20) Paradigmatic structure (ps) of the sentence

PS was accumulated within the framework of different linguistic schools in the mid 20th century. The theory of part of speech – realization of how concrete words turn to abstract. Sentences – how parts of speech turn into sentence members. These theories helped to work out the paradigmatic structure of production or generating. It gave name to the school Generative grammar.Another cardinal concept is the concept of transformation (20th century). It was understood as a derivational step which produces a paradigmatic series of sentences. Thus paradigmatic approach to sentence marked a new style in development of linguistics. They no longer view the sentence as a readymade unit. It exists in a pattern form. With the help of transformation – turn to sentences.P. approach discloses correlating sentence patterns. It describes relations between them in terms of transformation -> transitions form one pattern to another.Such transitions disclose derivational connections of sentence pattern. We should differentiate base patterns and transforms of these patterns.Base patterns may also be called Kernel Sentences with obligatory part only.

KS built up the deep base of the language. It serves to produce more complex sentences by means of transformation or syntactic derivations.~ I heard you + You sang a song -> I heard you sing a song(N1-pro + V1-f + N2-pro) + (N2 + V2-f + N3) -> N1 + Vf + N2-pro + V2-n-f + N3 – semi-composite sentence.Syntactic derivation is not an immediate change of one sentence to another, it’s production of complex pattern out of simple.Transformation of KS turn genuine sentence into surface speech. 6 major classes: 1) Morphological arrangement (tense, mood, aspect, voice, number), 2) Functional expansion (use of func. words), 3) Substitution, 4) Deletion/zeroing, 5) Positional arrangement, 6) Intonational arrangement.~ I felt a nice breeze. Where has it gone? – 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6)

Transformation of KS into a clause is called clausalization. It involves subordinators (which, why, when) and coordinators.~ They didn’t hear anything + Smb must have been playing wonderful music -> They didn’t hear anything thou smb must have been playing wonderful music.Transformation of KS into a phrase – phrasialization. The result will be either a nominal phrase or semi-predicative construction.~ When they arrived in Paris they at once went on the excursion -> On their arrival (nominalization) they at once… ~ The prime-minister came to London + He conducted negotiations there -> On coming to London (semi-predicative construction) the prime-minister….

21) Actual devision of the s-ce (ADS).Theme (T) – minimal new info = known info Rheme (R) – new info= main pointTransition (Tr) – sentence parts which are not so important. ADS consists in the exposing of the inform-l value of s-ce parts = to show the contribution of each part to the total info. Usually in a declarative s-ce T is placed at the beginning and R at the end. Ex: You’re charming. (You’ - T) and (charming – R)-Is she charming?-No, YOU are charming. (here we see a marked focus of the T. YOU becomes the R and charming - T)The AD in which the R is exp by the Subject = inverted ex: How charming you’re! This means that emotional coloring influences the ADS and the word order and logical stress. Special means of indicating the AD: 1) contrastive complexes- Green but not gray is the color that suits me. 2) the anticipatory “It” It’s the latest issue of the paper that is lying on the bed. 3) “There” – pattern supplies unemph-c identify-n. 4) particles “only” and ‘even’ + W, which serves as the R of the s-ce. Ex: Only the children belong to this surrounding. He came – Even he came. (R) In a typical unmarked case the T is mapped on the Subject. The R follows. The focus together with a tonic occurs at the end of the s-ce.

22) Communicative type

The sentence is above all a communicative unit; therefore, the primary classification of sentences is based on the communicative principle, traditionally defined as “the purpose of communication”. According to the purpose of communication, sentences are subdivided into declarative, interrogative and imperative. Declarative sentences are traditionally defined as those expressing statements, either affirmative or negative, e.g.: He (didn’t) shut the window. Imperative sentences express inducements of various kinds (orders or requests); they may also be either affirmative or negative, e.g.: (Don’t) Shut the window, please. Interrogative sentences express questions, or requests for information, e.g.: Did he shut the window?Declarative sentences are defined as sentences which express statements and can be syntagmatically connected with the listener’s signals of attention (his or her appraisal, agreement, disagreement, etc.), e.g.: He didn’t shut the window. - Oh, really?; imperative sentences express inducements, situationally connected with the listener’s actions or verbal agreement/disagreement to perform these actions, e.g.: Shut the window, please. – OK, I will; interrogative sentences express requests for information and are syntagmatically connected with answers, e.g.: Did he shut the window? – Yes, he did. Further distinctions between the three cardinal types of sentences may be revealed in the light of the actual division of the sentence: each communicative sentence type is distinguished by its specific actual division features, especially, the nature of the rheme. The strictly declarative sentence immediately expresses a certain proposition, and the actual division of the declarative sentence presents itself in the most developed and complete form: the rheme of the declarative sentence provides the immediate information that constitutes the informative center of the sentence in opposition with its thematic part, e.g.: He (theme) shut the window (rheme). The strictly imperative sentence does not express any statement of fact, i.e. any proposition proper. It is only based on a proposition, without formulating it directly, e.g.: Let him shut the window (He hasn’t shut the window). Thus, the rheme of the imperative sentence expresses the informative nucleus not of an explicit proposition, but of an inducement, an action wanted, required, necessary, etc. (or, unwanted, unnecessary, etc.). Due to the communicative nature of the inducement addressed to the listener, the theme of the imperative sentence may be omitted or may take the form of an address, e.g.: Shut the window, please; Tom, shut the window.The rheme of the interrogative sentence is informationally open: it is an informative gap, which is to be filled by the answer. This rhematic “zero” in pronominal (“special”) questions is expressed by an interrogative pronoun, which is substituted by the actual information wanted in the answer, e.g.: Who shut the window? – Tom (did). The interrogative pronoun in the question and the rheme of the answer make up the rhematic unity in the question-answer construction. The openness of the rheme in non-pronominal questions consists in the alternative semantic suggestions from which the listener has to choose the appropriate one. The semantic choice is explicit in the structure of alternative questions, e.g.: Did he or his friend shut the window? The rheme of non-pronominal questions requiring either confirmation or negation (“general” question of yes-no response type) is implicitly alternative, implying the choice between the existence or non-existence of an indicated fact (true to life or not true to life?), e.g.: Did he shut the window? – Yes, he did (No, he didn’t). The thematic part of the answer, being expressed in the question, is easily omitted, fully or partially, as the examples show. Traditionally, the so-called exclamatory sentence is distinguished as one more communicative type of sentence. Exclamatory sentences are marked by specific intonation patterns (represented by an exclamation mark in written speech), word-order and special constructions with functional-auxiliary words, rendering the high emotional intensity of the utterance. But these regular grammatical features can not be treated as sufficient grounds for placing the exclamatory sentences on the same level as the three cardinal communicative types of sentences. In fact, each cardinal communicative type, declarative, imperative or interrogative, may be represented in its exclamatory, emotionally coloured variant, as opposed to a non-exclamatory, unemotional variant, cf.: She is a nice little girl – What a nice little girl she is!; Open the door. – For God’s sake, open the door!; Why are you late? – Why on earth are you late?! Exclamation is actually an accompanying feature of the three cardinal communicative types of sentences, which discriminates emotionally intense constructions from emotionally neutral ones at the lower level of analysis, but it does not constitute a separate communicative type.

23) The composite sentence is polypredicative syntactic construction,formed by two or more predicative lines. This means, that the composite sentence reflects two or more situations or events making up a unity. Each predicative unit in a composite sentence forms a clause. A clause as a part of a composite sentence corresponds to a separate sentence. Cf.: When I sat down to dinner I looked for an opportunity to slip in the information that I had by accident run across the Driffields, but news traveled fast in Blackstable. Here C.S. includes 4 clauses. There are two principal types of composite sentences: complex and compound. In compound sentences, the clauses are connected on the basis of coordinative connections (parataxis); by coordination the clauses are arranged as units of syntactically equal rank, i.e. equipotently. In complex sentences, the clauses are united on the basis of subordinative connections (hypotaxis); by subordination the clauses are arranged as units of syntactically unequal rank, one of which dominates another. The connections between the clauses in a composite sentence may be effected syndetically, i.e. by means of special connecting words, conjunctions and other conjunctional words or word-combinations, or asyndetically, i.e. without any conjunctional words used.Alongside the two basic types of composite sentences there is one more type of polypredicative construction, in which the connections between the clauses are rather loose, syntactically detached: the following clause is like an afterthought, an expansion or a comment to the proceeding clause. This type of connection is called cumulation (see Unit 19), and such composite sentences can be called cumulative. The status of cumulative sentences is intermediary between composite sentences proper and combinations of sentences in supra-sentential constructions. e.g.: I wasn’t going to leave; I’d only just arrived.; e.g.: As I have already told you, they are just friends. According to the position with a composite sentence the whole domain of cumulation should be divided into 2 parts: the continuative cumulation, placing the cumulated clause in post-position to the expanded predicative construction, and the parenthetical cumulation, placing the cumulated clause in inter-position as well as pre-position or post-position since the parenthetical clause gives only a background to the essential information and m.b. shifted within the C.S. Alongside the “completely” composite sentence, built up by two or more fully predicative lines (explicitly expressed), there are polypredicative constructions, in which one predicative line may be partially predicative (potentially predicative, semi-predicative), as, for example, in sentences with various verbid complexes, e.g.: I heard him singing in the backyard. This sentence don’t represent a classical C.S., but it’s not a simple sentence because it contains more than one predicative lines. This can be demonstrated by transformation: I heard him. He is singing in the backyard. The status of such sentences is in intermediary between the simple and the composite sentences.Thus, C.S. as polypredicative constructions exist in 2 varieties as regards the degree of their predicative completeness: first, C.S. of complete composition; second, C.S. of concise ( semi-composite) composition

24) COMPLEX SENTENCE. Типо Classif-n of Prin. Clauses.

The complex sentence is a polypredicative construction built up on the principle of subordination. It is derived from two or more base sentences one of which performs the role of a matrix in relation to the others, the insert sentences

The CS of minimal composition includes two clauses — a principal one and a subordinate one. The principal clause positionally dominates the subordinate clause. The subordinate clause is joined to the principal clause either by a subordinating connector (subordinator), or, with some types of clauses, asyndetically. This connector is as a transformer of an independent sentence into a subordinate clause. Cf.: Tom left the room. → (I do remember quite well) that T left the room. → (He went on with his story) after T left the room. И тд.It means that the sub.cl. can be joined to the principal clause by means of the "zero"-connector. Cf.: —» (How do you know) 0 Moyra left the room?The minimal, two-clause complex sentence is the main volume type of complex sentences. Это важный тип (in terms of frequency, in terms of its paradigmatic status).The structural features of the principal clause (PC) differ with different types of subordinate cl. (SC) The PC is markedly incomplete in complex sentences with the subject and predicative subordinate clauses. E.g.: And why we descend to their level is a mystery to me. (The gaping principal part outside the subject clause: " — is a mystery to me".) The PC of the complex sentence that includes both subject and predicative SCs: its proper segment, i.e. the word-string (последовательность) standing apart from the subordinate clauses is usually reduced to a sheer finite link-verb. Cf.: How he managed to pull through is what baffles me. (The principal clause representation: " — is — ").To understand the status of the "deficiently incomplete and gaping" PC we must take into consideration the matrix nature of the PC in the sentence: the matrix presents the upper-level positional scheme which is to be completed by predicative constructions on the lower level.The proper segment of the PC, i.e. its "nucleus", is predicatively deficient, the whole of the clause should be looked upon as merged with the corresponding filler-subordinate clauses. ТАК ЧТО ЕСТЬ, merger PCs (complex sentences with clausal deployment of their main parts) and non-merger PCs (complex sentences with clausal deployment of their secondary parts).The PC dominates the SC positionally, but it doesn't mean that by its syntactic status it must express the central informative part of the communication. In a neutral context the rhematic part of the sentence tends to be placed somewhere near the end of it. This holds true both for the simple and complex sentences. Cf.: The boy was friendly with me because I allowed him to keep the fishing line.Here the PC, placed in the front position, expresses the starting point of the information, the SC renders the main idea, (the speaker's explanation of the boy's attitude). Speaking of the information status of the PC, even in unemphatic speech the predicative unit is often reduced to a sheer introducer of the subordinate clause, the latter expressing practically all the essential information envisaged by the communicative purpose of the whole of the sentence. Cf.: You see that mine is by far the most miserable lot. Just fancy that James has proposed to Mary! You know, kind sir, that I am bound to fasting and abstinence.The principal clause-introducer in sentences like these performs also the function of keeping up the conversation, (phatic – фатическая). Verbs of speech and especially thought are commonly used in phatic principals to specify "in passing" the speaker's attitude to the information rendered by their rhematic subordinates: Ex. I think there's much truth in what we hear about the matter. (можно ещё - I'т sure)

25) COMPLEX SENTENCE § 1. The complex sentence is a polypredicative construction built up on the principle of subordination. It is derived from two or more base sentences one of which performs the role of a matrix in relation to the others, the insert sentences. When joined into one complex sentence, the matrix base sentence becomes the principal clause of it and the insert sentences, its subordinate clauses.The complex sentence of minimal composition includes two clauses — a principal one and a subordinate one. The subordinate clause is joined to the principal clause either by a subordinating connector (subordinator), or, with some types of clauses, asyndetically.

§ 2. The structural features of the principal clause differ with different types of subordinate clauses. In particular, various types of subordinate clauses specifically affect the principal clause from the point of view of the degree of its completeness. E.g.:And why we descend to their level is a mystery to me. (The gaping principal part outside the subject clause: " — is a mystery to me".) Your statement was just what you were expected to say. (The gaping principal part outside the predicative clause: "Your statement was just — ") In case of such clauses as subject and predicative, these are all the same subordinated to the matrix by way of being its embedded elements, i. e. the fillers of the open clausal positions introduced by it.In accord with the functional principle, subordinate clauses are to be classed on the analogy of the positional parts of the simple sentence, since it is the structure of the simple sentence that underlies the essential structure of the complex sentence (located on a higher level). In particular, most types of subordinate clauses meet the same functional question-tests as the parts of the simple sentence. Cf.:You can see my state. > You can see my wretched state. > You can see my state being wretched. > You can see that my state is wretched. > You can see that. —»What can you see?Subordinate clauses are introduced by functional connective words which effect their derivation from base sentences. Categorially these sentence subordinators (or subordinating clausalisers) fall into the two basic types: those that occupy a notional position in the derived clause, and those that do not occupy such a position. The non-positional subordinators are referred to as pure conjunctions. Here belong such words as since, before, until, if, in case, because, so that, in order that, though, however, than, as if, etc. The positional subordinators are in fact conjunctive substitutes. The main positional subordinators are the pronominal words who, what, whose, which, that, where, when, why, as. Some of these words are double-functional (bifunctional), entering also the first set of subordinators; such are the words where, when, that, as, used both as conjunctive substitutes and conjunctions. Together with these the zero subordinator should be named, whose polyfunctional status is similar to the status of the subordinator that. The substitute status of positional subordinators is disclosed in their function as "relative" pronominals, i. e. pronominals referring to syntagmatic antecedents. Cf.:That was the day when she was wearing her pink dress. Sally put on her pink dress when she decided to join the party downstairs.Subordinate clauses of secondary nominal positions include attributive clauses of various syntactic functions. They fall into two major classes: "descriptive" attributive clauses and "restrictive" ("limiting") attributive clauses. The descriptive attributive clause exposes some characteristic of the antecedent. It should be noted that, since the difference between descriptive and restrictive clauses lies in their functions, there is a possibility of one and the same clausal unit being used in both capacities, depending on the differences of the contexts. Cf.: At last we found a place where we could make a fire. The place where we could make a fire was not a lucky one.The subordinate clause in the first of the cited examples in-forms the listener of the quality of the place (> We found such a place) thereby being descriptive, while the same clause in the second example refers to the quality in question as a mere mark of identification (> The place was not a lucky one) and so is restrictive.The subord.clause dominated positionally by a closed matrix- position. Subordination is a relation of inequality. The type of Subordination in the level is called consecutive. 2 or more dependent clauses contradictional referential Subordinate clauses which immediately refer to one and the same principle clause matrix are said to be co- Subordinated. They are Subordinated in parallel. Parallel Subordination is homogeneous if both clauses dependent on the element in the principle clause. Parallel Subordination in heterogeneous if the dependent clauses refer to different elements in the Subordinate clause.