- •1. Introduction to the language studies
- •2. Linguistic forms and syntactic functions
- •2.1. Language units and their ranks in the system
- •2.2. Classes of units
- •2.2.1. Classes of clauses
- •2.2.2. Classes of word groups
- •2.2.3. Classes of words
- •2.2.4. Classes of morphemes
- •2.3. Language taxonomy and the concept of the unit structure
- •2.3.1. Syntactic elements of clauses
- •2.3.2. Syntactic elements of groups (syntactic word groups)
- •2.3.3. Components, realization and function
2.3.3. Components, realization and function
Any clause structure can be considered composed of elements which form a configuration of 'functions', whether semantic functions such as Agent-Process-Participant or syntactic functions such as the clause configuration Subject-Predicator-Direct Object or the modifier-head-qualifier structure of the Nominal Group.
Each of these functions is in turn realized by a unit which is itself, at least potentially, a configuration of functions, and these in turn are realized by others until the final stage is reached and abstract categories such as Subject, head, modifier, etc., are realized by the segments of the spoken or written language called phrases. The following 'structural tree' diagrams this model of analysis at the three unit ranks of clause, group and word, to illustrate the clause The bus strike will affect many people tomorrow:
Pic. 2. Tree diagram.
|
|
|
Clf |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NP |
|
|
VP |
|
|
|
Realisations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S |
|
|
P |
|
Od |
A |
|
Components |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N P |
|
|
V P |
|
N P |
A dvP |
|
Realisations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
d |
m |
h |
O |
h |
d |
H |
h |
|
Components |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
art |
noun |
noun |
aux |
verb |
adj |
noun |
adv |
|
Realisations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the |
bus |
strike |
will |
affect |
many |
people |
tomorrow |
|
Realisation by lexical exponents |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An important property of language is the fact that there is no one-to-one correspondence between the class of unit and its function. While it is true that certain classes of unit typically realize certain functions (Nominal Phrases at Subject and Object functions, for instance), it is nevertheless also true that many classes of words can fulfill various or similar functions, which attests to asymmetry between language form and meaning.
This many-to-many relationship is fundamental for understanding the relationship of the English grammar to text. By this it is not implied that a text is a kind of super-sentence, a grammatical unit that is simply 'larger' than a sentence and with the same kind of relationship holding between its parts as that which holds between grammatical units. A text is quite different in kind from a grammatical unit. It is, rather than grammatical, a semantic unit of whatever length, spoken or written, and which forms a unified whole, with respect both to its internal properties and to the social context in which it is produced. A text is encoded by various types of semantic unit, which in turn are realized by syntactic units. In our course we will deal mainly with linguistic units and their grammatical representation rather than with the text, thought the relationship between the two is of primary interest.