» » English Theoretical Grammar


English Theoretical Grammar

1 3 |

>Lecture-Notes in EnglishTheoreticalGrammar


>Theme 1.INTRODUCTION.

Point 1. Thesubject oftheoreticalgrammar anditsdifferencefrompracticalgrammar.

Thefollowingcourse oftheoreticalgrammarserves todescribe thegrammaticalstructure of the Englishlanguageas asystemwhere allpartsareinterconnected. Thedifferencebetweentheoretical andpracticalgrammarlies in thefact thatpracticalgrammarprescribescertainrules ofusage andteaches tospeak (orwrite)correctlywhereastheoreticalgrammarpresentsfacts oflanguage,whileanalyzingthem, andgivesnoprescriptions.

>Unlikeschoolgrammar,theoreticalgrammardoesnotalwaysproduce a ready-madedecision.Inlanguagethereare anumber ofphenomenainterpreteddifferentlybydifferentlinguists.To agreatextent,thesedifferencesaredue to thefact thatthereexistvariousdirections inlinguistics,eachhavingitsownmethod ofanalysis and,therefore,itsownapproach to thematter.Butsometimesthesedifferencesarisebecausesomefacts oflanguagearedifficult toanalyze, and inthiscase theonlything toofferis apossibleway tosolve the problem,instead ofgiving afinalsolution.Itisdue tothiscircumstance thattherearedifferenttheories of thesamelanguagephenomenon,whichisnot thecasewithpracticalgrammar.

Point 2. Themaindevelopmentstages of Englishtheoreticalgrammar.

Englishtheoreticalgrammarhasnaturallybeendeveloping in the mainstream' of worldlinguistics.Observing thefact thatsome languagesareverysimilar tooneanother intheirforms,whileothersarequitedissimilar,scholarsstilllongagoexpressed theidea that languagesrevealingformalfeatures ofsimilarityhave a commonorigin.Attempts toestablishgroups ofkindred languageswererepeatedlymadefrom the 16>thcentury on.Among thescholars whodeveloped theidea oflanguagerelationship andattempted togive thefirstschemes oftheirgenealogicalgroupingswefind thename ofJ.J.Scaliger (1540-1609).

>But aconsistentlyscientificproof andstudy of theactualrelationshipbetween languagesbecamepossibleonlywhen thehistoricalcomparativemethod oflanguagestudywascreated in thefirstquarter of the 19>thcentury.

Thehistoricalcomparativemethoddeveloped inconnectionwith thecomparativeobservation of languagesbelonging to theIndo-European family, anditsappearancewasstimulatedby thediscovery ofSanskrit.

>SirWilliamJones (1746-1794), aprominent Britishorientalist andSanskritstudent,was thefirst topoint out in theform ofrigorouslygroundedscientifichypothesis thatSanskrit,Greek,Latin,Gothic, andsomeother languages ofIndia and Europehadsprungfrom thesamesourcewhichnolongerexisted. Heputforwardthishypothesis in hisfamousreport to theCalcuttaLinguisticSociety (1786),basing hisviews onanobservation ofverbalroots andcertaingrammaticalforms in the languagescompared.

The relationsbetween the languages of theIndo-European familywerestudiedsystematically andscientificallyat thebeginning of the 19>thcenturybysome Europeanscholars,suchasFranzBopp (1791-1867),RasmusKristianRask (1787-1832),JacobGrimm (1785-1863), and A.Ch.Vostokov (1781-1864).Thesescholarsnotonlymadecomparative andhistoricalobservations of thekindred languages,buttheydefined thefundamentalconception oflinguistic >kinship (>relationship), andcreated thehistoricalcomparativemethod inlinguistics. Therise ofthismethodmarks theappearance oflinguisticsas a science in thestrictsense of theword.

>After that thehistorical andcomparativestudy of theIndo-European languagesbecame the principal line of Europeanlinguisticsformanyyears tocome.

Thehistoricalcomparativelinguisticswasfurtherdeveloped in theworks ofsuchscholars of the 19>th and 20>th >centuriesas F.Dietz (1794-1876), A. F.Pott (1802-1887),A.Schleicher (1821-1868) ,F.I.Buslayev (1848-1897), F. F.Fortunatov (1848-1914), F. deSaussure (1857-1913),A.Meillet(1866-1936) andotherlinguists.

>At thebeginning of the 20>th >century the science oflinguisticswentdifferentways andlaterformedintovarioustrends orschools,each ofthemcontributinggreatly to Englishtheoreticalgrammar. Theprocessisstillunderwaynowadays, and itisgoing tobeconsidered indetailfurther on.

>Thus,wemaytentativelytracethreemaindevelopmentstages of Englishtheoreticalgrammar:first (the 16>th >century - thefirstquarter of the 19>thcentury), second (thefirstquarter of the 19>thcentury - the1930s) andthird (the1930s -presentday).

Point 3. Theclassicalscientificgrammar of thelate 19>thcentury and thefirst

>half of the 20>th >century.

>As ithasbeenstatedabove, themainmethod of the 19>thcentury and thebeginning of the 20>th >centurywas thehistoricalcomparativemethod.Valuableas itwasfor thescientificstudy of languages, ithaddefiniteshortcomings andlimitations.

Thehistoricalcomparativemethoddidnotgiveanyexactdefinition of theobject oflinguisticsasanindependent science.Logical,psychological, andsociologicalconsiderationswereinvolved inlinguisticstudies tosuchanextentas toobscurelinguisticsproper.

Thestudy ofnumerous languages of the worldwasneglected, the researchbeing limited to the group of theIndo-European languages.

>Itwasmainly thehistoricalchanges ofphonological andmorphologicalunits thatwerestudied;syntaxhardlyexistedasanelaboratedomain oflinguisticsalongside ofphonology andmorphology. Thepainstakingstudy of theevolution ofsounds andmorphemesled toanatomisticapproach tolanguage.

>As areaction to theatomisticapproach tolanguage a newtheoryappeared thatwasseeking tograsplinguisticevents intheirmutualinterconnection andinterdependence, tounderstand and todescribelanguageas asystem.

Thefirstlinguists tospeak oflanguageas asystem or astructure ofsmallersystemswereBeaudouin deCourtenay (1845-1929) andAcademicianF.F.Fortunatov of Russia, and theSwisslinguistFerdinand deSaussure.

>Therewerethreemajorlinguisticschools thatdevelopedthese newnotionsconcerninglanguage andlinguisticsas the science thatstudies it: thePragueSchool thatcreatedFunctionallinguistics, theCopenhagenSchoolwhichcreatedGlossematics, and the AmericanSchool thatcreatedDescriptivelinguistics. TheImmediateConstituentsGrammarwas afurtherdevelopment ofdescriptivelinguistics; theTransformationalGrammar, thelatest.

ThePragueSchoolwasfounded in 1929,unitingCzech andRussianlinguists:Mathesius,Trnka,NikolayTrubetskoy,RomanJakobson, andothers. Thechiefcontribution ofearlyPraguians tomodernlinguisticsis thetechniquefordetermining theunits of thephonologicalstructure of languages. Thebasicmethodis theuse ofoppositions (>contrasts) ofspeechsounds that change themeaning of thewords inwhichtheyoccur.

TheCopenhagenSchoolwasfounded in 1933byLouisHjelmslev (1899-1959) andViggoBrondal (1887-1942).In 1939 thePrague and theCopenhagenSchoolsfounded thejournal >ActaLinguistica thathadbeenforseveralyears theinternationaljournal ofStructuralLinguistics.In theearly1930s theconception of theCopenhagenSchoolwasgiven thename of >Glossematics (>fromGk. >glossa language).

Point 4. The AmericanDescriptiveLinguistics of the1940s-1950s.

 

>Descriptivelinguisticsdevelopedfrom thenecessity ofstudyinghalf-known andunknown languages of theIndiantribes.At thebeginning of the 20>thcenturythese languageswererapidlydying outunder theconditions of thattime. Thestudy ofthese languageswasundertaken out ofpurelyscientificinterest.

TheIndian languageshadnowriting and,therefore,hadnohistory. Thehistoricalcomparativemethodwas oflittleusethere, and thefirststep ofworkwas tobekeenobservation andrigidregistration oflinguisticforms.

>FrantzBoas,linguist andanthropologist (1858-1942)isusuallymentionedas thepredesessor of AmericanDescriptiveLinguistics.HisbasicideaswerelaterdevelopedbyEdwardSapir (1884-1939) andLeonardBloomfield (1887-1949).Bloomfieldsmainwork >Languagewaspublished in 1933.Alllinguists of the USAatonetime orotherfelt theinfluence ofthisbook.Itis acompletemethodology oflanguagestudy,approaching thelanguageasif itwereunknown to thelinguist (>student). Themainconcepts ofBloomfieldsbookare:

1.Languageis aworkablesystem ofsygnals, thatislinguisticformsbymeans ofwhichpeoplecommunicate.

2.Grammaris ameaningfularrangement oflinguisticformsfrommorphemes tosentence.

Thechiefcontribution of the AmericanDescriptiveSchool tomodernlinguisticsis theelaboration of thetechniques oflinguisticanalysis. Themainmethodsare theDistributionalmethod and themethod ofImmediateConstituents.

Arecentdevelopment ofDescriptivelinguisticsgaverise to a newmethod theTransformationalgrammar. The TGwasfirstsuggestedbyZellig P.S. Harrisas amethod ofanalyzing the >rawmeterial (>concreteutterances) andwaslaterelaboratedbyNoamChomskyas asyntheticmethod of >generating (>constructing)sentences. The TGrefers tosyntaxonly andpresupposes therecognition (>identification) ofsuchlinguisticunitsasphonemes,morphemes andform-classes, thelatterbeingstatedaccording to thedistributional and theIC-analysis orotherwise.CharlesCarpenterFriesisanotherprominentfigure of Americanlinguistictheory.Hismainwork TheStructure of Englishiswidelyknown.


>Theme 1.INTRODUCTION (>continued).

Point 5.Problems of CaseGrammar.

CaseGrammar, orrolegrammar,is amethod todescribe thesemantics of asentence,withoutmodal orperformativeelements,as asystem ofsemanticvalenciesthrough thebonds of themainverbwith therolespromptedbyitsmeaning andperformedbynominalcomponents.

>Example: theverb togiverequires theroles, orcases, of theagent, thereceiver and theobject ofgiving.

Hegivesme abook. Iamgiven abookbyhim. Abookisgiven tomebyhim.

CaseGrammaremergedwithin theframes ofTransformationalGrammar in thelate1960s anddevelopedas agrammaticalmethod ofdescription.

>Therearedifferentapproachestowards CaseGrammarconcerning thetype of thelogicalstructure of thesentence, thearrangement ofroles andtheirpossiblecombinations,i.e. >caseframes,aswellas theway inwhichsemantictiesarereflected in asentencestructurebymeans offormaldevices.

CaseGrammarhasbeenused todescribemany languages on thesemanticlevel. Theresults ofthis researcharebeingused indeveloping >artificialintellect (theso-called >framesemantics) and inpsycholinguistics.

>However, CaseGrammarhasneithercleardefinitionsnorcriteria toidentifysemanticroles;their statusisvague in thesentencederivation;equallyvagueare theextent offulness oftheirarrangement and theboundariesbetween >roleelements andotherelements in asentence.


Point 6. Themainconceptions ofsyntacticsemantics (orsemanticsyntax) andtextlinguistics

Thepurpose and thesocialessence oflanguageare toserveasmeans ofcommunication.Bothstructure andsemantics oflanguageultimatelyserveexactlythispurpose.Forcenturieslinguistshavefocusedmainly onstructuralpeculiarities of languages.Thismaybeeasilyexplainedby thefact thatstructuraldifferencesbetween languagesaremuchmoreevidentthandifferences incontents; thatiswhy thestudy of thelatterwasseenas research inconcrete languages. Thecorrectness ofsuchanassumptionisprovedby thefact that of allsemanticphenomena themoststudiedwerethosemostideoethnic,forexample,lexical andsemanticstructure ofwords.Asforsyntacticsemantics,whichis inmanyaspects commonforvarious languages, itturned out tobeleaststudied.Meanwhile, thestudy ofthisfield oflanguagesemanticsis ofspecialinterestforatleast tworeasons.Firstly,communicationisnotorganizedbymeans ofseparatewords,butbymeans ofutterances, orsentences.Learningspeechcommunication,fullyconveyedwith thehelp oflanguage information,isimpossiblewithoutstudyingsentencesemantics.Secondly,studying thesemanticaspect ofsyntacticconstructionsisimportant,besidespurelylinguistictasks,forunderstanding thepeculiarities andlaws ofmansthinkingactivities.Language andspeechare thebasicsource of informationwhichis afoundationforestablishing thelaws,aswellas thecategories andforms, ofhumanthinking.Thus,languagesemanticsisasimportant andlegalobject oflinguisticstudyaslanguageformsare.


Point 7.Modernmethods ofgrammaticalanalysis: theI.C.method (>method ofimmediateconstituents), theoppositional,transformational andcomponentialmethods ofanalysis.

(a) TheICmethod,introducedby Americandescriptivists,presents thesentencenotas alinearsuccession ofwordsbutas ahierarchy ofitsICs,as a >structure ofstructures.

>Ch.Fries, whofurtherdeveloped themethodproposedbyL.Bloomfield,suggested thefollowingdiagramfor theanalysis of thesentencewhichalsobringsforth themechanism ofgeneratingsentences: thelargestIC of asimplesentenceare theNP (>nounphrase) and theVP (>verbphrase), andtheyarefurtherdividediftheirstructureallows.

>Layer 3 Therecommendingcommitteeapproved his promotion.

>Layer 2

>Layer 1

Thedeeper thelayer of thephrase (thegreateritsnumber), thesmaller thephrase, and thesmalleritsICs. Theresultingunits (>elements)arecalledultimateconstituents (on thelevel ofsyntaxtheyarewords).If thesentenceiscomplex, thelargestICsare thesentencesincludedinto thecomplexconstruction.

Thediagrammaybedrawnsomewhatdifferentlywithoutchangingitsprinciple ofanalysis.This newdiagramiscalled a >candelabradiagram.

The manhit theball.


P.S


>Ifweturn theanalytical (>candelabra)diagramupsidedownweget a newdiagramwhichiscalled a >derivationtree,because itis fitnotonly toanalyzesentences,butshows how asentenceisderived, orgenerated,from theICs.

TheICmodelis acomplete andexacttheorybutitssphere ofapplicationis limited togeneratingonlysimplesentences.Italsohassomedemeritswhichmake itlessstrongthantransformationalmodels,forinstance, incase of theinfinitivewhichis atrickything in English.

(b) Theoppositionalmethod ofanalysiswasintroducedby thePragueSchool.Itisespeciallysuitablefordescribingmorphologicalcategories. Themostgeneralcaseis that of thegeneralsystem oftense-forms of the Englishverb.In thebinaryopposition >present::past the secondmemberischaracterizedbyspecificformalfeatures either thesuffix ->ed, or aphonemicmodification of theroot. Thepastisthus amarkedmember of theoppositionasagainst thepresent,whichisunmarked.

Theobviousoppositionwithin thecategory ofvoiceis thatbetweenactive andpassive; thepassivevoiceis themarkedmember of theopposition:itscharacteristicis thepattern '>be+Participle II',whereas theactivevoiceisunmarked.

() Thetransformationalmethod ofanalysiswasintroducedby AmericandescriptivistsZ.Harris andN.Chomsky.Itdealswith thedeepstructure of theutterancewhichis thesphere ofcovert (>concealed)syntactic relations,asopposed to thesurfacestructurewhichis thesphere ofovert relations thatmanifestthemselvesthrough theform ofsinglesentences.Forexample: Johnran.Shewrote aletter.

>But: 1)Shemadehim agoodwife.

2)Shemadehim agoodhusband.

Thesurfacestructures ofthese twosentencesareidenticalbut thesyntacticmeaningsaredifferent, and itisonlywith thehelp ofcertainchanges (>transformations) that thecovert relationsarebrought out:

1)Shebecame agoodwifeforhim.

2) Hebecame agoodhusbandbecauseshemadehimone.

Thetransformationalsentencemodelis, infact, theextension of thelinguisticnotion ofderivation to thesyntacticlevelwhichpresupposessetting off theso-called >basic or >kernelstructures andtheirtransforms,i.e.sentence-structuresderivedfrom thebasiconesaccording to thetransformationalrules.

>E.g. Hewrote aletter. Theletterwaswrittenbyhim.

>Thisanalysishelpsone tofind outdifference inmeaningwhennoothermethodcangiveresults, itappearsstrongenough insomestructureswith theinfinitive inwhich theICsare thesame:

1) Johniseasy toplease.

2) Johniseager toplease.

1)Itiseasy - -Itiseasy (>forsmb.) toplease John

>Smb.pleases John - - Johniseasy toplease.

2) Johniseager - -

Johniseager toplease.

Johnpleasessmb. - -

(>d) Thecomponentialanalysisbelongs to thesphere oftraditionalgrammar andessentiallyconsists of >parsing,i.e.sentence-memberanalysis thatisoftenbased on thedistributionalqualities ofdifferentparts ofspeech,whichsometimesleads toconfusion.

>E.g.Myfriendreceived aletteryesterday. (>A+S+P+O+AM)

>Histaskis towatch. (>A+S+V(+?)

>Histaskis tosettle allmatters. (>A+S+V+?+A+O)


>Theme 2.GENERALCHARACTERISTICSOFTHESTRUCTURE

>OFMODERNENGLISH.

Point 1. Thecorrelation ofanalysis andsynthesis in thestructure of English.

>Languagesmaybesynthetical andanalyticalaccording totheirgrammaticalstructure.

>Insynthetical languages,suchas,forinstance, Ukrainian, thegrammatical relationsbetweenwordsareexpressedbymeans ofinflexions:e.g. .

>Inanalytical languages,suchas English, thegrammatical relationsbetweenwordsareexpressedbymeans ofform-words andwordorder:e.g. thepalm of thehand.

>Analyticalformsaremostlyproper toverbs.Ananalyticalverb-formconsists ofone ormoreform-words,whichhavenolexicalmeaning andonlyexpressone ormore of thegrammaticalcategories ofperson,number,tense,aspect,voice,mood, andonenotionalword,generallyaninfinitive or aparticiple:e.g. Hehascome. Iamreading.

>However, thestructure of alanguageisneverpurelysynthetic orpurelyanalytical.Accordingly in the Englishlanguagethereare:

1.Endings (>speak>s,table>s,brother>s,smoke>d).

2.Innerflexions (>man men,sp>ea>k sp>o>ke).

3. Thesyntheticforms of theSubjunctiveMood:were,be,have, etc.

>Owing to thescarcity ofsyntheticforms theorder ofwords,whichisfixed in English,acquiresextremeimportance: Thefishermancaught afish.

Adeviationfrom thegeneralprinciple ofwordorderispossibleonly inspecialcases.


Point 2.Peculiarities of thestructure of English in thefield ofaccidence (>word-building andword-changing).

>Affixes,i.e.prefixes andsuffixes, in the Englishlanguagehave adualdesignation someareused inword-building,others inword-changing.Word-buildingisderivation of newwordsfrombasicforms ofsomepart ofspeech.Word-changingisderivation ofdifferentforms of thesameword.Word-building andword-changinghavetheirownsets ofaffixes:theircoincidencemayonlybepureaccidentalhomonymy (>cf.=confer >er inagentivenouns writer, and >er in thecomparativedegree ofadjectives longer).Theremaybeoccasionalcases of aword-changingsuffixtransformationinto aword-buildingone: Iam in astrongposition to know ofher >doings.

Englishprefixesperformonlyword-buildingfunctions, andarenotsupposed tobeconsidered inthiscourse.Asforsuffixes,theyaredividedintoword-building andword-changingones; thelatteraredirectlyrelated to thegrammaticalstructure.

Point 3.Peculiarities of the Englishlanguage in thefield ofsyntax.

Englishsyntaxischaracterizedby thefollowingmainfeatures:

1) Afixedwordorder in thesentence;

2) Agreatvariety ofword-combinations;

3)Anextensiveuse ofsubstituteswhichsave therepetition of aword incertainconditions (>one, that,do);

4)Availability ofnumerousform-words toexpress thegrammatical relationsbetweenwords in thesentence orwithin theword-combination;

5)Plentifulgrammaticalconstructions.


Point 4.Functional andsemanticconnection oflexicon andgrammar.

Thefunctionalcriterion ofworddivisionintoparts ofspeechpresupposesrevealingtheirsyntacticproperties in thesentence.Fornotionalwords, itisprimarilytheirposition-and-membercharacteristics,i.e.theirability toperform thefunction ofindependentmembers of thesentence:subject,verbalpredicate,predicative,object,attribute,adverbialmodifier.Indefining thesubclassappurtenance ofwords,whichis the secondstage ofclassification,animportantplaceisoccupiedbyfinding outtheircombinabilitycharacteristics (>cf.,forexample, thedivision ofverbsintovalencysubclasses).Thisis thelevel ofanalysiswhere apossiblecontradictionbetweensubstantive andlexical, andbetweencategorial andgrammatical,semantics of theword,issettled.Thus, initsbasicsubstantivesemantics theword >stoneis anoun,but in thesentence >AuntEmmawasstoningcherriesforpreserves thesaidsubstantivebasecomesforwardas aproductiveone in theverb.However, thesituationalsemantics of thesentencereflects thestablesubstantiveorientation of thelexeme,retained in thecausativecharacter ofitscontent (>here, totake outstones). Thecategorialcharacteristics ofsuchlexemesmightbecalled >combinedobjective andprocessionalone.Unlikethisone, thecategorialcharacteristics of thelexeme >go in theutterance >Thats agowillbedefinedas >combinedprocessional andobjective.Still, thecombinedcharacter ofsemantics on thederivational andsituational, and on thesensicallevel,doesnotdeprive thelexeme ofitsunambiguousfunctional andsemanticcharacterizationbyclassappurtenance.

Point 5.Functional andsemantic (>lexico-grammatical)fields.

 

Theidea offieldstructure in thedistribution ofrelevantproperties ofobjectsisapplied in thenotion of thepart ofspeech:within theframework of acertainpart ofspeech acentral group ofwordsisdistinguished,whichcostitutes theclass instrictconformitywithitsestablishedfeatures, and aperipheral group ofwordsisset off,with thecorrespondinggradation offeatures.On thefunctionallevel,one and thesamepart ofspeechmayperformdifferentfunctions.


>Theme 3.ACCIDENCE.

 

Point 1. Themainnotions ofaccidence.

>Accidenceis thesection ofgrammar thatstudies thewordform.Inthisstudy itdealswithsuchbasicnotionsas theword, themorpheme, themorph, theallomorph, thegrammaticalform andcategory of theword,aswellasits >grammaticalmeaning, andalso theparadigm, theoppositional relations and thefunctional relations ofgrammaticalforms.

Point 2. Thenotion of themorpheme.Types ofmorphemes.Morphs and

a>llomorphs

(a)One of themostwidelyuseddefinitions of themorphemeislikethis: Themorphemeis thesmallestlinearmeaningfulunithaving a soundexpression.However,thereareotherdefinitions:

-L.Bloomfield: Themorphemeis alinguisticformwhichbearsnopartialresemblance toanyotherform.

- B. DeCourtenay: Themorphemeis ageneralizednameforlinearcomponents of theword,i.e. theroot andaffixes.

-Prof.A.I.Smirnitsky: Themorphemeis thesmallestlanguageunitpossessingessentialfeatures oflanguage,i.e.havingbothexternal (sound) andinternal (>notional)aspects.

(b)Morphemes,as ithasbeenmentionedabove,mayincluderoots andaffixes.Hence, themaintypes ofmorphemesare therootmorpheme and theaffixmorpheme.Therealsoexists theconcept of thezeromorphemefor theword-forms thathavenoendingbutarecapable oftakingone in theotherforms of thesamecategory,whichisnotquitetruefor English.

>Asfor theaffixmorpheme, itmayincludeeither aprefix or asuffix, orboth.Sinceprefixes andmanysuffixes in Englishareusedforword-building,theyarenotconsidered intheoreticalgrammar.Itdealsonlywithword-changingmorphemes,sometimescalledauxiliary orfunctionalmorphemes.

()Anallomorphis avariant of amorphemewhichoccurs incertainenvironments.Thus amorphemeis a group ofone ormoreallomorphs, ormorphs.

Theallomorphs of acertainmorphememaycoincideabsolutely in soundform,e.g. therootmorpheme in >fresh, >re>fresh>ment, >freshen, thesuffixes in >speak>er, >actor, theadverbialsuffix in >great>ly, >ear>ly.However,veryoftenallomorphsarenotabsolutelyidentical,e.g. therootmorpheme in >o>me-ca>me, >ma>n-men, thesuffixes in >walk>ed, >dream>ed, >load>ed.

Point 3. Thegrammaticalform of theword.Synthetical andanalyticalforms.

(a) Thegrammaticalform of thewordisdeterminedbyitsformalfeaturesconveyingsomegrammaticalmeaning. Theformalfeature (>flexion,functionword, etc.)is the >exponent of theform, or thegrammatical >formant, thegrammaticalformproperbeingmaterializedby theunification of thestemwith theformant in thecomposition of acertainparadigmaticrow.Therefore, thegrammaticalformunites awholeclass ofwords,eachexpressing acorrespondinggeneralmeaning in theframework ofitsownconcretemeaning. (>E.g. thepluralform ofnouns:books-dogs-cases-men-oxen-data-radii, etc.)Thus thegrammaticalform of thewordreflectsitsdivisionaccording to theexpression of acertaingrammaticalmeaning.

(b)Syntheticformsarethosewhichmaterialize thegrammaticalmeaningthrough theinnermorphemiccomposition of theword.Analyticalforms,asopposed tosyntheticones,aredefinedasthosewhichmaterialize thegrammaticalmeaningbycombining the >substancewordwith the >functionword.


>Theme 3.ACCIDENCE (>continued).

 

Point 4. Thegrammaticalcategory.

Thegrammaticalcategoryis acombination of two ormoregrammaticalformsopposed orcorrelatedbytheirgrammaticalmeaning. Acertaingrammaticalmeaningisfixed in acertainset offorms. Nogrammaticalcategorycanexistwithoutpermanentformalfeatures.Anygrammaticalcategorymustincludeasmanyas twocontrastedforms,buttheirnumbermaybegreater.Forinstance,threarethreetenseforms Present,Past andFuture,fouraspectforms Indefinite,Perfect,Continuous,PerfectContinuous,butthereareonly twonumberforms ofnouns, twovoices, etc.

Point 5. Thegrammaticalmeaning.Categorial andnon-categorialmeanings ingrammar.

 

(a) Thegrammaticalmeaningis ageneralized andratherabstractmeaningunitinglargegroups ofwords,beingexpressedthroughitsinherentformalfeatures or, inanopposition,through theabsence ofsuch.Itsveryimportantpropertyis that thegrammaticalmeaningisnotnamed in theword,e.g.countables-uncountables innouns,verbs ofinstantactions inContinuous (>wasjumping,waswinking), etc.

Thegrammaticalmeaning inmorphologyisconveyedbymeans of:

1.Flexion,i.e. aword-changingformantwhichmaybeouter (>street>s,approach>ed) orinner (>f>oo>t-f>ee>t,f>nd-fou>nd).

2.Suppletivewordforms (tobe-am-was,good-better-best).

3.Analyticalforms (>iscoming,hasasked).

(b) Themostgeneralmeaningsconveyedbylanguage andfindingexpression in thesystemic,regularcorrelation offorms,arethought ofascategorialgrammaticalmeanings.Therefore,wemayspeak of thecategorialgrammaticalmeanings ofnumber andcase innouns;person,number,tense,aspect,voice andmood inverbs, etc.Non-categorialgrammaticalmeaningsarethosewhichdonotoccur inoppositions,e.g. thegrammaticalmeanings ofcollectiveness innouns,qualitativeness inadjectives, ortransitiveness inverbs, etc.

Point 6. Thenotion of theparadigm inmorphology.

>Anorderlycombination ofgrammaticalformsexpressing acertaincategorialfunction (ormeaning)constitutes agrammaticalparadigm.Consequently, agrammaticalcategoryisbuilt upas acombination ofrespectiveparadigms (>e.g. thecategory ofnumber innouns, thecategory oftense inverbs, etc.).

Point 7.Oppositional relations ofgrammaticalforms.

Thebasicmethod of theuse ofoppositionswaselaboratedby thePragueSchoollinguists.Infact, theterm >oppositionshouldimply twocontrastedelements, orforms,i.e. theoppositionshouldbebinary. Theprinciple ofbinaryoppositionsisespeciallysuitablefordescribingmorphologicalcategorieswherethiskind of relationsismoreevident.

>Forexample, thetense-forms of the Englishverbmaybedividedinto twohalves: theforms of thepresentplane andthose of thepast. Theformercomprises thePresent,PresentPerfect,PresentContinuous,PresentPerfectContinuous, and theFuture; thelatterincludes thePast,PastPerfect,PastContinuous,PastPerfectContinuous, and theFuture-in-the-Past. The secondhalfischaracterizedbyspecificformalfeatures either thesuffix >ed (oritsequivalents)appear, or aphonemicmodification of theroot. Thepastisthus amarkedmember of theopposition >present::pastasagainst thepresentsub-system,whichis theunmarkedmember. Thesamemaybeapplied toperfect andnon-perfectforms,active andpassiveforms,singular andpluralforms inclassnouns, etc.

Point 8.Functionaltranspositions ofgrammatical (>morphological)forms.

>Incontextfunctioning ofgrammaticalformsunder realcircumstances ofcommunicating,theiroppositionalcategorialfeaturesinteractso that amember of thecategorialoppositionmaybeused in apositiontypical of theothercontrastedmember.Thisphenomenonisreferred toas thefunctionaltransposition.Onemustbear inmind thatthereare twokinds offunctionaltranspositions: theonewith apartialloss of thefunctionalproperty, and theonewith acompleteloss of thefunctionalproperty. Theformermayalsobedefinedas thefunctionaltranspositionproperwhere thesubstitutingmemberperforms the twofunctionssimultaneously.E.g. theunusualusage of thepluralform of a >uniqueobject (>cf.: thatskinsoprizedbySouthernwomen andsocarefullyguardedwithbonnets,veils andmittensagainsthotGeorgian >suns. (>M.Mitchel)

Point 9.Neutralization of theopposition.

The secondkind offunctionaltranspositionwhere thesubstitutingmembercompletelylosesitsfunctionalproperty,is theactualneutralization of theopposition.Suchneutralizationitselfdoesnotpossessanyexpressivemeaningbutisgenerallyrelated to thevariations ofparticularmeanings (>cf.: A mancandiebutonce.(proverb)Thelionisnotsofierceasheispainted.(proverb)

Point 10.Polysemy,synonymy andhomonymy inmorphology.

>Morphologicalpolysemyimpliesrepresentations of awordasdifferentparts ofspeech,e.g. theword >butmayfunctionas aconjunction (last,butnotleast), apreposition (>therewasnothingbutfirelight), arestrictiveadverb (>thosewordswerebutexcuses), arelativepronoun (>therearenonebutdomuch thesame), anoun in thesingular andplural (thatwas alargebut; hisrepeatedbutsarereallytrying).

>Morphologicalsynonymyreflects avariety ofrepresentationsbydifferentparts ofspeechfor thesamemeaning,e.g.due to (>adjective),thanks to (>noun),because of (>preposition), etc.

>Morphologicalhomonymymaybedescribedasphoneticequivalentswithdifferentgrammaticalfunctions,e.g. Helooks herlooks;theywanted thejobwanted;smokingisharmful asmoking man;youread wesawyou, etc.

Point 11. Themainproblems offunctionalmorphology.

Theproblems offunctionalmorphologyaremany, themain andmostdisputedbeing:

(a) thefunctions of >formalmorphemes (>affixes) andallomorphs;

(b) thefunctionalcorrelation,i.e.connection ofphenomenadiffering incertainfeaturesbutunitedthroughothers (>import-toimport,must-should);

() thefunctionalclassification ofwordsasparts ofspeech.


>Theme 4.THEPARTSOFSPEECH.

 

Point 1. Theproblems of theparts ofspeech.

Thewholelexicon of the Englishlanguage,like theone of allIndo-European languages,isdividedintocertainlexico-grammaticalclassestraditionallycalled >parts ofspeech. Theexistence ofsuchclassesisnotdoubtedbyanylinguiststhoughtheymighthavedifferentpoints ofviewas totheirinterpretation.Classification of theparts ofspeechisstill amatter ofdispute;linguistsopinionsdifferconcerning thenumber and thenames of theparts ofspeech.

Point 2. Theprinciples ofdivisioninto theparts ofspeech.Issues ofdiscussion in theclassification ofwordsinto theparts ofspeech.Notional andfunctionalparts ofspeech.Conversion of theparts ofspeech.

 

(a) Themainprinciples ofworddivisionintocertaingroups, thathadlongexisted,wereformulatedbyL.V.Shcherbaquiteexplicitly.Theyarelexicalmeaning,morphologicalform andsyntacticfunctioning.Still,someclassificationsarebased onsome of thethreefeatures,forany ofthemmaycoincideneglecting thestrictlogicalrules.

(b)Inlinguisticstherehavebeen anumber ofattempts tobuild upsuch aclassification of theparts ofspeech (>lexico-grammaticalclasses) thatwouldmeet themainrequirement of alogicalclassification,i.e.wouldbebased on asingleprinciple.Thoseattemptshavefailed.

>H.Sweet, theauthor of thefirstscientificgrammar of the Englishlanguage,divides theparts ofspeechinto twomaingroups thedeclinables and theindeclinables.Thatmeans thatheconsidersmorphologicalproperties tobe themainprinciple ofclassification.Inside the group of thedeclinableshekept to thetraditionaldivisionintonouns,adjectives andverbs.Adverbs,prepositions,conjunctions andinterjectionsareunitedinto the group of theindeclinables.However,alongside ofthisclassification, Sweetproposesgroupingbased on thesyntacticfunctioning ofcertainclasses ofwords.Thisleads toincludingnouns,pronouns,infinitives,gerunds andsomeotherparts ofspeechinto thesameclass,whichisincorrect.

The DanishlinguistO.Jespersensuggested theso-calledtheory ofthreeranks (>primary,secondary andtertiarywords),e.g. >furiouslybarking dogwhere dogis aprimaryword, >barking secondary, and >furiously tertiary.

>Anotherattempt tofind asingleprinciple ofclassificationwasmadebyCh.Fries in hisbook TheStructure of English. Herejects thetraditionalclassification andtries todraw up aclasssystembased on thewordsposition in thesentence; hisfourclassescorrespond towhatistraditionallycallednouns (>class 1),verbs (>class 2),adjectives (>class 3) andadverbs (>class 4).Besides thefourclassesheset off 15groups.Andyet, hisattemptturned out tobe afailure,too,for theclasses andgroupsoverlaponeanother.

()Words on thesemantic (>meaningful)level ofclassificationaredividedintonotional andfunctional.

>To thenotionalparts ofspeech of the Englishlanguagebelong thenoun, theadjective, thenumeral, thepronoun, theverb and theadverb.

>Contrastedagainst thenotionalparts ofspeecharewords ofincompletenominativemeaning andnon-self-dependent,mediatoryfunctions in thesentence.Thesearefunctionalparts ofspeech.To thebasicfunctionalseries ofwords in Englishbelong thearticle, thepreposition, theconjunction, theparticle, themodalword, theinterjection.

(>d)From thepoint ofview oftheirfunctionalcharacteristicslexicalunitsmaybelong todifferentlexico-grammaticalclasses.Thiskind ofsyntactictransitioniscalledconversion andrepresents awidespreadphenomenonasone of themostproductive andeconomicalmeans ofsyntactictranspositions.E.g.Sheused tocombherhairlovingly. Hereisyourcomb.Theylived upnorth afewyearsago. Youmustbeready totake alltheseups anddownseasy.

>Theme 4.THEPARTSOFSPEECH (>continued).

Point 3. Theparts ofspeech in theonomasiologic light.

 

>Comparing theclassdivision of

1 3 |

: