- •Theoretical grammar
- •The Subject of Theoretical Grammar
- •Kinds of Theoretical Grammar
- •Theoretical approaches to language data interpretation
- •Main grammatical notions
- •1.3.1. Syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations.
- •1.3.2. Grammatical categories.
- •Subdivision of Language Levels’
- •General characteristics of the contemporary English language system
- •Characteristics of English:
- •Kinds of Morphemes
- •2.2. Principles of subdivision of parts of speech
- •1.Henry Sweet (19th century), an English linguist
- •2. Jence Otto Harry Jespersen (1860-1943), a Danish linguist
- •3. Charls Freez (19th-20th century), an American linguist
- •4. Lev Scherba (1880-1944), a Russian (Soviet) linguist,
- •2.3. Classification of parts of speech
- •2.4. Theory of the field structure of the word.
- •3.2. Subcategorization of the Noun.
- •The first classification of nouns
- •The second classification of nouns
- •3.3. Grammatical categories of the Noun.
- •The problem of the Gender of the English Noun.
- •The category of the Number.
- •The category of Case.
- •Comparing Grammatical Forms of the cases of the Latin and English Noun
- •4.1. Interpretation of the status of the English Article
- •4.2. The problem of the number of articles (how many morphological forms the Article can be presented in)
- •4.3. Functions and significance of the Article
- •5.2. Word-formative and word-changing systems of the Verb
- •5.3. Classification of verbs
- •5.3.1. Morphological Classification
- •Scheme of Morphological Classification of Verbs
- •5.3.2. Semantic Classification
- •Scheme of the 1st Semantic Classification of Verbs
- •Scheme of the 2nd Semantic Classification of Verbs
- •5.3.3. Syntactic Classification
- •Scheme of Syntactic Classification of Verbs
- •5.4. Grammatical Categories of the English Verb General Characteristics of the Categories of the English Verb
- •I Categories of the Finite Verbs
- •Terms that are used to name Forms of the Verb that do not make agree with Persons
- •6.2. The Paradigm of the Non-Finite Forms
- •6.3. Functions and Significance of the Non-Finite Forms
- •7.2. Classification of Word-combinations
- •Examples of types of word-combinations
- •Syntactic Location;
- •Morphological Form
- •Presence or absence of Syntacategorematic words
- •7.2. Classification of sentences. Structural Approach.
- •General Structure of the Simple Sentence
- •7.3. Semantics of the Sentence. Relevant Model.
- •Correspondence of Semantic Roles and their syntactic realisation
- •Practice I
- •Test I (teacher’s copy)
- •Test I (s)
- •Practice I Main grammar notions Syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations. Grammar categories
Main grammatical notions
1.3.1. Syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations.
As for the structure Theoretical Grammar can be stipulated by syntagmatic (distributive) or paradigmatic (transformative) relations.
O
ther
words, connections of language elements can be syntagmatic
or paradigmatic
(drawing 1.3).
Relations of contiguity The relations stipulate connections of language elements of the highest level. Adjacent language elements (relations of contiguity) can not replace each other for they belong to the different grammatical categories. They create meaningful combinations and have a propriety to combine meaningfully (not any two or more elements can be combined). * A combination of sounds creates a morpheme (a) or even a word (b). For instance: a) [p] + [r] + [i] = [pri] (the prefix ‘pre’ that means ‘before or preceding sth’); b) [t] + [i] + [n] = [tin] (the word ‘tin’ that means ‘a chemical element, a soft silver-white metal’). BUT the sounds [p], [r], [t], [n], for example, together will not create any meaningful combination (the same – in the brought under examples). * A combination of morphemes creates a word. For instance: the prefix ‘in’ (here = ‘not’) + the root ‘explic’ (from ‘explicit’ = ‘clear’) + the suffix ‘able’ (= ‘can’) = the word ‘inexplicable’ (‘that cannot be understood or explained’). * A combination of words creates a phrase (a) or a sentence (b). For instance: a) the article ‘a’ + the noun ‘pint’ + the preposition ‘of’ + the noun ‘milk’ = the phrase ‘a pint of milk’; b) The pronoun ‘She’ + the auxiliary ‘has’ + the notional verb ‘come’ = the sentence ‘She has come’. |
|
Relations of similarity The relations unite language elements that cannot become adjacent but can replace each other. They belong to a class of elements that has a general similarity and forms paradigmatic series. For instance: a) in the given under varieties of a phrase
a cup of milk bottle gallon the words ‘pint’, ‘cup’, ‘bottle’, ‘gallon’ are included to the series of language elements which means some quantity of a liquid and can replace each other in accordance with the quantity that is meant. Thus, the words form a paradigmatic line of language elements;
b) in the given under sentences Jack is sleeping. Jill is reading. predicates can replace each other in accordance with a real situation, too: Jack is reading. Jill is sleeping. Though they cannot be adjacent. It is impossible to use them adjacently: Jack (Jill) is sleeping, reading. It is incorect use that has no sense. Thus, the predicates ‘is sleeping’ and ‘is reading’ form a paradigmatic class of predicates and the proper names ‘Jack’ and ‘Jill’ – the one of subjects.
c) the given under forms of the verb ‘mean’ mean, meaning, meant, has meant, is meant, had been meant, meaningful, etc. also create a paradigmatic line of forms that are variants of the word ‘mean’. |
Drawing 1.3. Two general types of structural relations of language elements

pint