14.Categorial meaning of English adjectives. Their lexical / grammatical subclasses and morphemic structure.

Semantic features. The adjective expresses the property of an entity.Typically, adjectives denote states, usually permanent states, although there are also adjectives which can denote temporary states.

meaning and grammatical characteristics:qualitative and relative.

By Qualitative adjectives denote qualities of a substance directly not threw it’s relation to another substance as: size, shape, color, physical and mental quality.

Realative adjectives denote qualities of a substance directly threw it’s relation to:

material ( woolen, silk)

place ( Italian, ancient)

time ( monthly, weekly)

the number of them is limited in English.

Statives Adlinks (B.S. Khaimovich,B.I. Rogovskaya), A-adjectives, The category of state words (.A.Ilyish)

Morphological features. Derivationally, adjectives are related either to nouns or verbs. Suffixes changing nouns to adjectives are: - (i)al, -ar, -ary or –ery, -ed, -en, -esque, -ful, -ic(al), -ish, -istic, -less, -like, -ly, -ous, -ward, -wide, -y. Suffixes changing verbs to adjectives are: -able or –ible, -ent or –ant, -ed, -ing, -ive, -(at)ory.

Morphological characteristics of an adjective are divided into:

- simple

- derivative→ productive → unproductive.

- compound

15. Categorial status of a-adjectives in English.

A-adjectives are the separate part of speech – ‘the category of state words’

There is a distinct group of English adjectives which are characterized by the following features:

1) the lexical/grammatical meaning of state, namely, the psychological state of a person, e.g. afraid, aghast; the physical state of a person, e.g. asleep, awake; its location in space, e.g. afloat, asquint; the physical state of an object, e.g. afire, abalze, aglow; 2) the prefix a-; 3) no grammatical categories; 4) combinabilty with link verbs, e.g. to be afraid; 5) the syntactic function of a predicative complement. In the 60-70-s of the XXth century, certain scholars suggested that a-adjectives are to be considered as a separate part of speech. B.A.Ilyish suggested a name for them – the category of state words, B.S. Khaimovich and B.I.Rogovskaya called them adlinks (Cf. adverbs are combined with notional verbs, adlinks – with link verbs).

L.S.Barkhudarov puts forward the following arguments against this approach: 1) the state is a variety of the property of a substance; 2) as it were, aadjectives are not totally excluded from the morphological category of degrees of comparison and the lexical/semantic category of intensity, 3) Cf. Of all of us, Jack was the one most aware of the situation in which we found ourselves; I saw that the adjusting lever stood far more askew that was allowed by the direction; 4) the number of a-adjectives in English is relatively small: a couple dozen of stable ones and perhaps twice as many of coinages. Thus a-adjectives, though forming a unified set of words, do not constitute a separate part-of-speech class which exists in English on a par with nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs. They should rather be treated as a subclass within the partof-speech class of adjectives.

15. Syntactic functions of English adjectives.

From a syntactic point of view, adjectives can be divided into three groups:

1) adjectives which can be used attributively and predicatively (a healthy man – the man is healthy);

2) adjectives which can be used attributively only (a complete idiot – *the idiot is complete);

3) adjectives which can be used predicatively only (*a loath man – the man is loath to agree with it).

Attributive adjectives constitute two groups:

1. intensifying;

2) restrictive, or particularizing (limiter adjectives).

Intensifying adjectives constitute two groups:

1) emphasizers;

2) amplifiers.

Emphasizers have a heightening effect on the noun (clear, definite, outright,plain, pure, real, sheer, sure, true); amplifiers scale upwards from an assumed norm (complete, great, firm, absolute, close, perfect, extreme, entire, total, utter).

Restrictive adjectives restrict the noun to a particular member of the class (chief, exact, main, particular, precise, principal, sole, specific). They particularize the reference of the noun.

15. The Pronoun as a part of speech.

THE PRONOUN is a part of speech which points out objects and their qualities without naming them

Form. As far as form goes pronouns fall into different types. Some of them have the category of number (singular and plural), e. g. this, while others have no such category, e. g. somebody. Again, some pronouns have the category of case (he— him, somebody — somebody's), while others have none (something).

• Semantic classification:

1) personal pronouns (I, you, he, she, it, we, they);

2)possessive pronouns(my, your, his, her, its, our, their);

3)demonstrative pronouns(this, that, such, (the)same);

4)reflexive(also calledemphatic) pronouns(myself, yourself, himself, her­self, itself, ourselves, yourselves, themselves);

5)interrogative pronouns(who, whose, what, which);

6)relative pronouns(who, whose, which, that);

7)indefinite pronouns(some, any, somebody, anybody, someone, anyone, one);

8)negative pronouns(no, nobody, no one, nothing);

9)defining pronouns(all, each, every, everybody, everyone, everything);

10)reciprocal pronouns(each other, one another).

For instance, per­sonal, possessive and reflexive pronouns are marked with the category of person. Indefinite, negative and generalizing pronouns, in their turn, convey the meaning of quantity. To eliminate these unfortunate drawbacks, some grammarians suggest dividing pronouns into four groups: 1) personal,2)demonstrative,3)interrogative,and 4)quantitative.

Functions of the pronouns

1. The deictic and anaphoric function of the pronoun

• Deictic (anaphoric) ‘deixis’ – pointing without naming: this, now, there, him, you, etc.

• Anaphoric (the function of connecting with the preceding sentence / clause): relative, conjunctive pronouns

• Syntactic function: Subject, Predicate, Object

2. Syntactic peculiarities of the pronouns (a closed class system)

Syntactic function: Subject, Predicate, Object

The five syntactic functions that relative pronouns can perform in English grammar are:

1. Subject

2. Direct object

3. Prepositional complement

4. Possessive determiner

5. Adverbial

The following sections discuss five functions of relative pronouns and include examples to illustrate use.

3. Grammatical categories of the pronouns

Gender masculine, feminine, neuter (personal, possessive)

Case: nominative, objective (personal, interrogative and relative WHO ), common, genitive (indefinite, reciprocal, negative)

Number sg., pl. (demonstrative and the defining OTHER)

Grammatical Categories

Number sg., pl. (demonstrative and the defining OTHER)

(4) person

- Manifested in personal / reflexive / possessive PRO

- 1st person = the speaker

- 2nd person = the addressee

- 3rd person = "the rest"

15. The Numeral as a part of speech.

The treatment of numerals presents some difficulties, too. The so-called cardinal numerals (one, two) are somewhat different from the so-called ordinal numerals (first, second).

Meaning. Numerals denote either number or place in a series.

Form. Numerals are invariable.

Function. (a) As far as phrases go, both cardinal and ordinal numerals combine with a following noun (three rooms, third room); occasionally a numeral follows a noun (soldiers three, George the Third).

(b) In a sentence, a numeral most usually is an attribute (three rooms, the third room), but it can also be subject, predicative, and object: Three of them came in time; "We Are Seven" (the title of a poem by Wordsworth); I found only four.

The cardinal numeralsfrom 13 to 19 are derivatives with the suffix-teen; thecardinalsindicating tens are formed by means of the suffix-ty; thecardinal numeralsfrom 21 to 29, from 31 to 39 are compound, whereasordinals are formed by means of the suffix-th, with the exception of the first three suppletive forms-first, second, third.

15. Theory of three ranks.

O. Jespersens theory of three ranks provides logical foundations• for identifying the hierarchy of syntactic relations between elements• joined together in a grammatical unit. With all this, O. Jespersens analysis contains some disputable• points and inconsistency.• The very definition of the notion of rank is not accurate which in• some cases leads to inadequacy of analysis