
- •The subject of theoretical grammar, it’s purpose..
- •The grammatical structure of English language.
- •Morphology and syntax as two main parts of grammar.
- •Language as a system and structure. Levels
- •Systemic relations in language. Syntagmatic relations.
- •Systemic relations in language. Paradigmatic relations.
- •Linguistic units and their peculiarities.
- •The morphemic structure of the word as a language unit.
- •The word as the smallest naming unit and the main unit of morphology.
- •Lexical and grammatical aspects of the word. Types of grammatical meanings
- •Explicit grammatical categories.Implicit lexico-grammatical categories. Types and kinds of oppositions
- •Parts of speech. Different approaches to the system of parts of speech in Modem English.
- •Criteria for classification of words into parts of speech in Modem English: semantic, formal and functional. Notional and functional parts of speech
- •The Noun as a part of speech, its grammatical categories. The category of number and its peculiarities in Modem English.
- •The category of case. Different approaches to the category of case in Modem English
- •The problem of gender in English. Personal pronouns as gender indicators of nouns.
- •The Adjective as a part of speech. Problems concerning the category of degrees of comparison in Modem English.The Stative.
- •Substuntivisation of adjectives and adjectivization of nouns
- •The Verb. Finite and non-finite forms of the verb. The category of finitude
- •The Verb. The category of tense. The problem of existence of morphological future tense
- •21. The Verb.The category of aspect. Aspect opposition
- •22. The category of voice and its peculiarities in English
- •The problem of so-called Reflexive, Reciprocal and Middle voice in Modern English
- •The category of mood. The problem of mood opposition. Mood and modality
- •25. The verb. The category of person and number.
- •26. The Perfect forms in Modern English. Divergent views concerning the essence of the Perfect forms.
- •27. Syntax as a part of grammar. The main concepts of syntax.
- •28. Basic syntactic notions: syntactic units, syntactic relations, syntactic connections.
- •29. The phrase and the problem of its definition. The main distinctive features of the phrase as compared with those of the word and the sentence.
- •30. Nominal word combinations. Noun phrase with pre-posed and post-posed adjuncts.
- •31. Verbal word combinations. Types of verbal complements
- •32. Means of expressing syntactical relations between the components of subordinate phrases
- •33. The sentence and the problem of its definitions. The main essential features of the sentence. Implicit predication.
- •34. Classification of sentence acc. To the purpose of utterance and acc. To their structure. Two- member and one-member sentences.
- •35. Simple sentence. Principle, secondary and detached parts of the sent.
- •36. The utterance. Informative structure of the utterance.The theme and the rheme.
- •37. The utterance. Communicative and pragmatic types of utterances.
- •38. The composite sentence and the problem of coordination and subordination.
- •39. The criteria for classification of subordinate clauses.
- •SubjectandPredicateClauses:
- •2. Object Clauses:
- •3. Attributive Clauses
- •40. Text as a syntactic unit. Coherence, cohesion and deixis as the main features of the text.
- •41. Textual connective devices. Reiterations, collocation, endophoric relations.
- •42.Pragmatic approach to the study of language units.
- •43. Speech Act Theory. Classifications of speech acts.
- •According to their origin:
- •According to their function:
- •Classification
- •44. Indirect speech acts.
The Verb. The category of tense. The problem of existence of morphological future tense
The verbal category of tense in the most general sense expresses the time characteristics of the process denoted by the verb.
It is necessary to distinguish between time as a general category and time as a linguistic category. Time in the general philosophical presentation along with space is the form of existence of matter; it is independent of human perception and is constantly changing. Time is reflected by human beings through their perception and intellect and finds its expression in language, in the meaning of various lexical and grammatical lingual units. The moment of immediate perception and reflection of actual reality, linguistically fixed as “the moment of speech”, makes the so-called “present moment” and serves as the demarcation line between the past and the future. Linguistic expression of time may be either oriented toward the moment of speech, “present-oriented”, “absolutive”, or it may be “non-present-oriented”, “non-absolutive”. The “absolutive time” denotation embraces three spheres: the past, the present and the future. The sphere of the present includes the moment of speech and can be expressed lexically by such words and word-combinations asthis moment, today, this week, this millennium, etc. The sphere of the past precedes the sphere of the present by way of retrospect and can be expressed lexically by such words and word-combinations as last week, yesterday, many years ago, etc. The sphere of the future follows the sphere of the present by way of prospect and can be expressed lexically by such words and word-combinations as soon, in two days, next week, etc. The “non-present-oriented” time denotation may be either “relative” or “factual”. The “relative time” denotation shows the correlation of two or more events and embraces the priority (the relative past),the simultaneity (the relative present) and the posteriority (the relative future)of one event in relation to another. Relative time is lexically expressed by such words and word-combinations as after that, before that, at the same time with, some time later, soon after, etc. The factual expression of time denotes real astronomical time or historical landmarks unrelated with either the moment of speech or any other time center; it can be expressed lexically by such words and word-combinations as in the morning, in 1999, during World War II, etc.
Factual time can be expressed only lexically (as shown above), while absolutive and relative expressions of time in English can be not only lexical, but also grammatical. The grammatical expression of verbal time through morphological forms of the verbs constitutes the grammatical category of tense (from the Latin word “tempus” – “time”).
The tense category in English differs a lot from the verbal categories of tense in other languages, for example, in Russian. The tense category in Russian renders absolutive time semantics; the three Russian verbal tense forms present the events as developing in time in a linear way from the past to the future, cf.: Онработал вчера; Он сегодня работает; Он будет работать завтра. In English there are four verbal tense forms: the present (work), the past (worked), the future (shall/will work), and the future-in-the-past (should/would work). The two future tense forms of the verb express the future in two separate ways: as an after-event in relation to the present, e.g.: He will work tomorrow (not right not),and as an after-event in relation to the past, e.g.: He said he would work the next day. The future forms of the verb in English express relative time – posteriority in relation to either the present or the past. The present and the past forms of the verb render absolutive time semantics, referring the events to either the plane of the present or to the plane of the past; this involves all the finite verb forms, including the perfect, the continuous, and the future forms. Thus, there is not just one verbal category of tense in English but two interconnected tense categories, one of them rendering absolutive time semantics by way of retrospect (past vs. present) and the other rendering relative time semantics by way of prospect (after-action vs. non-after-action).
This approach is vindicated by the fact, that logically one and the same category cannot be expressed twice in one and the same form: the members of the paradigm should be mutually exclusive; the existence of a specific future-in-the-past form shows that there are two tense categories in English.
One more problem is to be tackled in analyzing the English future tenses: the status of the verbs shall/will and should/would. Some linguists, O. Jespersen and L. S. Barkhudarov among them, argue that these verbs are not the auxiliary verbs of the analytical future tense forms, but modal verbs denoting intention, command, request, promise, etc. in a weakened form, e.g.: I’ll go there by train. = I intend (want, plan) to go there by train. On this basis they deny the existence of the verbal future tense in English.
As a matter of fact, shall/will and should/would are in their immediate etymology modal verbs: verbs of obligation (shall) and volition (will). But nowadays they preserve their modal meanings in no higher degree than the future tense forms in other languages: the future differs in this respect from the past and the present, because no one can be positively sure about events that have not yet taken place or are not taking place now. A certain modal coloring is inherent to the future tense semantics in any language as future actions are always either anticipated, or foreseen, or planned, or desired, or necessary, etc. On the other hand, modal verbs are treated as able to convey certain future implication in many contexts, cf.: I may/might/ could travel by bus.
This does not constitute sufficient grounds to refuse shall/will andshould/would the status of auxiliary verbs of the future. The homonymous, though cognate, verbs shall/will and should/would are to be distinguished in contexts, in which they function as purely modal verbs, e.g.: Payment shall be made by cheque; Why are you asking him? He wouldn’t know anything about it, and in contexts in which they function as the auxiliary verbs of the future tense forms with subdued modal semantics, e.g.: I will be forty next month.