35. Participle 2

Есть информация у коричневого Блоха 112-115 и в Ильише 132-135. все остальное из лекции

Это Блох:

Non-finite forms of the verb (verbids) are the forms of the verb which have features intermediary between the verb and the non-pro-cessual parts of speech. Their mixed features are revealed in their se­mantics, morphemic structural marking, combinability, and syntac­tic functions. Verbids do not denote pure processes but present them as peculiar kinds of substances and properties; they do not express the most specific finite verb categories - the categories of tense and mood; they have a mixed, verbal and non-verbal, valency; they per­form mixed, verbal and non-verbal, syntactic functions.

The strict division of functions clearly shows that the opposition be­tween the finite and non-finite forms of the verb creates a special gram­matical category. The differential feature of the opposition is constitut­ed by the expression of verbal time and mood: while the time-mood grammatical signification characterizes the finite verb in a way that it underlies its finite predicative function, the verbid has no immediate means of expressing time-mood categorial semantics and therefore presents the weak member of the opposition. The category expressed by this opposi­tion is called the category of "fmitude". The syntactic content of the category of fmitude is the expression of verbal predication.

The peculiar feature of the verbid verbality consists in their ex­pressing "secondary" ("potential") predication. They are not self-de­pendent in a predicative sense. The verbids normally exist only as part of sentences built up by genuine, primary predicative constructions that have a finite verb as their core. And it is through the reference to the finite verb-predicate that these complexes set up the situation de­noted by them in the corresponding time and mood perspectives.

The English verbids include four forms distinctly differing from one another within the general verbid system: the infinitive, the ger­und, the present participle, and the past participle. In compliance with this difference, the verbid semi-predicative complexes are dis­tinguished by the corresponding differential properties both in form and in syntactic-contextual function.

PII – the non-finite form of the verb which combines the properties of the verb with those of the adjective, serving as the qualifying-processual name.

The past participle combines the properties of the verb with those of the adjective. The categorial meaning of the past participle is qual­ifying: it gives some sort of qualification to the denoted process. The past participle has no paradigmatic forms; by way of paradigmatic correlation with the present participle, it conveys implicitly the cate­gorial meanings of the perfect and the passive. Its valency is not spe­cific; its typical syntactic functions are those of the attribute and the predicative.

Like the present participle, the past participle is capable of mak­ing up semi-predicative constructions of complex object, complex subject, as well as absolute complexes.

The consideration of the English verbids in their mutual compar­ison, supported and supplemented by comparing them with their non­verbal counterparts, reveals a peculiar character of their correlation.

The correlation of the infinitive, the gerund, and the verbal noun, being of an indisputably systemic nature and covering a vast propor­tion of the lexicon, makes up a special lexico-grammatical category of processual representation. The three stages of this category repre­sent the referential processual entity of the lexemic series, respective­ly, as dynamic (the infinitive and its phrase), semi-dynamic (the ger­und and its phrase), and static (the verbal noun and its phrase). The category of processual representation underlies the predicative dif­ferences between various situation-naming constructions in the sphere of syntactic nominalization.

Another category specifically identified within the framework of substantival verbids and relevant for syntactic analysis is the catego­ry of modal representation. This category, pointed out by L.S. Bar-khudarov, marks the infinitive in contrast to the gerund, and it is revealed in the infinitive having a modal force, in particular, in its attributive uses, but also elsewhere.

In treating the ing-forms as constituting one integral verbid entity, opposed, on the one hand, to the infinitive, on the other hand, to the past participle, appeal is naturally made to the alternating use of the possessive and the common-objective nounal element in the role of the subject of the ing-form, the latter construction is known in linguistics as "half-gerund". The half-gerund is an intermediary form with dou­ble features whose linguistic semi-status is reflected in the term itself. In fact, the verbid under examination is rather to be interpreted as a transferred participle, or a gerundial participle, since semantic accent in half-gerundial construction is made on the situational content of the fact or event described, with the processual substance as its core (e.g.: / didn 't mind the children playing in the study).

Лекция:

• It is closely associated with the verb (it has got the verbal stem; it is a component of 2

analytical verbal forms – the perf and passive voice forms have written – is written). PII never substitutes the finite form of the verb, it indicates some state of the object which is a result of the action.

Verb – action, process

PII - result

• It can be modified by an adverb (beautifully written).

• In certain lexical contexts it opposes Participle I in voice and aspect (writing - written, falling -

fallen).

• It is unchangeable. (unlike in Russian) – devoid of any morphological category. English verb is the most developed morphological system and non-finite forms have got their own paradigms, PII stands apart.

• Categorial meaning - some state of the object which is the result of the process. No aspect or voice, these distinctions of voice, tense, aspect can be implied.

The young man loved by everybody – action in progress

The young man killed in the war – completed action

There’re a number of different names for PII.

Terminology:

1. Past Participle (PII) (as opposed to Present Participle (PI)) – we can’t agree as verbals don’t have the category of tense (only for finite forms) PII can render different meanings with the help of predicative verb. Past part. - meaning of future/past action => PII is more general => more preferable

e.g. Viewed from above the city seems beautiful. Reference to the present

seemed - past

will seem -reference to the future

e.g. One day passed was already a day in the past. – priority of the action.

e.g. I don’t want to have it hung up. Just lean it against the wall. - Refers to posterior action

=> PII can render meaning that’s simultaneous, prior, posterior to the action of the verb

2. Passive Participle (as opposed to Active Participle)

He wrote - it was written

Written

Passive meaning is not the constant meaning of this form. We don’t always speak about passivity, it’s often active

e.g. fallen leaves – no passivity. They fall themselves!, the risen sun, a vanished land, past times, the newly arrived guests, a grown girl, escaped prisoners, the deceased lady, a collapsed lorry, an eloped pair, an expired lease, a deserted sailor, etc.

when PII denotes an active action, it’s got another semantic characteristic of a completed action.

Here it opposes PI in aspect (completeness-incompleteness)

Fallen – completeness

Falling - incompleteness

e.g. she would sit watching the fallen leaves of last year, as she had watched the falling ashes at home.

Much depends on the verb being transitive/intransitive

Subjective or objective relations with Participle II can be identified only syntagmatically. Much depends on the verbal stem of Participle II. Objective relations are more recurrent and they express:

• A result of a completed action (the verb is terminative and transitive) e.g. He took a sheet of ruled paper covered with pencil notes.

• Consequence of an incompleted action (the verb is non-terminative and transitive) e.g. He came in, escorted by Christine.

Subjective relations are expressed occasionally with a limited number of Participles, denoting a completed action (the verb is terminative and intransitive)

e.g. Arrived at this point, we halted, e.g. Colonel Crashaw, retired.

The feature that unites them is the relative character of their meaning

3. Perfect Participle (Prof.Smirnitskij): the action of the Participle is prior to the moment of speech or to another action. Underlined the perfect nature of PII, priority of the action, expressed by PII.

e.g. He found a letter, it was written by his father. – prior the action of finding

e.g. It is made of steel. – prior to the moment of speech

the forms been, laid, sat are called quasi [kweisai]

I’ve been here for an hour – PII in form but no meaning of result

• PII is more preferable

PII differs from the adjectives, capable of expressing predicative relations

Un- : untouched, unpaid, unimpressed

PI – no such participle untouching – can’t say

A feature of adjectivisation

Unkind = not kind

Unjust = not just

Untouched = the absence of the action, not negative feature. No action that could result in a state.

• the difference in Meaning

Function – prepositive attribute furnished rooms

Postpositively – the verbal meaning is stronger. More like a clause

A note written at his request (=that was…)

The controversial character of PII can be interpreted in the following way:

Syntactically it’s closer to E adhective (equal to the adjective), at the same time PII and adjective oppose each other: PII refers to ther field of the verb, the adj refers to nominals, the adj refers to the sphere of denotation, PII – signification (the way it renders the grammatical meaning is more general)

Classification of participles:

-expressing the state of a person – frightened, pleased

- expressing the state of non-person

They’re identical in form => the classification of the verb itself is more relevant (transitive /intransitive)

36. The ing-forms.

Коричневый Блох 108-112, 118-123

Non-finite forms of the verb (verbids) are the forms of the verb which have features intermediary between the verb and the non-pro-cessual parts of speech. Their mixed features are revealed in their se­mantics, morphemic structural marking, combinability, and syntac­tic functions. Verbids do not denote pure processes but present them as peculiar kinds of substances and properties; they do not express the most specific finite verb categories - the categories of tense and mood; they have a mixed, verbal and non-verbal, valency; they per­form mixed, verbal and non-verbal, syntactic functions.

The strict division of functions clearly shows that the opposition be­tween the finite and non-finite forms of the verb creates a special gram­matical category. The differential feature of the opposition is constitut­ed by the expression of verbal time and mood: while the time-mood grammatical signification characterizes the finite verb in a way that it underlies its finite predicative function, the verbid has no immediate means of expressing time-mood categorial semantics and therefore presents the weak member of the opposition. The category expressed by this opposi­tion is called the category of "fmitude". The syntactic content of the category of fmitude is the expression of verbal predication.

The peculiar feature of the verbid verbality consists in their ex­pressing "secondary" ("potential") predication. They are not self-de­pendent in a predicative sense. The verbids normally exist only as part of sentences built up by genuine, primary predicative constructions that have a finite verb as their core. And it is through the reference to the finite verb-predicate that these complexes set up the situation de­noted by them in the corresponding time and mood perspectives.

The English verbids include four forms distinctly differing from one another within the general verbid system: the infinitive, the ger­und, the present participle, and the past participle. In compliance with this difference, the verbid semi-predicative complexes are dis­tinguished by the corresponding differential properties both in form and in syntactic-contextual function.

The gerund, like the infinitive, combines the properties of the verb with those of the noun and gives the process the verbal name. In comparison with the infinitive the gerund reveals stronger substan­tive properties. Namely, as different from the infinitive, and similar to the noun, the gerund can be modified by a noun in the possessive case or its pronominal equivalents (expressing the subject of the ver­bal process), and it can be used with prepositions.

The combinability of the gerund is dual: it has a mixed, verb-type and noun-type, valency. Like the infinitive, the gerund performs the syntactic functions of the subject, the object, the predicative, the at­tribute, and the adverbial modifier. The gerund has two grammatical categories: the aspective category of retrospective coordination and the category of voice. Consequently, the categorial paradigm of the gerund of the objective verb includes four forms: the Simple Active, the Perfect Active, the Simple Passive, the Perfect Passive. The ge-rundial paradigm of the non-objective verb, correspondingly, includes two forms.

The present participle serves as a qualifying-processual name. It combines the properties of the verb with those of the adjective and adverb.

The present participle has two categories: the category of retro­spective coordination and the category of voice. The triple nature of the present participle finds its expression in its mixed (verb-type, ad­jective-type, adverb-type) valency and its syntactic functions (those of the predicative, the attribute, and the adverbial modifier).

The present participle, similar to the infinitive, can build up semi-predicative complexes of objective and subjective types.

Блох 118-123

The problem is do they constitute 2 different verbids, or do they present 1 and the same form with a somewhat broader range of functions than either of the two taken separately?

1) the integral V-ing form. if the two uses of V-ing are functionally identical, and if the "half-gerund" V-ing occurs with approximately the same frequency as the "full-gerund" V-ing, both forms present­ing an ordinary feature of an ordinary English text, then there is no point in discriminating the "participle" V-ing and the "gerund" V-ing.

2) The two informs in question possess categorially differential properties estab­lishing them as two different verbids in the system of the English verb.

Justification of the 2^nd:

Different uses of the ing-forms: one range of uses is definitely noun-rel­ated, definitely of process-substance signification; the other range of uses is definitely adjective-adverb related, definite­ly of process-quality signification. This differentiation can easily be illustrated by specialized gerund-testing and par­ticiple-testing, as well as by careful textual observations of the forms.

gerund-testing - the noun-substitution procedure backed by the question-procedure.

My chance of getting, or achieving,—> My chance of what? —> My chance of success.

All his relatives somehow disapproved of his writing poetry/ his poetical work.

+ its natural occurrence in coordinative connections with the noun. (it came immediately off my tongue without any pause or planning.)

par­ticiple-testing,- the adjec­tive-adverb substitution procedure backed by the correspond­ing question-procedure, as well as some other analogies. (He was in a terrifying condition. —> In what kind of con­dition was he?—*He was in an awful condition.)

+ enters into easy coordinative and par­allel associations with qualitative and stative adjectives. (That was a false, but convincing show of affection.)

the two different types of conversion the compared forms are subject to, namely, the nounal con­version of the gerund (their calling him a liar-the youth's choice of a calling in life.) and, correspondingly, the adjectival conversion of the participle (a car passing by - a passing passion.).

cases of categorial ambiguity, where the cat­egory of the qualifying element remains open to either in­terpretation, such as the "typing instructor", the 'boiling kettle", or the like. However, cases like these present a triv­ial homonymy which, being resolved, can itself be taken as evidence in favour of, not against, the two ing-forms differ­ing from each other on the categorial lines.

textual observations of the forms.

the half-gerund (my doing sth, me doing sth): it is essentially based on the positional verbid neutralization.

1) an actually intermediary form with double features, whose linguistic semi-status is truly reflected in its conventional name

2) an element of a non-existent categorial specification, i.e. just another variant of the same indiscriminate V-ing.

the verbid under examination is rather to be in­terpreted as a transferred participle, or a gerundial partici­ple, the latter term seeming to relevantly disclose the es­sence of the nature of this form; though the existing name "half-gerund" is as good as any other, provided the true character of the denoted element of the system is understood.

62