- •Оглавление
- •Методические рекомендации для студентов по курсу «Теоретическая грамматика английского языка»
- •Цели курса.
- •Задачи курса.
- •Место курса в системе освоения профессиональной образовательной программы.
- •Требования к уровню освоения содержания курса.
- •Содержание курса
- •Форма итогового контроля
- •Теоретический материал курса Темы лекций:
- •Theme 1. The aim of theoretical grammar Plan
- •References:
- •Theme 2. Units of linguistic analysis Plan
- •References:
- •Theme 3. Morphology and syntax Plan
- •References:
- •Theme 4. Grammatical oppositions and grammatical categories Plan
- •References:
- •Theme 5. Grammatical Means Plan
- •References:
- •Theme 6. Parts of Speech: Part I Plan
- •Theme 6. Parts of Speech: Part II Plan
- •References:
- •Theme 7. The noun: general. The category of number Plan
- •References:
- •Theme 8. The noun: the category of case Plan
- •References:
- •Theme 9. The verb: general Plan
- •References:
- •Theme 10. The verb: the finite forms of the verb. The categories of person, number, tense. Part I. Plan
- •Theme 10. The verb: the finite forms of the verb. The categories of person, number, tense. Part II. Plan
- •References:
- •Theme 11. The verb: the non-finite forms of the verb (the verbids) Plan
- •References:
- •Theme 12. The verb: aspect Plan
- •References:
- •Theme 13. The verb: time correlation Plan
- •References:
- •Theme 14. The verb: the category of voice Plan
- •Voice forms
- •Indicative mood (unmarked) Indicative mood (marked)
- •References:
- •Theme 15. The verb: the category of mood Plan
- •References:
- •Theme 16. The problem of the subjunctive mood in english Plan
- •References:
- •Theme 17. The adjective Plan
- •References:
- •Theme 18. The adverb Plan
- •References:
- •Theme 19. The main principles of syntactic modeling the sentence Plan
- •The Theory of the ic. (The Phrase Grammar)
- •English Phrases
- •The Analytical ic Model of the Sentence
- •The Derivation Tree Diagramme
- •References:
- •Theme 20. The functional sentence perspective Plan
- •References:
- •Theme 21. The case grammar Plan
- •References:
- •Theme 22. Pragmatics of the sentence Plan
- •References:
- •Theme 23. Text and discourse Plan
- •References:
- •Темы для самостоятельного изучения
- •4.1 Перечень примерных вопросов и заданий
- •4.2 Примерная тематика курсовых и дипломных работ:
- •5. Практические занятия по курсу Seminar 1. The Categorial Structure of the Word Plan
- •Questions and Tasks:
- •References:
- •Seminar 2. Parts of Speech Plan
- •Questions and Tasks:
- •References:
- •Seminar 3. The Noun as Part of Speech. The category of number Plan
- •Questions and Tasks:
- •References:
- •Seminar 4. The Noun: The Category of Case. The Category of Gender Plan
- •Questions and Tasks:
- •References:
- •Seminar 5. The Verb: General Plan
- •Questions and Tasks:
- •References:
- •Seminar 6. The verb: the categories of person, number and tense Plan
- •Questions and Tasks:
- •References:
- •Seminar 7. The verb: the categories of aspect and time correlation Plan
- •Questions and Tasks:
- •References:
- •Seminar 8. The verb: the category of voice Plan
- •Questions and Tasks:
- •References:
- •Seminar 9. The verb: the category of mood Plan
- •Questions and Tasks:
- •References:
- •Seminar 10. The adjective and the adverb Plan
- •Questions and Tasks:
- •References:
- •Seminar 11. The phrase: general Plan
- •Questions and Tasks:
- •References:
- •Seminar 12. Part I. The simple sentence: The Traditional Grammar about the Structural Classification of a Simple Sentence Plan
- •Questions and Tasks:
- •Seminar 12. Part II. The simple sentence: constituent structure. Revision of the Existing Grammars Plan
- •Questions and Tasks:
- •References:
- •Seminar 12. Part III. The Simple Sentence: Paradigmatic Structure Plan
- •Questions and Tasks:
- •References:
- •Seminar 13. The composite sentence Plan
- •Questions and Tasks:
- •References:
- •Seminar 14. The functional sentence perspective (fsp) Plan
- •Questions and Tasks:
- •References:
- •Seminar 15. Pragmatics of the sentence Plan
- •Questions and Tasks:
- •References:
- •Контрольные вопросы и задания по курсу
- •6.1 Вопросы и задания
- •6.2 Перечень тем к зачету
- •6.2.1 Предложения для анализа (к зачету)
- •6.3 Перечень вопросов к экзамену по теоретической грамматике
- •6.3.1 Предложения для синтаксического анализа по членам предложения (к экзамену)
- •7. Упражнения по темам курса
- •7.1 Морфология
- •7.1.1 The Noun parts of speech
- •The category of case
- •The category of number
- •7.1.2 The Verb the subjunctive mood
- •The infinitive
- •The gerund
- •The participle
- •The voice
- •Time correlation
- •7.2 Синтаксис
- •8. Глоссарий
- •9. Список рекомендуемой литературы Основная литература:
- •Дополнительная литература:
References:
Аракин В. Д. Сравнительная типология английского и русского языков. – М.: Просвещение, 1989, стр. 130-134.
Воронцова Г. Н. Очерки по грамматике английского языка. – М.: Издательство литературы на иностранных языках, 1960, стр. 240-299.
Жигадло В. Н., Иванова И. П., Иофик Л. Л. Современный английский язык. Теоретический курс грамматики. – М.: Издательство литературы на иностранных языках, 1956, стр. 113-126.
Иванова И. П., Бурлакова В. В., Почепцов Г. Г. Теоретическая грамматика современного английского языка. – М.: Высшая школа, 1981, стр. 68-74.
Ильиш Б. Н. Строй современного английского языка. – 2-е изд., - Л.: Просвещение, Ленинградское отделение, 1971. – На английском языке.
Корнеева Е. А., Кобрина Н. А., Гузеева К. А., Оссовская М. И. Пособие по морфологии современного английского языка. – М.: Высшая школа, 1974, стр. 103-112.
Смирницкий А. И. Морфология английского языка. – М.: Издательство литературы на иностранных языках, 1959, стр. 341-353.
Спорные вопросы английской грамматики. / Зернов Б. Е., Варшавская А. И., Чахоян Л. П. и др.; Отв. ред. В. В. Бурлакова. – Л.: Издательство Ленинградского университета, 1988, стр. 53-63.
Хаймович Б. С., Роговская Б. И.. Теоретическая грамматика английского языка. – М.: Высшая школа, 1967, стр. 139-142; 150-157.
M. Y. Bloch. A Course in Theoretical English Grammar. Ch. 17. Mood, pp 185-202.
L. L. Iofik, L. P Chakhoyan, A. Y. Pospelova. Readings in the Theory of English Grammar. – Л.: Просвещение, 1981, стр. 82-87.
Theme 16. The problem of the subjunctive mood in english Plan
The Introduction
The Semantic Approach to the Mood
The Formal Approach
A. I. Smirnitsky and other Soviet linguists on the problem of the Subjunctive Mood
The binary theory (R. Jacobson) about the Category of Mood
The Problem of Survival of the Subjunctive Mood in English
The Function of the Subjunctive Mood forms
The Problem of Mood in the English Language
The problem of Mood has been the object of controversy for more than a hundred years. The authors describing the subjunctive mood often disagree on the concept of mood, modality, modal auxiliaries and the criteria the researcher should use in defining the concept and the grammatical status of the subjunctive mood.
To account for this difference of opinion it is necessary to take into consideration at least two circumstances:
The problem of mood is not a specific grammar question, it is a knot of cardinal problems: that of form and function, language and reality, modality, interaction and interdependence of various language levels.
Should someone untie this knot he would probably define the grammatical status of the subjunctive mood.
The system of the subjunctive mood in Modern English has been and still is in a state of development. There are many elements in it which are rapidly falling into disuse and there are new elements coming into use.
The authors describe the subjunctive mood as a morphological category. The grammatical category on the morphological level can be realized through a paradigm. The structure of a paradigm is different. The paradigm of an English verb includes both inflexional and analytical forms. Interpreting the subjunctive mood as a morphological category makes it impossible for a researcher to find out the correspondence between the grammatical form and the definite grammatical meaning expressed by it. One form can have various meanings, and the same meaning can be expressed by different grammatical means. This is what accounts for various approaches to the problem of the Subjunctive Mood. The history of its study goes back to the 18th century. It was as far back as 1764 that the author of A Real English Grammar stated the necessity to mind the situation requiring this or that grammatical form to express some meaning, not the inflexion. As far back as 1796, R. Zynch objected to numerous attempts to distinguish between more moods than there are inflexions.
The problem of Mood can be approached from the semantic formal points of view and that of binary oppositions.
The Semantic Approach
In keeping with the semantic approach the number of moods ranges from two to sixteen. It is due to the degree of semantic generalization, expressed by the grammatical forms viewed as the subjunctive mood forms. With classical grammar authors meaning came first. H. Sweet (Sweet 1892: 109) distinguishes between fact-mood (the indicative mood) and thought-mood (the mood, expressing something as contrary to reality). The latter could be subjunctive (be, were) or conditional (should, would + infinitive) as regards the form: synthetic or analytical. In keeping with the verb form semantics H. Sweet also distinguishes two more moods: Permissive (may + infinitive) and Compulsive (is + infinitive).
According to G. Curme (Curme 1935: 228) there are two moods: Optative (it expresses a desirable action) and Potential (something probable, but not a fact, “a mere conception of mind”). J. Curme gives a number of examples, modal verbs let + infinitive including, which are traditionally treated as subjunctive mood forms. But all of them lack systematic approach and have no correlation with the meaning they express.
M. Deutschbein (Deutschbein 1931: 112-131) has the greatest number of moods – 16, which after a closer examination can boil down to four: cogitative, optative, voluntative and expectative.
Among the latest papers on the subject it is the theory of J. Leech (Leech 1971: 106-112) that deserves attention. As regards the grammatical form, the subjunctive mood and the indicative have a lot in common. It is only the semantics that help distinguish between the factual, theoretical and hypothetical. J. Leech gives the inventory of all possible grammatical forms used to express the meanings registered.
All the semantic theories of the Subjunctive Mood developed by foreign scholars have the same drawback:
The Subjunctive Mood meanings are generalized or made concrete to the greatest extent;
Various language phenomena are listed under the Subjunctive Mood.
The Soviet scholars take into consideration both the meaning and the grammatical form of the category.
The formal approach
If you treat the category of mood from the point of its grammatical form, a number of problems still remains. Here belong the inventory of the subjunctive mood forms, the problem of compatibility of forms of various meaning and structure within one paradigm; the problem of polysemy or homonymy of grammatical forms used to express subjunctive mood meanings and the Indicative mood; the correlation of the Subjunctive Mood and Tense.
The problem of making an inventory of the Subjunctive mood forms is due to the co-existence of the archaic forms of the Subjunctive Mood “be”, “were” and the new analytical forms “should”, “would” + infinitive, “may”, “might” + infinitive and so on. Otto Jespersen (Jespersen 1933: 293-295), who upholds the formal approach to the phenomenon examined, while criticizing Deutschbein’s 16 moods treats “be”, “were” as such and wouldn’t admit analytical forms. It is O. Jespersen who has greatly influenced the views of scholars belonging to younger generations. The great majority of linguists tend to regard synthetic forms of the Subjunctive Mood “be”, “were” (e.g. long live, suffice it to say) to be the only forms of the Subjunctive Mood despite the fact that they have become archaic and are found as survivals in poetry, high prose, official documents and certain set expressions (Harsh 1968, Visser 1966). Should/would forms are free syntactical combinations. Here belong modal verb combinations and modal expressions. According to the other linguists (Trager, Smith 1951) there is no grammatical category of Subjunctive Mood since there are no special grammatical forms to express it. As regards something imaginary, desirable, problematic, contrary to reality (subjunctive mood meanings) they are expressed by verb combinations called “modelike” and “similar to the modes”. P. Roberto has it (Roberto 1958) that they are should/would +infinitive collocations, where should and would, may and might are modal verbs.
W. Francis (Francis 1958) divides mood forms into 2 groups:
may, can, shall, will, must + infinitive
have, be, be going, be about + infinitive
These groups overlap. He does not mention the Subjunctive Mood.
Like W. Francis, R. Allen (1966: 162) speaks of two groups: that of modals (modal auxiliaries) and quasi modals (to be able etc.). A. Hill and R. Hall (Hill 1958; Hall 1964) question the existence of the Subjunctive Mood, since there are no inflexions to show it and thus come to the conclusion that there is no grammatical category of mood in English. Along with it they admit that there are forms that could be used in the subjunctive function.
The analysis of the viewpoints held by foreign scholars shows that we deal with a mixture of terms and phenomena that mislead and confuse the reader (Cf. R. Long 1966: 204-208).
In this country the scholars that regard the formal criterion as the primary one are I. P. Ivanova, V. V. Burlakova, G. G. Pocheptsov (Теоретическая грамматика современного русского языка 1981: 68-74). They account for the complexity and lack of harmony in mood system forms by historical development (Cf. B. S. Khaimovich and B. I. Rogovskaya 1967: 157): the new analytical forms with should have come to replace the former present subjunctive in popular speech.
Cf: Take heed, lest thou fall
Take heed, lest you should fall.
(In American English where many archaic features are better preserved the former present tense forms are more common). I. P. Ivanova and alia hold that more importance should be given to the context in which this or that meaning is realized. Their inventory of the Subjunctive Mood forms includes the traditional grammatical forms treated as the Subjunctive Mood forms.
The Subjunctive Mood and the Category of Tense
Time is objective, but all the moods, the indicative excluding, are subjective, that’s why the grammatical meaning of the opposition lived :: had lived, would come :: would have come is that of time correlation, not the temporal meaning (Ilyish 1971). The authors of “Теоретическая грамматика современного английского языка” also point out the time correlation meaning of some forms of the Subjunctive Mood. Some foreign scholars also connect some subjunctive mood forms with the temporal planes of the Present/Past/Future depending on the context, while some scholar point out the modality of some subjunctive mood forms: assuredness, reality He had come, I should have left, If I were King… (Evans B., Evans C. 1957: 484; Jacobson 1975: 281).
The correlation between the Subjunctive Mood and the category of tense seems to be the only point that is not contradictory (the least controversial point).
The English Mood can also be described in terms of the binary theory (Якобсон 1972: 95-113). But it doesn’t help solve the problem of the Subjunctive Mood. Analysing the grammatical means used to express the subjunctive mood meanings takes you nowhere.
Де Гроот (1972: 169-213) offers another attempt of describing the theory of Mood. According to Гроот, the Subjunctive Mood in English lacks productive semantic function. It only has a syntactic function. The sphere of its usage is confined to writing and literary speech. He suggests that the opposition the Subjunctive Mood :: the Indicative Mood be replaced by a complicated system of moods; ignoring many forms and meanings traditionally considered subjunctive. The drawback of the theory is the following: it is too complicated, miscellaneous as regards the forms, there is no definition of the mood as a category.
It is obvious that another attempt to interpret the phenomena traditionally treated as the Subjunctive Mood will not contribute to the new understanding of the problem. It always takes us back to the starting point: one and the same form can mean various things; and the same grammatical meaning can be expressed by different means.
The Function of the Subjunctive Mood
In Old English the function of the Subjunctive Mood was expressing modality. Later its usage in simple sentences was narrowed and the Subjunctive Mood forms were used mainly in sub-clauses. It is free syntactical combinations of modal verb with the infinitive, that assumed the function of expressing modality. The old function of expressing modality is represented in a simple sentence with the Subjunctive Mood. In Modern English the Subjunctive Mood is found in clichés.
In all other cases the Subjunctive Mood forms are used in complex sentences and their meanings can be deduced from the context and depend on the structure and kind of the clause (Ермолаева 1978) which emphasizes the syntactical function of the Subjunctive Mood. It is small wonder that some Soviet and foreign scholars believe that the problem can be solved on the clause level (Muir 1972: 93). Мартынов (1985: 155) “Absolute linguistic realia belong to semantic syntax, not to morphology”.
But before the Subjunctive Mood is interpreted as a syntactical category it requires definition. It is only then that one could attempt to describe the phenomenon from the new stand.