- •Seminar 1 syntax as a part of grammar Topics for Discussion
- •Literature
- •Practical Tasks
- •Practical Tasks
- •Seminar 3 syntax of the simple sentence: traditional view Topics for Discussion
- •Topics for Reports
- •Literature
- •11. Иванова и.П., Бурлакова в.В., Почепцов г.Г. Теоретическая грамматика
- •16. Плоткин в.Я. Строй английского языка. – м., 1989.
- •Practical Tasks
- •Syntax of the simple sentence: alternative approaches Topics for Discussion
- •Literature
- •1. Blokh m.Y., Semionova t.N., Timofeyeva s.V. Theoretical English Grammar.
- •2. Кобрина н.А., Болдырев н.Н., Худяков а.А. Теоретическая грамматика
- •Practical tasks
- •Seminar 5
- •Literature
- •Seminar 6 syntax of the composite sentence: compound sentence Topics for Discussion
- •Topics for Reports
- •Literature
- •Practical tasks
- •I. State the type of clause connection and identify the semantic relation between clauses in the following compound sentences:
- •Literature
- •Practical tasks
- •Seminar 8 syntax of the semi-composite sentence Topics for Discussion
- •Topics for Reports
- •Literature
- •Practical tasks
- •Seminar 9 cognitive approach in syntax Topics for Discussion
- •Topics for Reports
- •Literature
- •Practical tasks
- •2. The notions “event integration” and “macro-event”. Linguistic patterns for the
- •Representation of macro–events (see: Further readings on syntax in this book from
- •L.Talmy “Toward a cognitive semantics”.
- •Literature
- •Practical tasks
- •The ditransitive construction
- •The caused-motion construction
- •Seminar 11 syntax of the text Points for Discussion
- •Points for Reports
- •Literature
- •1. Blokh m.Y. A Course in Theoretical English Grammar. Moscow, 2006.
- •2. Blokh m.Y., Semionova t.N., Timofeyeva s.V. Theoretical English Grammar.
- •Practical tasks
- •I. State the type of inter-sentence relation. Identify the means of sentence
- •Revision Test yourself:
- •Topics for reports and course projects:
- •Examination questions:
- •1. On syntagmatic relations (from “cognitive grammar” by j.R. Taylor)
- •2. On sentence typology: clause types and clause structure (from “cognitive grammar” by j.R. Taylor)
- •3. Semantics of the constructions (from “constructions” by a.Goldberg)
- •The construction is associated with a category of related senses:
- •4. Event integration in syntax (from “toward a cognitive semantics” by l. Talmy)
- •Schemas of the macro-event Linguistic representation
- •Type of support relation between Linguistic representation
- •Type of support relation between Linguistic representation
Schemas of the macro-event Linguistic representation
Motion as the framing event is realized through “Path”. The co-event is a “self-contained motion”- aspectually unbounded activity, such as rotation, oscillation, local wander, etc.
Motion is realized through “Path + Ground”. The co-event is an action.
|
1.The ball rolled / bounced down the hall. “Path” is represented by the prepositional phrase; “co-event” (“self-contained motion”) – by the verb-predicate.
2.He drove her home. 3. I kicked the door shut. “Path + Ground” is represented by the satellites (home (2), shut (3).
|
Type of support relation between Linguistic representation
a co-event and a framing event
Manner: This type of relation presupposes that the co-event is an additional activity, performed concurrently with the framing event
Manner subtypes: Agentive Manner (there is an Agent, who performs the additional activity (co-event) which leads to and causes the framing event itself) Nonagentive Manner (the source of the co-event (additional activity) is the moving figure itself)
Cause This type of relation presupposes that the co-event is an additional activity which causes the co-event , which in turn causes the framing event.
Cause subtypes: Agentive Cause (the source of the cause of motion is an Agent)
Nonagentive Cause (the source of the cause is not explicitly expressed)
|
1. I rolled the pen across the table. (= I acted on the pen and made it move across the table, rolling as it went.)
|
S t a t e c h a n g e a s t h e f r a m i n g e v e n t
The macro-event framed by a state change event consists of a co-event (any process or activity that determines the dynamics of the macro-event and causes a change in some of its property) and a framing event “state change”, which announces the result or final stage of the dynamics of the macro-event.
The analysis of linguistic expressions suggests that the schema of the macro-event is that of the motion event: “Path” or “Path + Ground”. Within the structure of the macro-event, state change as a framing event is more abstract than a co-event and often involves change in an individual’s cognitive state. For example, state changes may include “to become awake / aware / familiar / in possession / existent / nonexistent / dead etc. The co-event is concrete and physical (compare the verb predicates in the examples below). The most prevalent type of relation between a co-event and framing event are the same as with the case of motion (Manner and Cause).