second sentence and correlative parallelism of words and phrases: still flaps its wings - still... looks like... a little man waving his arms. Wed. Days passed after days, and each day was similar to the previous one(Dostoevsky. “Poor People”).
2) You were always strict with me, and you were fair...(Turgenev. “Rudin”).
3) If there is a shade of cause-and-effect relationship: I realized that I was a child in her eyes - and it became very difficult for me!(Turgenev. “First Love”). Wed. different ratio of the main parts: It became stuffy in the hut, and I went out into the air to freshen up.(Lermontov. “Bela”).
In a complex sentence I realized that I was a child in her eyes - and it became very difficult for me! an impersonal sentence expresses a state as a consequence of what is reported in the first part of a complex sentence. The perfect past tense forms, found in both parts of a complex sentence, express a sequence of events.
In a complex sentence It became stuffy in the hut, and I went out into the air to freshen up. the impersonal proposal is brought to the fore. It reports the onset of a state of stuffiness, as a result of which the hero left the saklya.
Thus, structurally, the parts of these complex sentences are of the same type, but their position, their order within the whole may change.
Characteristic is the parallelism of the structure of both parts of a complex sentence connected by the conjunction A, in the presence of lexically matching elements, but with the absence in the second part of a complex sentence of any member of the sentence already named in the first. For example:
Three girls ran into one door, and the valet ran into another(Pushkin. “The Queen of Spades”); Katerina Ivanovna and her grumpy husband went to her room, and her daughter went to hers.(Lermontov. “Princess Ligovskaya”); [Mykin] A single man thinks about service, but a married man thinks about his wife(A. Ostrovsky. “Profitable Place”); Yegorushka looked at him for a long time, and he looked at Yegorushka(Chekhov. “The Steppe”).<...>
In complex sentences, the parts are united by subordinating conjunctions, relative pronouns and pronominal adverbs, intonation of successive rise and fall, as well as the ratio of tense forms, less often - mood or correlation of other members.
<...>Let us take as a simple example complex sentences with relative subordination of the attributive meaning. The diversity of their types is due not only to differences in the meanings of the attributive parts associated with different relative words - which, which, what, whose and so on. and with correlative demonstratives - this one, that one and so on. It is also due to different types of correlation of tense forms in parts of a complex sentence. For example: The sea slept in the healthy, sound sleep of a worker who was very tired during the day(Gorky. “Chelkash”). (Wed. The sea slept like the healthy sleep of a worker who is very tired during the day.);It was a typical Donetsk city, whose life without a plant is meaningless and impossible(V. Popov. “Steel and Slag”). (Wed. It was a typical Donetsk city, whose life without a plant was meaningless and impossible.)
In addition, from complex sentences of this type with purely attributive parts, one should decisively separate those in which the part introduced by the relative pronoun performs not a attributive, but a distributive-narrative function. Here we usually find slightly different principles of the relationship between forms of time, and some peculiarities in the structure of the second part. Indicative in this case is the impossibility of using a demonstrative pronoun in the first part. For example: ...I mounted my good horse, and Savelich mounted a skinny and lame nag, which one of the city residents gave him for free...(Pushkin. “The Captain’s Daughter”). If it were said: on t u a skinny and lame nag, which one of the city residents gave him for free, then the meaning would be different, definitive: there would be an indication of an already known, previously mentioned nag, with which some episodes in the previous narrative were connected; past tense form gave would have received the meaning of the past (“once, once given”). Pronoun That serves to indicate a specific, isolated object, distinguished from a number of others.
Wed. other types of relative subordinating constructions with distributive-narrative meaning: I took her question seriously and told her the procedure, at the end of which the doors of the temple of science should open before me(Gorky. “My Universities”); Today I met a wonderful artist who speaks with his eyes, mouth, tip of his nose and fingers, with barely noticeable movements, turns(Stanislavsky. “The actor’s work on himself”). Wed. Today I met a wonderful artist: he speaks with his eyes, mouth, ears...
It is curious that for both types of these complex sentences with relative subordination, synonymous constructions of simple sentences with participial phrases are possible.<...>
Along with this, in the system of complex sentences there are sentences in which both parts are not only mutually subordinate, but are, as it were, related phraseologically. Sentences of this type include conjunctive phraseological combinations that create the backbone of the sentence and determine the scheme of its syntactic construction. The phraseological unities underlying such structures are separated (“distant”): one part of them is placed in the first part of a complex sentence, usually at the beginning of it, the other begins the second part. For example: He called the commander and did not have time to utter two words when something scorching scalded his shoulder.(Vs. Ivanov. “Parkhomenko”). Wed. also complex sentences based on phraseological combinations: didn't pass... how...;it was worth... like... and etc.
Thus, the structural types of complex sentences are very diverse.<...>
§ 1. Subject of syntax. The term “syntax” is used to designate both the object of study and the branch of the science of language. The syntax of a language is its syntactic structure, a set of laws operating in the language that regulate the construction of syntactic units. Syntax as a science is a section of grammar that covers the syntactic structure of a language, the structure and meaning of syntactic units. “Syntax” is a Greek word (syntax) that literally means “composition”, “construction”, “structure”. Indeed, syntax as the science of the syntactic structure of a language makes it possible to show the system of syntactic units, the connections and relationships between them, what and how they are composed of, how, and by what means components (elements) are connected into syntactic units.
The fundamental concepts of syntax are concepts about the system of syntactic units, syntactic relations, syntactic connections (and means of communication) and grammatical (syntactic) semantics.
§ 2. System of syntactic units. Syntactic units are constructions in which their elements (components) are united by syntactic connections and relationships. As part of syntactic units, inflected words are used in one of their forms (word forms), which together form the morphological paradigm of the word. Yes, in a sentence By morning frost will stick to_ pine branches_(Kedrin) 7 words, but 5 word forms, since the preposition is an element of the word form and is part of the members of the sentence. In this sentence, the number of word forms and sentence members coincides, but such a relationship is not always observed. In a sentence Heavy evening dew must have settled on the grass(L. Tolstoy) 7 word forms, but 5 sentence parts.
Word forms are studied both in morphology and syntax. In syntax, word forms are considered as building elements of syntactic units.
Word combinations are built from word forms: warm rain, half of the night, starting to drizzle and so on.
Simple sentences are built from word forms and phrases: Warm rain began to drizzle from mid-night(Paustovsky).
Complex sentences are constructed from simple sentences, differing in the degree of semantic and grammatical cohesion. Yes, from the proposals The wind blew from land And The water was calm near the shore You can form complex non-conjunctive, complex and complex sentences: The wind blew from land - the water was calm near the shore; The wind blew from the land, and the water was calm near the shore; If the wind blew from land, the water was calm near the shore.(Other variants of complex sentences are possible.)
A complex syntactic whole is built from simple and complex sentences." For example: Our people have always loved, known and appreciated the forest. It’s not for nothing that so many fairy tales and songs have been written about our dense forests. In the forests lies our future, the fate of our harvests, our deep rivers, our health and, to a certain extent, our culture. Therefore, the forest must be protected, just as we protect human life, as we protect our culture and all the achievements of our extraordinary era.(Paustovsky). In this complex syntactic whole, simple and complex sentences are united by a common microtheme. The means of expressing interphrase connections and relationships are intonation (in oral speech), word order, pronominal adverb, and therefore the repetition of the word forms forest and our. So, the main syntactic units are a phrase, a sentence (simple and complex), and a complex syntactic whole. This hierarchy of syntactic units reflects a view of them “from below.” Syntactic units can also be considered in a different sequence (“from above”): a complex syntactic whole can be divided into simple and complex sentences, complex sentences into simple (predicative parts), predicative parts into combinations of words (including phrases), and in combinations of words and sentences, highlight word forms (members of the sentence).
These two approaches to the identification of syntactic units reflect different levels of the syntax system, in which lower-level units are included in higher-level units and, conversely, higher-level units are divided into lower-level units. Syntactic units of a lower level in constructions of a higher level act as elements (components!) that enter into syntactic connections and relationships with each other. For linguistic and methodological purposes, the first approach is more legitimate (from less complex constructions to more complex ones), although the second approach is more “syntactic”, since it allows you to show how syntactic units function in speech, how they change, combining with each other, entering into those or other connections and relationships. Thus, simple sentences within complex ones lose their semantic and intonation independence, the order of components in speech may change, combinations of words may appear that cannot be constructed outside the sentence, etc. These include predicative combinations (combinations of subject and predicate) , rows of homogeneous members of a sentence, etc. For example, in the sentence And the trees, air and meadows sounded, rang (Yashin) there is not a single phrase in a strict terminological meaning, but there is only a predicative combination and composed series of word forms in the position of subject and predicate.
The difference between the approaches “from below” and “from above” is especially clear when comparing word forms and sentence members. Word forms are the minimal elements of syntactic units, from which phrases and sentences are formed. Members of a sentence are structural and semantic components of a sentence. They exist only as part of a sentence and are isolated from it. As part of a sentence, word forms act as members of a sentence or are part of them.
A look “from below” and “from above” at the same syntactic phenomenon makes it possible to see its different sides, therefore, when describing individual syntactic units, both approaches will be taken into account or the one that will show more significant features of syntactic units.
Methodological note. At school, students practically become familiar with all of the specified syntactic units, only, instead of a complex syntactic whole, “text” is introduced, which is defined as “several sentences related in meaning and grammatically”"
§ 3. Syntactic connections and relationships. Syntactic connections and relationships between elements (components) of syntactic units are the main feature of syntactic constructions. 2 A syntactic connection is an expression of the relationship of elements in syntactic units.
The main types of syntactic connection are composition and subordination. When composing, syntactically equal components are combined, while subordinating them - syntactically unequal components: one acts as the main one, the other as the dependent one. A coordinating connection connects homogeneous members and parts of complex sentences, a subordinating connection connects word forms within phrases and sentences, as well as parts of complex sentences.
Syntactic connections of elements of syntactic units express syntactic (semantic) relationships, which reflect the relationships between objects and phenomena of reality. Reality is reflected in language through generalization in logical and psychological categories: judgments, concepts and ideas. Language performs the function of communication only because thought is formed and expressed in it.
Syntax in a language system begins where there are syntactic relationships between elements.
Syntactic relations are divided into predicative and non-predicative. Predicative relations are characteristic of the grammatical basis of a sentence: subject and predicate. Non-predicative relations, in turn, are divided into coordinating and subordinating (attributive (definitive), objective and adverbial). They can occur between components of all syntactic units.
Under the influence of syntactic relations, elements can change some of their properties. Thus, a word form in space has the lexical and grammatical meaning of place. In the phrase flights in space (cf.: space flights) between word forms flights and in space attributive relations arise that complicate the lexical-grammatical meaning of the word form in space.
§ 4. Means of syntactic communication and construction of syntactic units. To construct syntactic units, word forms, function words, typified lexical elements, intonation, word order, etc. are used. They also serve to formalize syntactic connections and relationships.
Word forms, as minimal elements of syntactic constructions, serve the semantic side of syntactic constructions with their lexico-grammatical properties, and the elements of word forms that have syntactic meaning are endings and prepositions.
The main function of the ending is to express syntactic connections and relationships between word forms in phrases and sentences. Therefore, the ending is called a service morpheme. The role of endings is especially important in the design of subordinating connections: in coordination and control.
Note. Of the other morphemes, prefixes (prefixes) are important for syntax in some cases, especially those that are part of verb forms. They often determine the associative (valence) properties of verb forms and correlate in their role with prepositions: enter a room, walk to the forest, take a break from work, drive down a mountain, etc. The word forms include prepositions that complement and enhance the auxiliary role of endings. In a sentence Yellow leaves lie on cold gray marble(Kedrin) 6 word forms (the preposition na is part of the word form on marble, despite the fact that it is separated from the noun by adjectives). Connections and relationships between word forms in this sentence (and the phrases that are in this sentence) are formalized using endings and the preposition na.
The role of derived prepositions in the expression of syntactic connections and relationships is especially pronounced, since they, while maintaining living word-formation connections with significant words, concretize and clarify the semantics of the word forms in which they are included. Wed: at the house - near the house, opposite the house, behind the house, past the house, around the house, along the house, etc.
Other function words - conjunctions and particles - are also important means of constructing syntactic units. Conjunctions, connecting homogeneous members of a sentence, parts of complex sentences and components of a complex syntactic whole, express their grammatical meanings. For example, subordinating conjunctions when, before, after, etc. express the meaning of time, because, since, for etc. - the meaning of the reason, So- the meaning of the consequence.
Less clear indicators of grammatical meanings are coordinating conjunctions, but they also express semantic relationships between the components being composed. These shades are recognized with varying degrees of clarity by speakers for whom Russian is their native language.
The range of unions is constantly being replenished. Their functions are assumed by some significant parts of speech, modal words, and particles. Conjunctions are often accompanied by semantic specifiers that clarify and differentiate the expressed meanings: and yet, and yet, and therefore, etc. Wed: Not only people, but also ideas can cause surges of hatred(Paustovsky) - Both people and ideas can cause... The increase in the range of allied means is due to the desire to clarify the shades of semantics of statements. Particles and their combinations can form indivisible sentences (Yes. No. But of course! Well, so what! Of course! Etc.), formulate the syntactic meanings of sentences, sentence members, act as semantic specifiers, independently perform the functions of means of communication of syntactic units, highlight the semantic center of statements, etc.
Particles are not included in the members of a sentence if they formulate the grammatical meaning of the entire sentence. For example: Is it really possible that room conditions will remain in the cabin at thousand-degree temperatures?(Stepanov). In other cases, particles, like prepositions, are part of the sentences: Curly lilac bushes here and there seemed to be sprinkled on top with something white and purple(L. Tolstoy). An important role in the construction of syntactic structures is played by the lexical means of the language, which are called typified. These include pronominal words: interrogative and relative (who, what, which, where, where, etc.), demonstrative (this, that, such, etc. in different forms; there, there, therefore and under); lexical-semantic groupings of words of other significant parts of speech (they can be combined thematically, as well as by synonymous or antonymic connections, etc.).
Typical lexical means also take part in the formation (construction) of simple sentences. Thus, interrogative pronominal words are one of the means of forming interrogative sentences, a lexico-grammatical group of impersonal verbs ( it's getting light, it's freezing etc.) forms the structural center of one-part impersonal sentences; thematic group of verbs with the meaning of speech ( talk, say and so on) - component of sentences with direct speech, etc.
For the structure of syntactic units, the order of their components is very important, which is determined by semantic and structural factors. In Russian, the order of the components of syntactic units has two types: direct (fixed) and inverted (free). With direct order, each component of syntactic constructions occupies a certain place, with free order, the components can change their place.
One of the means of expressing syntactic meanings and the emotional and expressive coloring of syntactic units is tone, the constituent elements of which are the melody of speech (raising and lowering the voice when pronouncing sentences), rhythm, tempo and timbre of speech, as well as logical stress, highlighting the information center in a sentence.
Intonation is included among the essential features of a sentence, since it is one of the indicators of completeness and integrity of a sentence in oral speech; intonation formalizes the types of simple sentences distinguished by the purpose of the statement, gives them an emotional coloring, expresses syntactic connections and relationships between members of the sentence, etc. Intonation is also very important when expressing the verbal meaning of a sentence: it can turn a positive assessment into a negative one, etc. Intonation characteristics of syntactic units in written speech (in the language of fiction) are often given with the help of lexical-semantic groups of words that perform the functions of circumstances of the manner of action, with verbs of speech: with reproach, with reproach... angrily, joyfully... quickly, slowly...; quietly, loudly... with emphasis on... and so on.
Several means are usually involved in the construction of syntactic structures.
§ 5. Grammatical meanings of syntactic units. In the morphology of parts of speech, lexical and grammatical (categorical, general grammatical) meanings are distinguished. The same is true in syntax. All syntactic units and their components have lexical (speech, individual) and grammatical (linguistic, syntactic, categorical, etc.) meanings.
Let us consider in the most general form the difference between lexical and grammatical semantics using the example of some phrases and sentences.
Let's take two series of phrases: warm day, magnificent palace, ironic smile; sing songs, shed tears, take tests. Each of these phrases has its own lexical meaning, determined by the lexical meanings of the words included in these phrases. In addition, the first group of phrases differs from the second in grammatical meaning, due to the different structure of these phrases. Thus, the first row has a general grammatical meaning - “an object and its attribute” (definitive relations), the general grammatical meaning of the second row is “the action and the object to which the action is transferred” (object relations). These general meanings are called the grammatical meanings of phrases. The question of the semantics of sentences is currently the subject of heated debate, however, some provisions have already entered into the practice of university and school teaching, since without attention to semantics it is impossible to study syntactic units.
In sentences Students listen to lectures; Pupils learn lessons; Collective farmers harvest crops- grammatical meaning - a message about an object and its action (predicative feature)
In sentences Do students listen to lectures? Are students learning lessons? Do collective farmers harvest crops?- grammatical meaning - a question about the subject and its action.
In sentences Students, listen to the lectures! Students, learn your lessons! Collective farmers, harvest the crops!- grammatical meaning - encouragement to action.
These general meanings of sentences can be supplemented with the grammatical meaning of phrases: listen to lectures, learn lessons, harvest crops(“action passing on to an object”)
Let's compare the following series of proposals: Students listen to lectures; Students work with a book; Our best students work hard; Students work in the evenings; Students working in the library etc. All these sentences have a common grammatical meaning - “a message about an object and its action.” The difference is determined not only by different speech, but also by different typical meanings of phrases: objective, attributive, adverbial.
Thus, grammatical (linguistic, syntactic) semantics is the general meaning of syntactic units of the same structure. Lexical semantics is the speech, specific, individual meaning of a particular syntactic unit associated with the lexical meanings of words and word forms.
Note. In school and university practice of teaching the Russian language, the concepts of “language” and “speech” are not clearly opposed, but they are not identified either. They are considered as two sides of one phenomenon, interconnected and complementary. In accordance with this, the term “linguistic semantics” is often used as a generic name for the meanings of all language units, and specific designations are used for different levels of the language system. For units of morphology and syntax (sections of grammar), the general term is the term “grammatical semantics,” which can be differentiated: “morphological semantics” for parts of speech (categorical meaning), “syntactic semantics” for units of syntax.
The term “lexical meaning” (“lexical semantics”) is used as a generic name for the individual meanings of speech units in syntax, although it is not entirely accurate, since the “speech meaning” (“speech semantics”) of syntactic units does not arise from a simple sum of lexical meanings combining components, but is complicated by additional semantic shades that are introduced into the semantics of syntactic units by connections and relationships between the components, the entire text as a whole, etc.
Syntactic and lexical semantics of syntactic units and their components differ from each other by different degrees of abstraction: syntactic semantics is the highest level of generalization of lexical semantics. Syntactic and lexical semantics can be represented as different poles, between which lies a zone of transitional phenomena reflecting different stages of abstraction. In this zone of interaction between the grammatical and lexical, structural-semantic types of sentences, phrases, etc. are formed. The syntactic semantics of the varieties of these sentences, phrases, etc. is called typical semantics. Thus, the general grammatical meaning of an impersonal sentence It's cold in the room is a message, and its typical value is the state of the environment; the general grammatical meaning of the subject is the meaning of the subject of speech (thought), and its typical meanings are the doer (producer of the action) and the bearer of the attribute. Wed: The wind howls and the wind is strong. The general meaning of the circumstances is specified by the typical meanings of the circumstances of place, time, reason, purpose, etc. Methodological note. The school textbook discusses the grammatical meanings of both phrases (p. 22-23) and sentences (p. 31) (2 Hereinafter, for references to the school textbook, see: Barkhudarov S. G., Kryuchkov S. E. Maksimov L Yu., Cheshko L.A. Russian language: Textbook for grades 7-8. - 12th ed., revised - M., 1985.) The grammatical meanings of phrases are related to their structure, and sentences - with the meanings of the moods of the predicate verb.
§ 6. Syntax in the language system. In modern research, language is considered as a system of systems in which subsystems (tiers, levels) are distinguished. The lowest tier (level) is phonology, the highest is syntax. The multi-level structure of the “language building” can be called multi-story: syntactic units are located on the top floor, sounds (phonemes) are located on the bottom floor, and the middle floors are occupied by the remaining units in accordance with their functions in language and speech.
Completing the “building of language,” syntactic units cannot exist without support from other floors: without the lower floors, the building will crumble. From above, from the syntactic level, the relationship and interdependence of individual tiers is better visible, so syntax allows you to show organic connections between vocabulary, morphology, syntax, etc.
See for more details: Babaytseva V.V. Semantics of a simple sentence: Sentence as a multi-aspect unit of language. - M. 1983.