The category of voice and its peculiarities in English

The Category Of Number

This category indicates whether one or more things is meant. Oneness is expressed by singular and more-than-oneness by plural forms.

All English nouns have form which corresponds to the structural type of the singular or plural. But not all of them have the grammatical category of number. Only count nouns are inflected for it. Only these nouns indicate whether the noun names one or more than one referent, that is,are used in both numbers.

Grammatical numbers of English nouns are the singular and the plural. The basic form is the singular.The plural of almost all the counts is built by adding the inflexion -/e/s to the basic form /singular form/. In speech this inflexion is related in 3 variants:

/s/, /z/, /iz/ depending upon the character of the preceding sound

/s/ occurs after voiceless consonants, cat –cats

/z/ after voiced consonants and vowels, bag-bags

/iz/ after sibilants, rose-roses

In nouns with the final –y preceded by a consonant –y changes into –i. The plural ending is –esт (Study-studies)

A small number of nouns have irregular plurals. They are

Man-men Woman-woman Goose-geese Foot-feet Tooth-teeth Mouse-mice

Louse-lice Child-children Ox-oxen

In a number of nouns having a sound /f/ in the singular/spelled –f of –fe/ this sound changes into /v/ in the plural form and the ending –es is added.

Knife-knives, Leaf-leaves

There is no change of the sound in the plural of the nouns roof,proof,safe. Both variants are found in the nouns handkerchieves /-fs/,hoof-hooves/hoofs/, scarf-scarfs /ves/

 

1. The category of case. Different approaches to the category of case in Modem English

Case is the inflected form of the noun indication the grammatical relation in which.the noun stands to other parts of the sentence

English nouns have a two case system: the common case /the basic form/ and the genitive case/ the possessive case./

The genitive case of all singular nouns /which are used in it, of course of those plurals which don’t have the number morpheme –s / is built up by means of the morpheme –s which is added to the base form.For example:

Singular:boy-boy’s

Student-student’s

Plural man-men’s

Woman-woman’s

In the genitive of personal names ending in sibilants the morpheme –s is optional, but the apostrophe and the pronunciation /-iz/ are obligatory.For example:

Common case Possessive case

Burns Burn’s/-iz/ poems

BozBoz’s/-iz/ sketches

Fox Fox’s/-iz/ articles

Four special views advanced at various times by different scholars should be considered as successive stages in the analysis of this problem.

The first view may be called the “theory of positional cases”. This theory is directly connected with the old grammatical tradition, and its traces can be seen in many contemporary school textbooks in the English-speaking countries. Linguistic formulations of this theory may be found in the works of Nesfield, Deutschbein, Bryant and others

The second view may be called the “theory of prepositional cases”. It is also connected with the old school grammar teaching, and was advanced as a logical supplement to the positional view of the case.

The third view of the English noun case recognizes a limited inflectional system of two cases in English, one of them featured and the other one un-featured. This view may be called the “limited case theory”. This theory is at present most broadly accepted among linguists both in this country and abroad. It was formulated by such scholars as Sweet, Jespersen, and has since been radically developed by Smirnitsky, Barkhudarov and others.

 

1. The problem of gender in English. Personal pronouns as gender indicators of nouns.

A system of grammatical gender, whereby every noun was treated as either masculine, feminine or neuter, existed in Old English, but fell out of use during the Middle English period. Modern English retains features relating to natural gender, namely the use of certain nouns and pronouns (such as he and she) to refer specifically to persons or animals of one or other sex.

Gender is no longer an inflectional category in Modern English. The only traces of the Old English gender system are found in the system of pronoun–antecedent agreement, although this is now generally based on natural gender – the sex, or perceived sexual characteristics (or asexual nature), of the pronoun's referent

Benjamin Whorf described grammatical gender in English as a covert grammatical category. He noted that gender as a property inherent in nouns (rather than in their referents) is not entirely absent from modern English: different pronouns may be appropriate for the same referent depending on what noun has been used. For example, one might say this child is eating its dinner, but my daughter is eating her (not its) dinner, even though child and daughter in the respective sentences might refer to the same person.

The third-person singular personal pronouns are chosen according to the natural gender of their antecedent or referent

1. The Adjective as a part of speech. Problems concerning the category of degrees of comparison in Modem English.The Stative.

ADJECTIVE: A part of speech that modifies, enumerates, or describes a noun

An adjective is a word that describes a noun (person, place, thing, or idea). Adjectives help us

communicate our ideas more precisely and artistically

The category of comparison expresses the quantitative characteristics of the quality rendered by the adjective, in other words, it expresses the relative evaluation of the amount of the quality of some referent in comparison with other referents possessing the same quality. Three forms constitute this category: the positive degree, the comparative degree, and the superlative degree forms of the adjective. The basic form, known as the positive degree, has no special formal mark, e.g.: tall, beautiful; the comparative degree is marked by two kinds of forms; synthetical forms with the suffix “-er” and analytical forms with the auxiliary word more, e.g.: taller, more beautiful; the superlative degree is also formed either synthetically with the help of the grammatical suffix “-est”, or analytically with the help of the auxiliary word most, e.g.: tallest, most beautiful. The synthetic and analytical degrees stand in complementary distribution to each other, their choice is determined by syllabo-phonetic forms of adjectives and is covered in detail in practical grammar textbooks. Also, there are suppletive forms of the degrees of comparison, e.g.: bad – worse – worst.

Blokh:Among the words signifying properties of a nounal referent there is a leximic set which claims to be recognied as a separate part of speech, a class of words different form the adjectives in its class-forming features. These are words built up by the prefix a- and denoting different states, mostly of temporary duration. Here belong lexemes like afraid, agog, adrift, ablaze. These are treated as predicative adjectives in traditional grammar.

Scherbs and Vinogradov were the first to identify notional words signifying states and specially used as predicatives. They called the newly identified part of speech the “category of state“ (Russian words: тепло, зябко, одиноко, радостно, жаль, лень).

The term “words of the category of state” being rather cumbersome form the technical point of view was later changed into “stative words” or “statives”.

 

1. Substuntivisation of adjectives and adjectivization of nouns

Substantivation of adjectives: some adjectives can transgress the border between the two classes and can acquire some features of the noun. Strictly speaking, substantivation is a type of conversion - a lexical word-building process of zero-derivation. When adjectives are fully substantivized, they make a new word, a noun, which is connected with the adjective only etymologically. Conversion of this type often takes place in cases of one-word ellipsis in stable attributive word-combinations, e.g.: a private ß a private soldier, a native ß a native resident. These nouns acquire all the forms of constitutive substantive categories: number, case, article determination, e.g.: privates, natives, private’s, native’s, a private, the private, etc. (Cf.: similar substantivation cases in Russian: рядовой, больной, etc.)

** Some adjectives can transgress the border between the two classes and can acquire some features of the noun. Strictly speaking, substantivation is a type of conversion - a lexical word-building process of zero-derivation. When adjectives are fully substantivized, they make a new word, a noun, which is connected with the adjective only etymologically. Conversion of this type often takes place in cases of one-word ellipsis in stable attributive word-combinations, e.g.: a private ß a private soldier, a native ß a native resident. These nouns acquire all the forms of constitutive substantive categories: number, case, article determination, e.g.: privates, natives, private’s, native’s, a private, the private, etc. (Cf.: similar substantivation cases in Russian: рядовой, больной, etc.)

There is also a group of partially substantivized adjectives which are characterized by mixed (hybrid) lexico-grammatical features: they convey the mixed adjectival-nounal semantics of property; in a sentence they perform functions characteristic of nouns; and they have deficient paradigms of number and article determination (they are not changed according to the category of number and are combined only with the definite article). They include words denoting groups of people sharing the same feature – the rich, the beautiful, the English, and words denoting abstract notions – the unforgettable, the invisible, etc. The former resemble the pluraliatantum nouns, and the latter the singulariatantum nouns. They make up a specific group of adjectives marginal to the nouns and can be called “adjectivids” by analogy with “verbids”.

This type of word-building has become particularly productive in modern English, involving adjectivized past participles, which exhibit “triply” mixed meanings, e.g.: the newly wed, the unemployed, etc. And these tend to acquire more and more substantive features in the course of time, e.g., one can say the newly-weds, or an unemployed.

Adjectivization of nouns means the process when nouns become adjectives, e.g. stone wall, house fronts, goods van.

19 The Verb. Finite and non-finite forms of the verb. The category of finitude

The verb as a notional part of speech has the categorial meaning of dynamic process, or process developing in time, including not only actions as such (to work, to build), but also states, forms of existence (to be, to become, to lie), various types of attitude, feelings (to love, to appreciate), etc.

The complexity of the verb is also manifested in the intricate system of its grammatically relevant subclasses.

On the upper level, all the verbs according to their semantic (nominative) value fall into two big sub-classes: the sub-class of notional verbs and the sub-class of functional and semi-functional verbs. Notional verbs have full nominative value and are independent in the expression of the process, e.g.: to work, to build, to lie, to love, etc.; these verbs comprise the bulk of the class and constitute an open group of words. Functional and semi-functional (or, semi-notional) verbs make a closed group of verbs of partial nominative value. They are dependent on other words in the denotation of the process, but through their forms the predicative semantics of the sentence is expressed (they function as predicators).

Functional and semi-functional verbs are further subdivided into a number of groups. Auxiliary functional verbs are used to build the analytical grammatical forms of notional verbs, e.g.: have done, was lost, etc. Link verbs connect the nominative part of the predicate (the predicative) with the subject. They can be of two types: pure and specifying link verbs. Pure link verbs perform a purely predicative-linking function in the sentence; in English there is only one pure link verb to be; specifying link verbs specify the connections between the subject and its property, cf.: He was pale. – He grew pale. The specification of the connections may be either “ perceptional ”, e.g.: to seem, to look, to feel, etc., or “ factual ”, e.g.: to grow, to become, to get, etc. The semi-functional link verbs should be distinguished from homonymous notional verbs, e.g.: to grow can be a notional verb or a specifying link verb, cf.: The child grew quickly. – He grew pale. Modal verbs are predicators denoting various subject attitudes to the action, for example, obligation, ability, permission, advisability, etc.: can, must, may, etc. A group of semi-notional verbs function as verbid introducers, i.e., they introduce non-finite forms of verbs into the structure of the sentence: they are grammatically inseparable from the verbids and these two lexemes jointly make the predicate of the sentence, e.g.: He happened to know all about it. Verbid introducers render the following meanings: modal identity, when the speaker evaluates the action denoted by the following verbid as seeming, accidental, or unexpected, e.g.: to seem, to prove, to appear, to happen, etc.; subject-action relations (conation), e.g.: to try, to fail, to manage, etc.; phasal semantics, e.g.: to begin, to start, to continue, to finish, etc. These semi-notional verbs should also be distinguished from homonymous notional verbs, cf.: It happened ten years ago (happen is a notional verb). – He happened to be there at the same time with her (happen is a semi-notional verbid introducer of modal identity – the process denoted by the infinitive is presented as unexpected).

The subdivision of verbs into notional and (semi-)functional is grammatically relevant since the verbs of the two subclasses perform different syntactic functions in the sentence: notional verbs function as predicates, semi-functional and functional verbs as parts of predicates (predicators).

 

All verbal forms fall into two major sets: finite and non-finite. The term “finite” is derived from the Latin term “verbum finitum”, which shows that these words denote actions developing in time.

Non-finite forms of the verb, the infinitive, the gerund, participle I (present participle) and participle II (past participle), are otherwise called “ verbals ”, or “ verbids ”. The term, introduced by O. Jespersen, implies that they are not verbs in the proper sense of the word, because they combine features of the verb with features of other notional parts of speech. Their mixed, hybrid nature is revealed in all the spheres of the parts-of-speech characterization: meaning, formal features, and functions. The non-verbal features of verbids are as follows: they do not denote pure processes, but present them as specific kinds of substances and properties; they are not conjugated according to the categories of person and number, have no tense or mood forms; in some contexts they are combined with the verbs like non-verbal parts of speech; they never function as independent predicates; their functions are those characteristic for other notional parts of speech. The verbal features of verbids are as follows: their grammatical meaning is basically processual; like finites, they do have (at least, most of them have) aspect and voice forms and verbal combinability with direct objects and adverbial modifiers; they can express predication in specific semi-predicative constructions. Thus, verbids can be characterized as intermediary phenomena between verbs and other non-verbal parts of speech.

The opposition between finite and non-finite forms of verbs expresses the category of “finitude ”. The grammatical meaning, the content of this category is the expression of verbal predication: the finite forms of the verb render full (primary, complete, genuine) predication, the non-finite forms render semi-predication, or secondary (potential) predication. The formal differential feature is constituted by the expression of verbal time and mood, which underlie the predicative function: having no immediate means of expressing time-mood categorial semantics, the verbids are the weak member of the opposition.

It is interesting to note that historically verbids in English were at first separate non-verbal nominative forms, but later they were drawn into the class of verbs by acquiring aspect and voice forms, verbal combinability, etc.

 

 

20 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 as this 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 and should/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.

21. The Verb.The category of aspect. Aspect opposition

The general meaning of the category of aspect is the inherent mode of realizationof the process. Aspect is closely connected with time semantics, showing, as A. M. Peshkovsky puts it, “the distribution of the action in time”, or the “temporal structure” of the action.

Like time, aspect can be expressed both by lexical and grammatical means. This is one more grammatical domain in which English differs dramatically from Russian: in Russian, aspect is rendered by lexical means only, through the subdivision of verbs into perfective and imperfective, делать – сделать; видеть– увидеть; etc. In Russian the aspective classification of verbs is constant and very strict; it presents one of the most typical characteristics of the grammatical system of the verb and governs its tense system formally and semantically. In English, as shown in Unit 10, the aspective meaning is manifested in the lexical subdivision of verbs into limitive and unlimitive, e.g.: to go – to come, to sit – sit down, etc. But most verbs in English migrate easily from one subclass to the other and their aspective meaning is primarily rendered by grammatical means through special variable verbal forms.

The expression of aspective semantics in English verbal forms is interconnected with the expression of temporal semantics; that is why in practical grammar they are treated not as separate tense and aspect forms but as specific tense-aspect forms, cf.: the present continuous – I am working; the past continuous – I was working; the past perfect and the past indefinite – I had done my work before he came, etc. This fusion of temporal and aspectual semantics and the blend in their formal expression have generated a lot of controversies in dealing with the category of aspect and the tense-aspect forms of the verb. The analysis of aspect has proven to be one of the most complex areas of English linguistics: the four correlated forms, the indefinite, the continuous, the perfect, and the perfect continuous, have been treated by different scholars as tense forms, as aspect forms, as forms of mixed tense-aspect status, and as neither tense nor aspect forms, but as forms of a separate grammatical category.

The category of aspect is a linguistic representation of the objective category of manner of action. It is realized through the opposition Non-Continuous (Common):: Continuous. The realization of the category of aspect is closely connected with the lexical meaning of verbs, e.g.: He brought her some flowers. – Common aspect form brought the sentence means that the flowers actually reached her.; He was bringing her some flowers. – The continuous aspect form means that he had the flowers with him but something prevented him from giving them to her.

 

Mood and modality

Mood is a matter of grammatical form.

Modality is a matter of meaning.

The main markers of modality in English are the modal auxiliaries can, may, must, will, shall.

Considering modality it is useful to distinguish between two parts:

· The Dictum (what is said);

· The Modus (how it is said).

Kinds of modal meaning:

· Deontic modality(It is concerned with “influencing actions, states, or events”; it deals with obligation, permission, threats, promises, requests, commands, instructions, desires, wishes, fears. E.g.: You must come in immediately (obligation).; You can have one more turn (permission).; You cannot have any more (prohibition).);

· Epistemic modality (It is concerned with the speaker’s judgment of the truth of the proposition embedded in the statement. E.g .: It was a mistake. – represents an unqualified assertion; You may be right. – merely acknowledges the possibility that “You are right” is true.);

· Dynamic modality (It is subject-oriented and generally concerns the properties and dispositions of person, etc., referred to in the clause. E.g.: Liz can drive better than you.; I asked Ed to go but he won’t. – In these examples, the speaker is concerned with Liz’s driving ability and Ed’s willingness to go.).

Verb is the most complex part of speech. First of all it performs the central role in realizing predication - connection between situation in the utterance and reality. That is why the verb is of primary informative significance in an utterance. Besides, the verb possesses quite a lot of grammatical categories. Furthermore, within the class of verb various subclass divisions based on different principles of classification can befound.

Verbs are words that express action or state of being.

Semantic features: the verb possesses the grammatical meaning of verbiality – the ability to denote a process developing in time.

Morphological features: the verb possesses such grammatical categories as: tense, aspect, voice, mood, person, number, finitude, temporal correlation.

Syntactic features: 1) ability to be modified by adverbs; 2) ability of the verb to perform the syntactic function of the predicate.

In English, only the third person present tense singular form expresses person grammatically; therefore, the verb forms are obligatorily associated with personal pronouns. Special mention should be made of the modal verbs and the verb be. Modal verbs, with the exception of shall/should and will/would, do not show person grammatically.

The verb be is more grammaticalized in this respect: it takes an exception to the other verbs.

The category of person is represented in English by two-member opposition: third person singular – non-third person singular.

The category of number shows whether the process is associated with one doer or with more than one doer. The category of number is a two-member opposition: singular – plural.

 

25. The verb. The category of person and number.

Verb is the most complex part of speech. First of all it performs the central role in realizing predication - connection between situation in the utterance and reality. That is why the verb is of primary informative significance in an utterance. Besides, the verb possesses quite a lot of grammatical categories. Furthermore, within the class of verb various subclass divisions based on different principles of classification can befound.

Verbs are words that express action or state of being.

Semantic features: the verb possesses the grammatical meaning of verbiality – the ability to denote a process developing in time.

Morphological features: the verb possesses such grammatical categories as: tense, aspect, voice, mood, person, number, finitude, temporal correlation.

Syntactic features: 1) ability to be modified by adverbs; 2) ability of the verb to perform the syntactic function of the predicate.

In English, only the third person present tense singular form expresses person grammatically; therefore, the verb forms are obligatorily associated with personal pronouns. Special mention should be made of the modal verbs and the verb be. Modal verbs, with the exception of shall/should and will/would, do not show person grammatically.

The verb be is more grammaticalized in this respect: it takes an exception to the other verbs.

The category of person is represented in English by two-member opposition: third person singular – non-third person singular.

The category of number shows whether the process is associated with one doer or with more than one doer. The category of number is a two-member opposition: singular – plural.

 

26. The Perfect forms in Modern English. Divergent views concerning the essence of the Perfect forms.

The Modern English perfect forms have been the subject of a lengthy discussion which has not so far brought about a definite result. The position of the perfect forms in the system of the English verb is a problem which has been treated in many different ways and has raised much controversy. There are three major approaches to defining the essence of perfective forms in English:

1) according to Jespersen the category of perfect is tense category;

2) according to Vorontsova the category of perfect is aspect category;

3) according to Smirnitsky the category of perfect is neither one of tense, nor one of aspect but a specific category – “time relation” different from both.

If the Perfect were a tense category, then the present perfect/past perfect/future perfect would be a union of two different tenses. This is simply impossible.

The Perfect is not an aspect too.

Since the Perfect is neither a tense nor an aspect, it is bound to be some special grammatical category “time relation” or “correlation”.

 

The verb-phrase.

The VP is a definite kind of the subordinate phrase with the verb as the head. The verb is considered to be the semantic and structural centre not only of the VP but of the whole sentence as the verb plays an important role in making up primary predication that serves the basis for the sentence. VPs are more complex than NPs as there are a lot of ways in which verbs may be combined in actual usage. Valent properties of different verbs and their semantics make it possible to divide all the verbs into several groups depending on the nature of their complements.

Prepositional phrases.

Coordinative conjunctions are rather few in number: and, but, or, yet, for.

Sentence-linking words, called conjunctive advebs are: consequently, furthermore, hence, however, moreover, nevertheless, therefore.

Some typical fixed prepositional phrases functioning as sentence linkers are: at least, as a result, after a while, in addition, in contrast, in the next place, on the other hand, for example, for instance.

Complex sentences are structures of subordination with two or more

immediate constituents which are not syntactically equivalent. In the simplest case,

that of binary structure, one of them is the principal clause to which the other is

joined as a subordinate. The latter stands in the relation of adjunct to the principal

clause and is beneath the principal clause in rank.

The semantic relations that can be expressed by subordination are much

more numerous and more varied than with co-ordination: all such relations as time,

place, concession, purpose, etc. are expressly stated in complex sentences only.

To express subordination of one syntactic unit to another in a complex

sentence English uses the following means: conjunctions: when, after, before,

while, till, until, though, although, that, as, because; a number of fixed phrases

performing the same function: as soon as, as long as, so long as, notwithstanding

that, in order that, according as, etc.; conjunctive words: the relative pronouns

who, which, that, whoever, whatever, whichever, and the relative adverbs where,

how, whenever, wherever, however, why, etc.

 

Attributive Clauses

Like attributive adjuncts in a simple sentence, attributive clauses qualify the

thing denoted by its head word through some actions, state or situation in which

the thing is involved.

It has been customary to make distinction between two types of attributive

sub-clauses: restrictive and continuative or amplifying clauses("defining " and

"non-defining ") This division is however too absolute to cover all patterns.

Restrictive clauses are subordinate in meaning to the clause containing the

antecedent; continuative clauses are more independent: their contents might often

be expressed by an independent statement giving some additional information

about the antecedent that is already sufficiently defined. Continuative clauses may

be omitted without affecting the precise understanding of the sentence as a whole.

This is marked by a different intonation, and by a clear break preceding the

continuative clause, no such break separating a restrictive clause from its

antecedent. The presence or absence of such a pause is indicated in writing and in

print by the presence or absence of a comma before as well as after the sub-clause.

- Clauses of Cause:

Clauses of cause are usually introduced by the conjunctions because, since,

and as and indicate purely causal relations.

e.g. I had to go home since it was getting dark.

As we have just bought a new house, we cannot afford a new car.

I did not arrive on time because I had missed my bus.

- Clauses of Place:

Clauses of place do not offer any difficulties of grammatical analysis; they

are generally introduced by the relative adverb where or by the phrase from where,

to where, etc.

e.g.: He went to the café where he hoped to find his friend.

6. Temporal Clauses:

Temporal clauses can be used to denote two simultaneous actions or states,

one action preceding or following the other, etc.

e.g. When we finished our lunch, we left.

- Clauses of Condition:

Conditional sentences can express either a real condition ("open condition")

or an unreal condition:

If you ask him he will help you (real condition)

If you asked him, he would help you (unreal condition)

- Clauses of Result:

Clauses of result or consequence are characterized by two patterns:

- clauses introduced by the conjunction that correlated with the pronoun

such or the adverb so in the main clause;

- clauses introduced by the phrasal connective so that.

e.g. Suddenly she felt so relieved that she could not help crying.

- Clauses of Purpose:

Clauses expressing purpose are known to be introduced by the conjunction

that or lest and by the phrase in order that.

e.g. I avoided mentioning the subject lest he be offended.

- Clauses of Concession:

The following types of concessive clauses are clauses that give information

about the circumstances despite or against which what is said in the principal

clause is carried out:

e.g. I went to the party, though I did not feel like it.

- Clauses of Manner and Comparison:

Sub-clauses of manner and comparison characterize the action of the

principal clause by comparing it to some other action.

e.g. She was nursing the flower, as a mother nurses her child.

 

Endophoric relations.

REFERENCE realized by nouns, determiners, personal and demonstrative pronouns or adverbs

 

EXOPHORA (points out of the text to a real world item) Ex.: Can you see that?

ENDOPHORA (refers to an item within the text)     ANAPHORA (referring to preceding text) Ex.: 1)direct anaphora: I met a man. He was wearing. 2) indirect anaphora: It is a solid house. The walls are thick CATAPHORA (referring to following text) Ex.: I would never have believed it. They’ve accepted the proposal.

42.Pragmatic approach to the study of language units.

Describing the ways in which sentences are formed, many scholars make reference to meaning and how sentences express it. The analysis of meaning is treated as divisible into two major domains: semantics and pragmatics. Semantics deals with the sense conventionally I assigned to sentences independently of the contexts in which they might be uttered. Pragmatics deals with the way in which utterances are interpreted in context and the ways in which the utterance of a particular sentence in a certain context may convey a message that is not actually expressed in the sentence and in other contexts might not have been conveyed. PRAGMATICS is concerned not with the meaning of sentences as units of the language system but with the interpretation of utterances in context.

CLASSIFICATION

J. L. AUSTIN (the founder of the speech act theory) distinguishes three kinds of speech acts:

a) locutionary acts is an act of saying something in the full sense of the word say.

 

b) illocutionary acts is an act performed in saying something. It realizes the intent of die speaker, such as asking or answering a question, giving some information or an assurance or a warning, announcing a verdict or an intention, pronouncing sentence, making an appointment or an appeal or a criticism, and so on.

 

c) perlocutionary acts is an act performed as a result of saying. Here we deal with the effects of the communication on the addressee. For example, by making a promise a speaker may reassure and create expectations in his audience.

 

We may always deny that a particular perlocutionary act was intended by saying things like:

Didn't mean to embarrass you.

I was simply stating a fact.

 

Indirect speech acts.

INDIRECT SPEECH ACTS when a sentence characterized by formal features of some pragmatic type in speech acquires illocutionary power of sentences of another type.

Indirect speech acts are commonly used to reject proposals and to make requests.

Ex.:

A speaker asks, "Would you like to meet me for coffee?" and another replies, “I have class.”

The second speaker used an indirect speech act to reject the proposal. This is indirect because the literal meaning of "/ have class" does not entail any sort of rejection.

TYPICAL CASES

Types: constativeoffertive   quesitiverequestive   constativerequestive

Examples: It is rather cool here. (Please close the window.) Do you have any cash on you? (Please lend me some.) There is some chocolate on the tea table. (Have some.)

 

A sentence used transpositionally still retains its original meaning. The two meanings co-exist, the indirect one being layered upon the original one.

 

 

The Category Of Number

This category indicates whether one or more things is meant. Oneness is expressed by singular and more-than-oneness by plural forms.

All English nouns have form which corresponds to the structural type of the singular or plural. But not all of them have the grammatical category of number. Only count nouns are inflected for it. Only these nouns indicate whether the noun names one or more than one referent, that is,are used in both numbers.

Grammatical numbers of English nouns are the singular and the plural. The basic form is the singular.The plural of almost all the counts is built by adding the inflexion -/e/s to the basic form /singular form/. In speech this inflexion is related in 3 variants:

/s/, /z/, /iz/ depending upon the character of the preceding sound

/s/ occurs after voiceless consonants, cat –cats

/z/ after voiced consonants and vowels, bag-bags

/iz/ after sibilants, rose-roses

In nouns with the final –y preceded by a consonant –y changes into –i. The plural ending is –esт (Study-studies)

A small number of nouns have irregular plurals. They are

Man-men Woman-woman Goose-geese Foot-feet Tooth-teeth Mouse-mice

Louse-lice Child-children Ox-oxen

In a number of nouns having a sound /f/ in the singular/spelled –f of –fe/ this sound changes into /v/ in the plural form and the ending –es is added.

Knife-knives, Leaf-leaves

There is no change of the sound in the plural of the nouns roof,proof,safe. Both variants are found in the nouns handkerchieves /-fs/,hoof-hooves/hoofs/, scarf-scarfs /ves/

 

1. The category of case. Different approaches to the category of case in Modem English

Case is the inflected form of the noun indication the grammatical relation in which.the noun stands to other parts of the sentence

English nouns have a two case system: the common case /the basic form/ and the genitive case/ the possessive case./

The genitive case of all singular nouns /which are used in it, of course of those plurals which don’t have the number morpheme –s / is built up by means of the morpheme –s which is added to the base form.For example:

Singular:boy-boy’s

Student-student’s

Plural man-men’s

Woman-woman’s

In the genitive of personal names ending in sibilants the morpheme –s is optional, but the apostrophe and the pronunciation /-iz/ are obligatory.For example:

Common case Possessive case

Burns Burn’s/-iz/ poems

BozBoz’s/-iz/ sketches

Fox Fox’s/-iz/ articles

Four special views advanced at various times by different scholars should be considered as successive stages in the analysis of this problem.

The first view may be called the “theory of positional cases”. This theory is directly connected with the old grammatical tradition, and its traces can be seen in many contemporary school textbooks in the English-speaking countries. Linguistic formulations of this theory may be found in the works of Nesfield, Deutschbein, Bryant and others

The second view may be called the “theory of prepositional cases”. It is also connected with the old school grammar teaching, and was advanced as a logical supplement to the positional view of the case.

The third view of the English noun case recognizes a limited inflectional system of two cases in English, one of them featured and the other one un-featured. This view may be called the “limited case theory”. This theory is at present most broadly accepted among linguists both in this country and abroad. It was formulated by such scholars as Sweet, Jespersen, and has since been radically developed by Smirnitsky, Barkhudarov and others.

 

1. The problem of gender in English. Personal pronouns as gender indicators of nouns.

A system of grammatical gender, whereby every noun was treated as either masculine, feminine or neuter, existed in Old English, but fell out of use during the Middle English period. Modern English retains features relating to natural gender, namely the use of certain nouns and pronouns (such as he and she) to refer specifically to persons or animals of one or other sex.

Gender is no longer an inflectional category in Modern English. The only traces of the Old English gender system are found in the system of pronoun–antecedent agreement, although this is now generally based on natural gender – the sex, or perceived sexual characteristics (or asexual nature), of the pronoun's referent

Benjamin Whorf described grammatical gender in English as a covert grammatical category. He noted that gender as a property inherent in nouns (rather than in their referents) is not entirely absent from modern English: different pronouns may be appropriate for the same referent depending on what noun has been used. For example, one might say this child is eating its dinner, but my daughter is eating her (not its) dinner, even though child and daughter in the respective sentences might refer to the same person.

The third-person singular personal pronouns are chosen according to the natural gender of their antecedent or referent

1. The Adjective as a part of speech. Problems concerning the category of degrees of comparison in Modem English.The Stative.

ADJECTIVE: A part of speech that modifies, enumerates, or describes a noun

An adjective is a word that describes a noun (person, place, thing, or idea). Adjectives help us

communicate our ideas more precisely and artistically

The category of comparison expresses the quantitative characteristics of the quality rendered by the adjective, in other words, it expresses the relative evaluation of the amount of the quality of some referent in comparison with other referents possessing the same quality. Three forms constitute this category: the positive degree, the comparative degree, and the superlative degree forms of the adjective. The basic form, known as the positive degree, has no special formal mark, e.g.: tall, beautiful; the comparative degree is marked by two kinds of forms; synthetical forms with the suffix “-er” and analytical forms with the auxiliary word more, e.g.: taller, more beautiful; the superlative degree is also formed either synthetically with the help of the grammatical suffix “-est”, or analytically with the help of the auxiliary word most, e.g.: tallest, most beautiful. The synthetic and analytical degrees stand in complementary distribution to each other, their choice is determined by syllabo-phonetic forms of adjectives and is covered in detail in practical grammar textbooks. Also, there are suppletive forms of the degrees of comparison, e.g.: bad – worse – worst.

Blokh:Among the words signifying properties of a nounal referent there is a leximic set which claims to be recognied as a separate part of speech, a class of words different form the adjectives in its class-forming features. These are words built up by the prefix a- and denoting different states, mostly of temporary duration. Here belong lexemes like afraid, agog, adrift, ablaze. These are treated as predicative adjectives in traditional grammar.

Scherbs and Vinogradov were the first to identify notional words signifying states and specially used as predicatives. They called the newly identified part of speech the “category of state“ (Russian words: тепло, зябко, одиноко, радостно, жаль, лень).

The term “words of the category of state” being rather cumbersome form the technical point of view was later changed into “stative words” or “statives”.

 

1. Substuntivisation of adjectives and adjectivization of nouns

Substantivation of adjectives: some adjectives can transgress the border between the two classes and can acquire some features of the noun. Strictly speaking, substantivation is a type of conversion - a lexical word-building process of zero-derivation. When adjectives are fully substantivized, they make a new word, a noun, which is connected with the adjective only etymologically. Conversion of this type often takes place in cases of one-word ellipsis in stable attributive word-combinations, e.g.: a private ß a private soldier, a native ß a native resident. These nouns acquire all the forms of constitutive substantive categories: number, case, article determination, e.g.: privates, natives, private’s, native’s, a private, the private, etc. (Cf.: similar substantivation cases in Russian: рядовой, больной, etc.)

** Some adjectives can transgress the border between the two classes and can acquire some features of the noun. Strictly speaking, substantivation is a type of conversion - a lexical word-building process of zero-derivation. When adjectives are fully substantivized, they make a new word, a noun, which is connected with the adjective only etymologically. Conversion of this type often takes place in cases of one-word ellipsis in stable attributive word-combinations, e.g.: a private ß a private soldier, a native ß a native resident. These nouns acquire all the forms of constitutive substantive categories: number, case, article determination, e.g.: privates, natives, private’s, native’s, a private, the private, etc. (Cf.: similar substantivation cases in Russian: рядовой, больной, etc.)

There is also a group of partially substantivized adjectives which are characterized by mixed (hybrid) lexico-grammatical features: they convey the mixed adjectival-nounal semantics of property; in a sentence they perform functions characteristic of nouns; and they have deficient paradigms of number and article determination (they are not changed according to the category of number and are combined only with the definite article). They include words denoting groups of people sharing the same feature – the rich, the beautiful, the English, and words denoting abstract notions – the unforgettable, the invisible, etc. The former resemble the pluraliatantum nouns, and the latter the singulariatantum nouns. They make up a specific group of adjectives marginal to the nouns and can be called “adjectivids” by analogy with “verbids”.

This type of word-building has become particularly productive in modern English, involving adjectivized past participles, which exhibit “triply” mixed meanings, e.g.: the newly wed, the unemployed, etc. And these tend to acquire more and more substantive features in the course of time, e.g., one can say the newly-weds, or an unemployed.

Adjectivization of nouns means the process when nouns become adjectives, e.g. stone wall, house fronts, goods van.

19 The Verb. Finite and non-finite forms of the verb. The category of finitude

The verb as a notional part of speech has the categorial meaning of dynamic process, or process developing in time, including not only actions as such (to work, to build), but also states, forms of existence (to be, to become, to lie), various types of attitude, feelings (to love, to appreciate), etc.

The complexity of the verb is also manifested in the intricate system of its grammatically relevant subclasses.

On the upper level, all the verbs according to their semantic (nominative) value fall into two big sub-classes: the sub-class of notional verbs and the sub-class of functional and semi-functional verbs. Notional verbs have full nominative value and are independent in the expression of the process, e.g.: to work, to build, to lie, to love, etc.; these verbs comprise the bulk of the class and constitute an open group of words. Functional and semi-functional (or, semi-notional) verbs make a closed group of verbs of partial nominative value. They are dependent on other words in the denotation of the process, but through their forms the predicative semantics of the sentence is expressed (they function as predicators).

Functional and semi-functional verbs are further subdivided into a number of groups. Auxiliary functional verbs are used to build the analytical grammatical forms of notional verbs, e.g.: have done, was lost, etc. Link verbs connect the nominative part of the predicate (the predicative) with the subject. They can be of two types: pure and specifying link verbs. Pure link verbs perform a purely predicative-linking function in the sentence; in English there is only one pure link verb to be; specifying link verbs specify the connections between the subject and its property, cf.: He was pale. – He grew pale. The specification of the connections may be either “ perceptional ”, e.g.: to seem, to look, to feel, etc., or “ factual ”, e.g.: to grow, to become, to get, etc. The semi-functional link verbs should be distinguished from homonymous notional verbs, e.g.: to grow can be a notional verb or a specifying link verb, cf.: The child grew quickly. – He grew pale. Modal verbs are predicators denoting various subject attitudes to the action, for example, obligation, ability, permission, advisability, etc.: can, must, may, etc. A group of semi-notional verbs function as verbid introducers, i.e., they introduce non-finite forms of verbs into the structure of the sentence: they are grammatically inseparable from the verbids and these two lexemes jointly make the predicate of the sentence, e.g.: He happened to know all about it. Verbid introducers render the following meanings: modal identity, when the speaker evaluates the action denoted by the following verbid as seeming, accidental, or unexpected, e.g.: to seem, to prove, to appear, to happen, etc.; subject-action relations (conation), e.g.: to try, to fail, to manage, etc.; phasal semantics, e.g.: to begin, to start, to continue, to finish, etc. These semi-notional verbs should also be distinguished from homonymous notional verbs, cf.: It happened ten years ago (happen is a notional verb). – He happened to be there at the same time with her (happen is a semi-notional verbid introducer of modal identity – the process denoted by the infinitive is presented as unexpected).

The subdivision of verbs into notional and (semi-)functional is grammatically relevant since the verbs of the two subclasses perform different syntactic functions in the sentence: notional verbs function as predicates, semi-functional and functional verbs as parts of predicates (predicators).

 

All verbal forms fall into two major sets: finite and non-finite. The term “finite” is derived from the Latin term “verbum finitum”, which shows that these words denote actions developing in time.

Non-finite forms of the verb, the infinitive, the gerund, participle I (present participle) and participle II (past participle), are otherwise called “ verbals ”, or “ verbids ”. The term, introduced by O. Jespersen, implies that they are not verbs in the proper sense of the word, because they combine features of the verb with features of other notional parts of speech. Their mixed, hybrid nature is revealed in all the spheres of the parts-of-speech characterization: meaning, formal features, and functions. The non-verbal features of verbids are as follows: they do not denote pure processes, but present them as specific kinds of substances and properties; they are not conjugated according to the categories of person and number, have no tense or mood forms; in some contexts they are combined with the verbs like non-verbal parts of speech; they never function as independent predicates; their functions are those characteristic for other notional parts of speech. The verbal features of verbids are as follows: their grammatical meaning is basically processual; like finites, they do have (at least, most of them have) aspect and voice forms and verbal combinability with direct objects and adverbial modifiers; they can express predication in specific semi-predicative constructions. Thus, verbids can be characterized as intermediary phenomena between verbs and other non-verbal parts of speech.

The opposition between finite and non-finite forms of verbs expresses the category of “finitude ”. The grammatical meaning, the content of this category is the expression of verbal predication: the finite forms of the verb render full (primary, complete, genuine) predication, the non-finite forms render semi-predication, or secondary (potential) predication. The formal differential feature is constituted by the expression of verbal time and mood, which underlie the predicative function: having no immediate means of expressing time-mood categorial semantics, the verbids are the weak member of the opposition.

It is interesting to note that historically verbids in English were at first separate non-verbal nominative forms, but later they were drawn into the class of verbs by acquiring aspect and voice forms, verbal combinability, etc.

 

 

20 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.