Теоретическая грамматика английского языка = Theoretical Grammar of the English Language. Учебное пособие

in the sentence. Professor I.P. Ivanova thinks that they shall be considered as homonymous units (Ivanova, 1989).

The Pronoun

Pronouns have a very generalized meaning: they point to any objects, beings, abstract concepts, without naming them. This is a highly generalized part of speech, actualized in context, in a situation, but devoid of objective real content. The main function of the pronoun is deictic, i.e. they substitite other parts of speech. Pronouns have the same syntactic functions as nouns or adjectives. They constitute a limited class of words (that is a closed system) with numerous subclasses. They are generally differentiated into noun-pronouns (substituting nouns) and adjective-pronouns (substituting adjectives) (Kobrina, Korneeva, 1999).

All pronouns fall into a number of subclasses, different in lexical content, morphological forms and syntactic functions. Usually the following subclasses are distinguished: personal pronouns, possessive, demonstrative, reflexive, interrogative, reciprocal, relative, indefinite, negative.

31

MODULE 3

The Verb. General Notion

Grammatically the verb is the most complex part of speech. This is due to the central role it performs in the expression of the predicative functions of the sentence, i.e. the functions of establishing the connection between the situation and reality. The complexity of the verb is inherent not only in the intricate structure of its grammatical categories, but also in its various subclass divisions, as well as in its falling into two sets of forms profoundly different from each other: the finite set and the non-finite set (verbals, or verbids) (Blokh, 2000).

The categorial semantics of the verb is process presented dynamically. This general processual meaning is embedded in the semantics of all the verbs. It is proved by the verb valency and the syntactic function of the predicate. The verb combines with a noun expressing the doer of the action (subject), transitive verbs have objects, also verbs combine with adverbs modifying the process expressed by the verb.

In the sentence the finite verb performs the functions of the predicate, expressing the processual categorial features of predication, i.e. time, aspect, voice, and mood. From the point of view of their outward structure, verbs are characterized by specific forms of word-building, as well as by the formal features expressing the corresponding grammatical categories. The grammatical categories which find formal expression in the outward structure of the verb are, first, the category of finitude dividing the verb into finite and non-finite forms (this category has lexico-grammatical force); second, the categories of person, number, tense, aspect, voice, and mood (Blokh, 2000).

The class of verbs falls into a number of subclasses distinguished by different semantic and lexico-grammatical features. On the upper level of this division two unequal sets are identified: the set of verbs of full nominative value (notional verbs) which are opposed to the set of verbs of partial nominative value (semi-notional and functional verbs). The set of notional verbs is derivationally open. The second set is derivationally closed, it includes limited subsets of verbs characterized by individual relational properties. On the lower level of division each set can be subdivided into numerous subsets according to their relevant features (Blokh, 2000).

Notional verbs are classified on the basis of three main principles: the relation of the subject of the verb to the process denoted by the

32

verb, the aspective verbal semantics, the verbal combinability with other language units (Blokh, 2000).

According to the first criterion (the relation of the subject of the verb to the process denoted by the verb), all notional verbs can be divided into actional and statal. This division is grammatically relevant since it explains the difference between the actional and statal verbs in their attitude towards the denotation of the action in progress. Actional verbs express the action performed by the subject, i.e. they present the subject as an active doer. Statal verbs, unlike their subclass counterparts, denote the state of their subject. Alongside the two verbal sets, a third one could be distinguished which is made up of verbs expressing neither actions, nor states, but ‘process-verbs’.

Aspective verbal semantics (the second criterion) exposes the inner character of the process denoted by the verb. According to the aspective verbal semantics, two major subclasses of notional verbs are singled out: limitive and unlimitive. The verbs of the first order present a process as potentially limited. The verbs of the second order present a process as not limited by any border point. The demarcation line between the two aspective verbal subclasses is not rigidly fixed, the actual differentiation between them being in fact rather loose. The English lexical aspect differs radically from the Russian aspect. In terms of semantic properties, the English lexical aspect expresses a potentially limited or unlimited process, whereas the Russian aspect expresses the actual conclusion (the perfective, or terminative aspect) or non-conclusion (the imperfective, or non-terminative aspect) of the process in question. In terms of systemic properties, the two English lexical aspect varieties, unlike their Russian absolutely rigid counterparts, are but loosely distinguished and easily reducible. In accord with these characteristics, both the English limitive verbs and unlimitive verbs may correspond alternately either to the Russian perfective verbs or imperfective verbs, depending on the contextual uses (Blokh, 2000).

The syntactic valency of the verb falls into two cardinal types: obligatory and optional. The obligatory valency is such as must necessarily be realized for the sake of the grammatical completion of the syntactic construction. The subjective and the direct objective valencies of the verb are obligatory. The optional valency is not necessarily realized in grammatically complete constructions: this type of valency may or may not be realized depending on the concrete information

33

conveyed by the utterance. Most of the adverbial modifiers are optional parts of the sentence, so in terms of valency the adverbial valency of the verb is mostly optional.

Thus, according to the third criterion - the valency of the verb - all notional verbs are classified into two sets: complementive (taking obligatory adjuncts) and supplementive (taking optional adjuncts). Complementive and supplementive verbs fall into minor groups: complementive verbs are subdivided into predicative, objective, and adverbial verbs; supplementive verbs are subdivided into personal and impersonal verbs. In connection with complementive and supplementive characteristics of verbs there arises the question of clarifying the difference between the two notions - "objectivity" and "transitivity". Verbal objectivity is the ability of the verb to take any object, irrespective of its type. Verbal transitivity is the ability of the verb to take a direct object. The division of the verb into objective and non-objective is more relevant for English than for Russian morphology because in English not only transitive but also intransitive objective verbs can be used in passive forms.

Semi-notional and functional verbs are united in the set of the verbs characterized by partial nominative value. To this set of verbs refer several subdivisions of verbs: auxiliary verbs, modal verbs, link verbs, and semi-notional verbid introducer verbs. All semi-functional and purely functional verbs function as markers of predication showing the connection between the nominative content of the sentence and reality (Blokh, 2000).

The categories of person and number

These categories are closely connected with one another and at the same time different from the other categories of the verb. The nature of both of them is reflective: they cannot be characterized as processrelational similar to other aspects of the verbal categorial semantics. These aspects should be understood as substance-relational, reflected in the verb from the interpretation and grammatical featuring of the subject (Blokh, 2000)..

The expression of the category of person is mainly confined to the singular form of the verb in the present tense of the Indicative mood. As for the past tense, the person is not distinguished. In the present tense the expression of the category of person is divided into three subsystems:

34

modal verbs which have no personal inflexions, in them the category of person is wholly neutralized;

the unique verbal lexeme “be” which has three suppletive personalforms (am, is, are);

the regular, normal expression of person: the personal mark is confined to a third person singular; the other two persons remain unmarked.

In the future tense the person finds its expression in the first person in distinction to the remaining two; it includes also the plural form. The category of person in future is reflected in the opposition of the shall-will forms.

The category of number can hardly be viewed from the morphemic aspect. More or less distinct morphemic featuring of the category of number can be seen only with the forms of the verb “to be”. But even here the blending of person and number is rather profound the forms ‘are’ and ‘were’ penetrate the singular sphere in the expression of the second person (You are/were) (Blokh, 2000).

As for the rest of the verbs, the blending of the morphemic expression of the two categories is complete. The only explicit morphemic opposition in the integral categorial sphere of person and number is reduced to the third person singular as a marked member, contrasted to the unmarked form of the verb.

The ‘s’-ending doesn’t express number, as the form of the first person singular doesn’t have this ending. It doesn’t express the category of person either, as the third person plural (they look) is used without it.

The category of tense

The category of tense can be defined as a verbal category which reflects the objective category of time and expresses on this background the relations between time of the action and time of the utterance (Blokh, 2000).

The lexical expressions of time are divided into two groups:

1.The present-oriented, or absolute, distributing the intellective perception of time among three spheres: the present, the past, the future. Words and phrases such as: now, last week, yesterday, etc. give a temporal characteristic of an event from the point of view of its orientation towards the present.

2.Non-present-oriented or non-absolute expressions which don’t characterize an event in terms of orientation towards the present.

35

These expressions show the correlation of two or more events in time (preceding the other event, following it or simultaneous with it).

The grammatical expression of the verbal time, or tense, is realized in two correlated stages. At the first stage the process receives an absolute time characteristic by means of opposing the past tense to the present tense. The marked member is the past tense. The opposition is called Primary time opposition.

At the second stage the process receives a non-absolute, relative time characteristic by means of opposing the forms of the future tense to the forms of non-future. The future is the marked member. The opposition is called Prospective time opposition (Blokh, 2000).

The category of prospective time is relative by nature, as it characterizes the action from the viewpoint of its correlation with some other action. The future verbal form may be relative either to the present time, or to the past. The English verb has two different forms: the future of the present and the future of the past. It means that the future of the past is double strong; it expresses the strong member of the category of primary time and the strong member of the category of prospective time.

The category of primary time is the only verbal category of immanent order, which is expressed by inflexional forms. The inflexional forms of the past and present coexist with analytical forms of the future. The forms of the category of primary time have one important feature: they are marked by the ‘do’-forms.

The verbal present arises as a result of its immediate contrast with the past form which shows the exclusion of the action from the plane of present. Sometimes the form of the present tense describes the past event, the so-called historical present, to create a vivid picture of the event: He turned the corner and what do you think happens next?

The combinations of shall and will with the infinitive were regarded by some scholars not as the tense forms but as modal phrases (O. Jespersen). Prof. L.S. Barkhudarov excluded these combinations from the system of verb-forms, stressing that these combinations can express two tenses at once (Future-in-the-past). This is not typical of a category as it is constituted by the opposition of its forms, not by their composition.

According to Prof. M.Y.Blokh, the form shall/will + infinitive marks its own grammatical category, that of prospective time. It is based on the contrast between an after-action and non-after-action. A certain

36

modal colouring of the future action can be found, especially in the verbal form of the first person. It is natural, as the future action is only foreseen, planned, desired, projected. With the first person singular will-future expresses an action which is to be performed by the speaker for choice, of his own accord. This form is called the voluntary future. It doesn’t imply the actual wish to perform the action. The shall-form is called non-voluntary. Within the system of the English future tense a peculiar minor category is expressed which affects only the forms of the first person. It’s the category of futurity option (Blokh, 2000).

The category of aspect

The aspective meaning of the verb, as different from its temporal meaning, reflects the inherent mode of the realization of the process irrespective of timing. On the other hand, the aspective meaning can also be represented in variable grammatical categories. The continuous verbal forms are aspective, because reflecting the character of the process named by the verb they do not and cannot denote the timing of the process. The opposition constituting this category consists of continuous and non-continuous (indefinite) verbal forms. The categorial meaning discloses the nature of development of the verbal action and so the name of the category is the aspective category of development. Its expression is combined with other categorial expressions in one and the same verb form. The marked member is the continuous form; its categorial meaning is ‘action in progress’.

The evolution of views on this category has undergone three stages:

1.The temporal interpretation (H. Sweet, O. Jespersen). But continuous forms do not express timing as such; they show the action in the very process of its realization, while the indefinite forms show the action as a mere fact.

2.At the second stage of interpretation (Prof. I.P. Ivanova) the continuous form was understood as a blend of temporal and aspective meanings. It was an essential step forward as it already introduced the idea of aspective meaning in the grammatical system of English (Ivanova, 1989).

3.The essence of the oppositional study is found in the works by ProfessorsA.I.Smirnitsky,B.A.IlyishanddevelopedbyL.S. Barkhudarov, B.S. Khaimovitch, B.I. Rogovskaya and others.

Closely connected with the category of aspect is the problem of determining the status of the perfect form. The perfect, different from

37

the continuous, does reflect a kind of time, though in a purely relative way. It coordinates two times, locating one of them in retrospect towards the other. But it is not the only function of the perfect tense, because it also expresses a prior process with a time limit, reflected in the subsequent event.

The opposition of the perfect and non-perfect forms represents the category of retrospective coordination. It can be manifested in the integral verb form together with the manifestation of other categories (tense, aspective category of development). The functional meaning of the category of retrospective coordination has been interpreted in linguistics in different ways.

The first approach is known as the Tense view. According to it perfect is classified as a peculiar tense form. This viewpoint is held by H.Sweet, G. Curme, N.Irtenieva, I.Ganshina and others. The main thesis is that perfect denotes a secondary temporal characteristic of the action. It shows that the action precedes some other action in the present, past or future. This viewpoint doesn’t clearly show the aspective function of the perfect by which the action is successively connected with a certain time limit. It is not quite clear what forms represent the category.

Aspect view states that the perfect is the aspective form of the verb (M.Deutchbein, G.N.Vorontsova and others). Prof.G.N.Vorontsova demonstrated the idea of the successive connection of the two events expressed by the perfect: a connection of the past event with a later one and the general inclusion of the posterior situation in the sphere of influence of the anterior situation. The drawbacks of this approach are as follows: it underestimates the temporal side of the perfect form, it is not clear what forms are members of the opposition and thus the categorial status of the perfect is left undefined.

Tense-aspect blend view is held by Prof. I.P.Ivanova. In accord with this interpretation the perfect is recognized as a form of a double temporal-aspective character. The two verbal forms expressing temporal and aspective functions in a blend are contrasted against the indefinite form. This approach overcomes the drawbacks of the previous two. But this theory doesn’t show how the grammatical function of the perfect is realized in contrast to the continuous and indefinite. (Ibanova, 1989)

The categorial individuality of the perfect was shown by Prof. A.I. Smirnitsky. This conception is called the Time correlation

38

view. According to it the perfect is a special neither the tense nor the aspective grammatical form. It builds its own category of time correlation which shows priority expressed by the perfect form. This conclusion is very important. But this theory underestimates the aspective plane of the categorial semantics of the perfect (Smirnitsky, 1959).

The strict categorial view is held by Prof. M.Y.Bloch. According to the scholar, there exists a separate category of retrospective coordination represented by perfect and imperfect forms. The perfect is the marking form of a separate verbal category, semantically intermediate between aspective and temporal, but quite self-independent in the general categorial system of the English verb (Blokh, 2000).

The category of retrospective coordination can coexist with the category of development represented by continuous and non-con- tinuous forms. This interpretation makes it possible to explain the nature of the Perfect Continuous, showing the coexistence of two categories in one lexeme.

Thus, there are two purely temporal categories in English:

–primary time (past/present),

–prospective time (future/non-future). There are two major aspective categories:

–the category of development,

–the category of retrospective coordination.

Categorial interdependence can be seen in the following example:

He has just been speaking.

It expresses: the third person of the category of person, the singular of the category of number, the present of the category of time, the continuous of the category of development, the perfect of the category of retrospective coordination.

Category of voice

The category of voice differs from all other verbal categories because the two opposing forms of the category do not show different process but they represent the same process but from a different angle. The category of voice reflects the direction of the process, it expresses the relation of the process expressed by the verb to the subject, it shows the direction of the process: whether the process is directed from the subject or on the subject of the syntactic construction (Ivanova, 1982).

39

Most linguists acknowledge the existence of two voices: active (weak member of opposition) and passive (strong member of opposition). The passive form, being marked, expresses the reception of the action by the subject of the syntactic construction; its weak countermember – the active form – has the meaning of "non-passivity" (Blokh, 2000).

According to A.A. Kholodovich's definition of passive, in the passive construction the subject of the sentence does not coincide with the semantic subject. The subject of the verb in the passive voice is the person or object to which the action expressed by the verb-predi- cate is directed.

As a rule, in modern European languages, the form of the passive voice is inherent in the transitive verbs, that is, verbs capable of taking a direct object. But in the English language transitivity is not assigned to each individual verb; in most cases it is syntactically conditioned. In English not only transitive but also intransitive objective verbs can be used in the passive voice. Thus, the category of voice in English has a much broader representation than in Russian and some other languages. In the following example we see that the form of the passive voice is possible for intransitive verbs with the following preposition: She wasn’t in his room. Her bed was not slept in.

Another peculiarity of voice distinctions of English verbs consists in the fact that active forms often convey passive meanings. Here arises a problem of the so-called medial voices – the use of the active form in the passive meaning. Three medial voices are distinquished: reflexive (the action is performed by the subject and directed to the subject – e.g. He washed and shaved (himself)); reciprocal (the action is performed by two subjects and is reciprocally directed to these two subjects – e.g. Bob and Ann got married); middle (the subject of the real construction is not a real doer of the action – e.g. The door opens inside. The journal sold well).

Category of mood

The category of mood expresses the character of correlation between the process denoted by the verb and the actual reality, presenting the process as a real fact or as an imaginary phenomenon.

Mood is a grammatical category which shows the attitude of the speaker or writer towards the content of the sentence from the point of view of its reality, whether the speaker considers the action

40