IV. Syntagmatic and paradigmatic patterning.

The sentence and the phrase as particular syntactic patterns are traditionally viewed as standing to one another in two types of relations: syntagmatic and paradigmatic.

Syntagmatic relations are immediate linear relations between units in a sequence,

e.g.: The book was sold at a great reduction in price.

In this sentence syntagmatically connected are the words: “was sold”, “at a reduction in price”, “at a great reduction” etc.

Paradigmatic relations exist between elements of the system outside the strings where they co-occur. Paradigmatics finds its expression in a system of oppositions, for example sentences of various functional destination can be viewed as opposed to each other: question as opposed to statement, negation as opposed to affirmation (about syntactic oppositions read in the book by M.Y. Bloch p.286).

Syntactic oppositions are realized by correlated sentence patterns, the relations between which can be described as transformations. Some of the patterns are base patterns, others are their transformations, for example, a question can be described as produced from a statement, e.g.: He is interested in sports. Is he interested in sports? A negation produced from an affirmation, e.g.: He is interested in sports. He is not interested in sports.

Paradigmatics can be understood as syntactic derivation of more complex pattern-constructions out of basic or kernel pattern-constructions. There are two types of derivational relations in the paradigmatic system:

1. the constructional relations

2. the predicative relations.

The constructional derivation effects the formation of more complex clausal structures out of simpler ones. Kernel sentences can undergo changes into clauses (the process of clausalization) and phrases (the process of phrasalization). For example, the two kernel sentences “They departed from the city” and “They started a new life” produce the following constructions, which demonstrate clausalization:

1. As they departed from the city, they started a new life;

2. If they depart from the city they shall start a new life;

3. They departed from the city, and they started a new life;

4. They departed from the city, but they did not start a new life.

These kernel sentences also produce constructions, which demonstrate phrasalization:

1) On their departure from the city (a case of complete nominalization) they started a new life;

2) They departed from the city to start a new life (a case of partial nominalization);

3) They departed from the city starting a new life (a case of partial nominalization);

4) Having departed from the city, they started a new life ( participal construction of adverbial status).

The predicative derivation realizes the formation of predicatively different units, and is responsible for the expression of the predicative semantics of the sentence.

So, kernel sentences undergo structural modification, which expresses the predicative functions of the sentence, e.g.: He has done the job. -> He has not done the job.

In this respect the kernel sentence is the simplest construction both in the notional and functional sense, that is it is an elementary sentence which is non-interrogative, non-imperative, non-negative, non-modal.

Thus, the main units of syntax, phrases and sentences, enter the system of language by their syntactic patterns. Syntactic patterns are explicated in syntagmatic and paradigmatic patterning.