Sytnax as part of grammar.

Предложение признается основной единицей синтаксиса.

Hierarchy of Syntactic Units

1 ) Word-group

2 ) Sentence

3 ) Text

• WG =/= Sentence: Intonation + Predication

WG =/= S =/= Text: Discursive features(Литра: Воронцова, Маскальская - о тексте)

Текст предполагалось описывать также, как и предложение, чтобы выявить содержательные категории и их формальное наполнение, как и в предложении.

Но это не получилось, т.к. текст - сложное образование: там все не так однозначно. Если текст - отражение замысла автора, он все более вариативен.

Именно обращение к тексту позволило принять такие термины и явления, которые невозможно описать в пределах предложения.

ПРЕДЛОЖЕНИЕ

- грамматическое основа

- предикативность

- интонация

ТЕКСТ

- многократная предикативность

- сложная интонация

- КАТЕГОРИЯ ТЕКСТОВОЙ МОДАЛЬНОСТИ

Issues of syntactic analysis

Syntactical relation between words

When we speak about sentences and the row of the words in them , we can sya that in principle words combine in the S on the basis of their semantics.

Speaking about semantics, we can resort to the Lexical and Grammatical semantics of W. W can be combined in the S if they are compatible.

How do lexical and grammatical semantics co-operation in language expressions?

1) Her sister is teaching English. Her hobby is teaching English.

2) *Green rose. Pink grass.

3) A doctor's degree. The doctor's recommendation.

When we deal with 2 identical structured (1) the different between the 2 sentences is not about lexical semantics, but grammatical semantics.

(3) the same form noun (Doctor's): 2 meanings! To produce a functionally appropriate sentence, a sentence that is sensible and possible to perceive, we have to aim at the compatibility of 2 different kinds of semantics, which we have to produce in sentences in which we deal with compatible lexical and grammatical semantics.

It is possible to ignore the lexical matter, and focus on the grammatical relations between W, because this is what stands behind the structure of the grammar.

Traditionally, there are 2 basic types of grammatical relation between W and clauses.(речь и о СЛОВАХ, и о ПРЕДЛОЖЕНИЯХ)

In grammar we can speak about COORDINATION (сочинение) and SUBORDINATION (подчинение).

COORDINATION: grammatical equality in W joined together: the W you combine are supposed to be the same morphologcal staters.

• Syndetic (conjunctive) - эксплицитные связи сочинения

• Asyndetic (word order) - имплицитные

SYNDETIC:

2 units. There is a coordination conjunction (4 groups)

John and Mary John or Mary

John, but not Mary

The difference of the conjunction used, for there are different of meaning.

- We speak about copulative meaning of Coordination, when we anumenaate them

- Disjunctive: the idea of choice- Adversative meaning: when we oppose objects

We rely on the order of the coordinated elements.

To identify SC we resort the punctuation in writing, and intonation in speech.

SUBORDINATION: INEQUALITY in the grammatical staters of the elements joined together.

The immediate result of S is that one of the W becomes the main element of the structure, it is terminologically referred to as the HEAD word, while the other W become subordinated, it is terminologically referred to as a modifier of the head word.

Red rose:

relation of subordination.

The head word: the noun that is described with the help of adj.

S is also represented syndatically and asyndatically.

Вопрос согласования может перейти из сферы грамматики в сферу дискурса.

GOVERNMENT

A kind of relation in which the form of the subordinated W is determined by the form of the headword, but these forms are different.

Example:

1) when we combine a V with an Obj (Jane loves John) and instead of a noun we choose a pronoun (Jane loves HIM). Pronoun in objective case.

2) The use of the Genitive case in Nouns when we choose to produce a phrase conveying the idea of possession.

On the whole, speaking about G, we can say that this kind of relation sis widespread in modern English. In the majority of cases G can be deduced from the order of subordinated elements, alternatively we can resort to the use of function words of which preposition are the most important.

-> Syndatic subordination (G) - when we see prepositional structures.

RELATION S BETWEEN THE SUBJECT AND THE PREDICATE

I. S + P = AGREEMENT(R. Quirk, E. Palmer, H. Whitehall)

II. S + P = predicative (reciprocal) relations

(Смирницкий, Бархударов)

III. S + P = interdependence

(L. Hjelmslev)

Subject Predicate person action

number state process

SYNTACTIC RELATIONS REVISITED

• Cumulation (кумуляция)

- his new coat

- some old letters

- Queen Mary

- Alfred the King

CUMULATION

- his new coat

• some old letters

Both attributes somehow describe their head-words.

If it is really so, we have to take it for granted that there should be certain relation between HIS and NEW, and SOME and OLD.

The only proof the such relations is the impossibility to arrange them in any different way.

New his coat, new some letters.

How can we account for the impossibility to rearrange the attributes???

Кумуляция - накопление к итогу. Чем больше определений - тем лучше качественно мы описываем предмет и выделяем из массы предметов. Но грамматика, зафиксировав это способ описания, не может объяснить причину порядка определений.

ЭТО ЗАГАДКА. НИКТО ЕЩЕ НЕ СМОГ ОБЪЯСНИТЬ.

Единственное доказательство отношений - тот факт, что нельзя изменить порядок.

APPOSITION

has not been exhaustedly described by grammarians. However, it is absolutely clear that in appositive structures we deal with neither Coordination, not Subordination.

-Queen Mary

In this phrase both W may be viewed as heads, at the same time both W may be viewed as modifiers. In Subordination we are supposed to have 1 head W and 1 modifier.

We can say that to a certain extent such phrases resemble those which are based on the basis of Coordination, because they are supposed to have grammatical affinity. But in coordinated structures proper a free element possesses its individual referent, while in appositive structures both W are identical in reference.

Собачка Тузик. - сложно выделить, что из этих 2 слова должно представлять собой главное. Что важнее: что это собачка или Тузик? В поиске причин, мы покидаем сферу грамматической системы. Если мы берем словосочетание John, Simon and Jean:

John, Simon - 2 участника одного пола. Но QUEEN MARY - 2 слова для описания 1 человека.

ASPECTS OF THE SENTENCE

Correlation between the Structural and Communicative Aspects

The S no matter how obvious this unit seems to be, has not been defined by grammarians. What they managed to establish is that S is extremely complicated. Thus when S are mentions in academic literature scientists prefer to talk about S concerning some particular aspects.

THERE ARE 4 basic aspects of the S:

1) The STRUCTURAL ASPECT deal with the form of the S. It describes the immediate component that make up the structural sentence party. The most typical representation of the strctural pattern in eng is the scheme S-V-O. Though the scheme is not exactly consistent, at the same time it represents the typical syntactic order of S parts, it also imforms us that the structural center of the Eng S is the VERB.

* S and O - syntactic terms.

V - morphosyntactic term:

- обладает значением

- отбирает синтаксическое окружение

Теория валентности:глагол, будучи семантическим узлом, проецирует своим содержанием своё окружение.

Example: TELL - нужен doer, соетается с object.

=> tell проецирует эту схему: S-V-O

Почему V вместо predicate: глагол может принимать дополнение не только в личной, но и неличной форме (to love smb) + глагол может формировать предикативные конструкции.

The STructural aspect is the oldest aspect under discussion, it is almost exhausted.

It is very important with the teaching practice.

2) THE SEMANTIC ASPECT of the Eng S concerns its MEANING.

(TO BE CONTINUED....)

3) THE PRAGMATIC ASPECT of the S concerns the ABILITY of a S to BECOME A UNITOF COMMUNICATION. Every Eng S is uttered / produced with a certain purpose in the mind of a speaker. The roughest pragmatic subdivision of the S is: declarative, interrogative and imperative.

However, in modern grammar this subdivision became much more detailed

(TO BE CONTINUED IN THE 2 SEMESTER)

4) THE ACTUAL ASPECT of the S looks into the possible WAYS IMPLOYED BY THE S AS A GRAM UNIT TO DESCRIBE a situation of objective reality.S using the categories of tense and mood in the V to together with the categories of person and number and various ... expressions manage to relate the S to one particular situation of extra-linguistic rality.

(СМ ПРОБЛЕМЫ РЕФЕРЕНЦИИ ВО 2 СЕМЕСТРЕ)

THERE ARE 2 possibilities to classify the S as a structural unit.

STRUCTURAL CLASIFICATION 1

- COMPOSITE:

compound

complex-SIMPLE

It is based on the vital criterion that presupposes the construction of the S on teh basis of a CLAUSES (гр основа). Depending of the umber of closes S fall in to Simple and Composite: Compound and Complex (if 2 clauses are coordinated - COMPOUND S (сложносочиненная); if 1 clause is made dependent on the other - COMPLEX).

STRUCTURAL CLASIFICATION 2

* One member

* Two-member

* Presence of secondary parts:

- extended

- unextended (non-)*

Completeness:

- eliptical

-non eliptical

It looks into the inner structure of the S.

The subdivision here is into 1 or 2 member S: the presence/absence of the Subj or Predicate in a clause.

Presence/Absence is registered by the terms Extended or Unexstended.

There's no direct correlation between Structural and Communicative. We tend to produce a variety of ideas, the Communitive classification is more extended rather than the structural classification. The choice will depend on the degree of language acquisition.

The treatment of the S s introduced by Barkhudarov, who was one of the first linguists between the Commun and Struc.

If we want to introduce some statement in our speech, we are to resort the unmasked type of the S that is formally based on the direct order: descending stepping scale...

It will be unmarked and neutral.

DECLARATIVE statements may be formed in the basis of INVERSION, which falls into lexical and grammatical and when we speak about the so-called gram inversion, we mainly focus on the order of the S and P and the arrangement of the elements in the analytical structures.

Down the slope came the skiers.

Hardly had he entered when there came a shot.

INTERROGATIVE:

the marked typed from the viewpoint of the communicative purpose: we search for information

It is based on inversion (partial). They presuppose presence of special WH- words, as well as interrogative pronounce and words. Barkhudarov insists that we should start with the 2 major types of the ? (general and special)

* Alternative

Бархударов: если мы создаем альтер предложение, что мы используем? Мы создаем 2 общих вопроса в совместимыми структурными схемами, устраняем избыточность структурных компонентов и маркируем особенность выбора с помощью средств, все грам системы.

* Disjunctive question. These ? in fact are not treated as such in foreign grammars. The idea of this type of ? contradicts with the idea of information search. But this ? is meant to confirm.* Echoing questions appear when you fail to hear what your partner says. You stimulate them to repeat.

* Rhetorical ? are not ? at all. It is a specific way of expressing one's opinion.

IMPERATIVE S are also marked. They are restricted from he viewpoint of their communicative purpose. The idea of inducement. Structure: S are marked by the absense of the S, which occasionally may be introduced. Besides, sch S are marked in terms of morphology: they employ Vin the imperative mood. On the basis of such S you can never produce a ?.

EXCLAMATORY are also treated as a debatable issue in syntax. They may be different. Any structural type of the ones we have already spoken about may be turned into an EX S if you introduce a certain intonation pattern in speech and a "!" in writing. WE deal with structurally marked EX S, beginning with "WHAT and HOW" and a certain order and "!"

As a resurl the idea remains vague.* Unmarked type: They are making such noise?

* Marked type: What a noise they are making!

TRANSPOSITION OF STRUCTURAL TYPES

OF THE SENTENCE

COMPLETE AND INCOMPLETE SENTENCES

ONE-MEMBER SENTENCES

We speak about 1MS if of the 2 main members only 1 is employed and this primary member is neither the S nor the Predicate fof the S. In the Eng language the group of 1MS is quite limited.

1MS are treated as structurally complete.

ELLIPTICAL S

are structurally and semantically incomplete.

2 types:

- PARADIGMATIC

- SYNTAGMATIC

SYNTAGMATIC can be restored from the previous S that immediatelly precedes the elliptical S. To restore the structure and meaning of this S you need the CONTEXT!

PRADIGMATIC: to restore the structure we dont have the preious S. Instead we restore the structure on the basis of our knowledge of grammar of a particular lang. When we have to restore a paradigmatic elliptical S we resort to the full paradigm of a complete S.

Among PES we can single out 2 sub-groups:

1) ELLIPTICAL S which can be COMPLETED IN 1 WAY ONLY (1 particular paradigm is employed)

2) PES that can be COMPLETED IN SEVERAL WAYS (with the help of severla paradigms)