The notion of morph. Its types

The notion of morph. Its types

The morph is a minimum meaningful succession of phonemes that can not be divided into any meaningful units and which regularly occurs in different environments.

e. g clear

clearly

clears

clearing

cleared

here clear is a morph because:

- it’s meaningful = it has its lexical meaning of ясность

- it’s minimum meaningful unit

- occurs in different environments

 

But on the other hand not each repeated succession of morphemes is a morph (step, stop,street, strike): st is not a morph because

- it has no meaning

- if st is single out from the words the rest of the words is not a morph either

 

Hands come 2 conclusions:

- each phoneme of the wordform is part of the morph

- if one part of the word is a morph the rest of the word must be a morph too

 

According to the role in the word-structure morphs are divided into the following types:

- free – is a morph that can function as a separate word (e.g work, friend)

- bound – is morph that can be only part of a word but not a word itself (workers, freedom, greatly)

- semi-bound – is a morph of double- nature, on the one hand it is a word but on the other hand it can be regularly used as a derivational morpheme for producing new words (workman, sportsman,fishman, statesman)

- fused – are morphs that have common phoneme in their structure (really=real+ly)

- amalgamated – are fully fused morphs which represent different morphemes in the same word-form (girls’ = girl+z+z = full refused, express different morphemes = of plurality, of the genitive case)

- replacive – is a morph which is represented by a change of root-sound by means of which a certain grammatical meaning is expressed. (write – wrote, advice (n.) – advise (v.))

The notion of morpheme and its types

The notion of morpheme can be approached:

1) externally – morpheme is analyzed as a separate language unit. Morpheme is qualifiede as

- the smallest unit of language

- is the minimum lang. unit having its own content-side and expression-side

- the basic meaningful unit of language and speech

- the smallest meaningful unit having no positional isolatability

2) internally – is defined acc to its inner structure:

- morpheme is a set of morphs having the same meaning but being in the state of complementary distribution.

Distribution – is the total of all environments of unit.

There are 3 types of distribution:

1) contrastive – is such a relationship between morphs when they are added to one and the same stem but express different meanings (e.g played, playing)

2) non-contrastive – is a free alternation relationship (morphs are added to the same stem and express the same meaning: learned=learnt, dreamed=dreamt)

3) complementory – is such a relationship between morphs having the same meaning when one of them occurs in the environment in which the other doesn’t.

In other words, complementory distribution is the relationship between morphs with the same meaning which occur in mutually exclusive environment.

e.g cats,children

 

Acc. to the type of meaning and role in the word structure:

1) root morpheme is the bearer of the lexical meaning, can be free and bound. The bound root morpheme is always represented by a bound morph.

e.g підняти, перейняти, розняти

 

the free root morpheme can be represented by morph

e.g worker

 

2) Derivational morphemes express lexico-grammat. word- building meaning. Represented by:

- prefix

- suffixes

- vowel replacive morph

- consonant replacive morph (advice-advise)

- semantic stress (su bject – sub ject)

 

3) Inflectional are morphemes express pure grammatical categorical meanings. Two types:

- building up analytical forms: grammatical word morphemes (are of double nature. On the one hand they are words because they can function separately in speech e. g Will you enjoy me after the lecture? – I will. But on the other hand, these words serve the purpose of expressing gram. meanings like any other inflection.)

e.g shall, will- should, would

discontinuous word morphemes are two-element gram. units which consist of an auxiliary part and a specific form of a notional word. (takes place in continious aspect forms, perfect forms, passive forms)

- building up syntactical forms: outer (brake -broke) and inner inflections (send-sent).

 

Suppletivity is the change of the whole stem of the word by means of which a different gram. meaning is expressed (Ukr. бути – є, Eng good - worse).

 

Lexico –gram. word –morphemes occur in the so-called analytical words (to take up, to look after. to look for). They are of double nature. On the one hand, they have separate words but on the other hand, it inparts a new meaning to the word.

The notion of allomorph

Allomorphs are called morphs that are the part of the one and the same morpheme; the variants of a morpheme = are the representation of a given morpheme that manifests the alteration.

e.g morphs klia and klar = allomorphs 1 morpheme

 

A morpheme can be represented by only 1 allomorph

 

Allomorphs are divided into:

- phonetically condition – are allomorphs, the choice of which depends on the phonetic environment; they are always productive way of world building ([iz, s, z] are used after the phonemes [s, z, ʃ,ʒ, tʃ,dʒ])

- morphologically condition – are allomorphs the choice of which depends on the morphemes environment

 

e.g. Sing: boy [boi] boys [boiz]

hand [hand] hands [handz]

cat [kat] cats [kats]

ox [oks] oxen [oksɘn]

 

Allomorph

An allomorph may be defined as the “variant of morpheme whichoccurs in a certain definable environment”.One of the various distinct forms of a morpheme is an

Allomorph

. Allomorphs occur in predicable environments. A morpheme may have one or more allomorph. Allomorphs can be described in terms of phonemes. An abstract such as plural morpheme in English can be represented in three forms:

- as in books, pens, marks-esas in beaches, dishes, peaches-enas in oxen, children, womenThe suffixes –s, -es and –en, each, represent the plural morpheme inthe English language. Each of these distinct forms cannot be established as a morpheme because they cannot occur independently, but do occur under phonetic conditioning, as follows:

-s occurs after sounds spelled with p, t, k, d, g, f, v, th, l, r, n,m, ng, y, w.-es occurs after sounds spelled with ch, sh, s, z, x.-en does not occur under phonetic conditioning, but is a matter of convention.The negative particle not in English also has a bundle of allomorphs.Representing the negative not are im-, il-, ir-, un-, in-, and dis-.Phonetic conditioning that determines the negative prefixes in-, im-,il-, ir-, and un-, in certain composite words is the initial sound of thebase which follows each of the prefixes:Im- is prefixed to possible bases with initial letter

m or p as inimmovable, improper, immature, impossible, immorality, impolite.il- is prefixed to possible bases with initial letter I

as in illegible,illegal, illiterate, illogical, illuminate, illiquid.ir- is prefixed to possible bases with initial letter r as in irrelevant,irregular, irrational, irresponsible, irremovable, irreversible.un- is prefixed to possible base with other initial letter sounds as inunbeloved, unhappy, unanalyzed, unburnt, unprejudiced, ungraceful.in- is prefixed to possible bases with other initial letter sounds as inincapable, inapplicable, independent, inadequate, inhuman, insensible,inviolable,dis- is prefixed to possible bases with other initial sounds as indisagree, dislike, disapprove, disestablish, disunion, disaffection.In the relation to a bound morpheme, we should consider the notionof the allomorph.

 

In cases where there is no marker for the plural (as in ‘deer’,sheep,’ etc.) the allomorph of the plural morpheme is shown as // Ø {=zero); it is called a zero allomorph.

 

Typology of root morphemes

In both languages root morphemes serve to express the lexical meaning of words. Another isomorphic feature of Eng. and Ukr. root morphemes is there subdivision into free and bound. In both languages root morphemes often form part of a compound word like reading-hall, blackboard.

In Eng. there are much more free root morpheme words than in Ukr. It means that most Eng. words are simple in their composition having neither prefixes nor suffixes which would help identify the lexico-gramm. nature of a word. It means that the balk of Eng. words are not morphologically marked at the lang. level while in Ukr. All notional words are morphologically marked by specific derivational morphemes. Due to the lack of the derivational affixes. Eng. words may easily migrate from one class of words into another. This phenomena is called functional transposition.

Free root morpheme - words in Eng can be found in the sphere of notional as well as in functional words.

free roots – sport

bound – ant, ive

 

Prefixes are affixes preciding the root. In both languages in Eng and Ukr. prefixes perform 3 different functions:

- word-building

- word-forming

- grammatical categorical function

Word-building modify the lex. meaning of the word and serves the purpose of inner derivation (within the same class of words). e.g. cпитав,зібрав,ізняв, збив. The prefixes prevail in Ukr. Form new words within the same parts of speech.

Word-forming pref. have 2 functions:

- modify the lexical meaning

- change the class of a word

This type of pref. dominate in Eng. because in Eng. there are words of differ. parts of speech wich build up with the help of pref,

e.g. dew (n) – bedew (v.)

camp (n.) – encamp (v.)

rich (n.) – enrich (v.) обогащать

Both Eng. d Ukr. pref. are capable of expressing the categorical meanings of transitivity and terminativeness.

(жити (non-term) – прожити, пережити

terminative/ to live – outlive

Isomorphic in both lang. is the combination of 2 or more pref. within the same word.

(missrepresentation, misunderstanding), but more widely used in Ukr. (не пере роз под ілений).

5 Suffixes in the contrasted lang. are more numerous in number, more diverse in nature, more relevant in functioning than prefix in languages. Suffixes are much richer in diversity in Ukr. Because each notional Ukr word comprises specific suff. while in Eng. due to its historic development there are only about a hundred suff.: 60 noun-building suff., 26 adj-building suff., 5 verb-building suff. and 3 adv-building suff.

Noun-forming suffixes:

· -er (teacher, worker),

· -ing (living, reading);

· -ness (kindness, tenderness). These suffixes are productive.

· -age (voyage, courage);

· -ard (coward, drunkard);

· -ment (agreement, employment);

· -th (strength, length). These suffixes are non-productive.

In the Ukrainian language these are the following suffixes:

· -ар (шахтар, лікар);

· -ик (історик, радник);

· -ець (гравець, українець);

· -ач (оглядач, наглядач);

· -ак (співак, мастак);

· -нь (учень, здоровань

 

Adjective-forming suffixes:

· -able (movable, readable);

· -ful (powerful, delightful);

· -ish (whitish, bookish);

· -less (useless, hopeless);

· -y (noisy, sunny). These are productive suffixes.

· -en (golden, woollen) – non-productive.

In the Ukrainian language these are the following suffixes:

· ов- (зимовий, раптовий)

· н- (хмарний, класний)

· ив- (щасливий, кмітливий)

· ськ-/ цьк- (англійський, німецький).

In the Ukrainian language (but not in English) diminutive suffixes are often used:

-ньк (малесенький), -чк (дівчатко), -ець(вітерець).

Verb-forming suffixes:

· - ate (complicate, navigate);

· - en (darken, strengthen);

· - fy (signify, simplify);

· - ute (attribute, execute). These suffixes are non-productive.

In the Ukrainian language these are the suffixes: (ув)ати-, ити-(сушити, головувати).

Adverb—forming suffixes:

· - ly (quickly, lately);

· - long (sidelong, headlong);

· - ward(s) forward, toward(s);

· -ways, wise (clockwise, otherwise, crabways). Of all these suffixes only the suffix

-ly is productive.

In the Ukrainian language that is the suffix о-: високо, широко.

 

2. Semantic classification.

Suffixes changing the lexical meaning of the stem can be subdivided into groups.

1. Agent suffixes:

· -ist/ -іст/-ист (journalist, артист);

· ar/ -ар/-яр (scholar, школяр);

· ier-/-yer/ -ир (cashier, бригадир).

2. Suffixes denoting abstract notions:

· -ism/ -ізм (socialism, комунізм);

· -tion/ -ац (demonstration, демонстрація);

· -dom/ -ств/-цтв (kingdom, газетярство);

· -hood/ -ств (brotherhood, братство).

3. Evaluative suffixes:

· -ette (kitchenette);

· -y/-ie/-ey (sissy);

· -ling (duckling).

· -атк/ ятк (дівчатко, оленятко)

· -ик (ротик);

· -ечк (донечка);

· -ичк (сестричка);

· -ньк (дівчинонька).

All Ukrainian diminutive suffixes are productive. In English only –ie/ey, -ette are productive.

4. Gender/sex expressing suffixes.

In the Ukrainian language they can express masculine gender:

- -ар/яр (лікар, школяр);

- -ист/іст (бандурист);

- -ій (водій);

- -ант/ент (студент).

Feminine gender can be expressed by means of the following suffixes:

· -к (артистка);

· -их (кравчиха).

Neuter gender is expressed by means of:

· -атк (курчатко);

· -к (вушко);

· -ц (винце).

English gender suffixes are only sex expressing: actor – actress.

In both lang. there are evaluative suff. that are of 2 types:

- diminutive (сонечко, зіронька)

- augmentive (ручище,вовчище)

In Ukr. there are 50 of them:дівчатко, дитятко, синок,річечка

In Eng. only 4:

- y granny,dolly

- ling duckling

- ock killock

- ee antee

6 Inflexional morphemes in the contrasted languages express different morphological categories.

The number of genuinely Eng. inflexions is only 16, namely, noun inflexions, for example:

- s boys, watches

- en oxen

- ren children

 

Inflexions of the comparative and the superlative degree of qualitative adj.

- er bigger

- est biggest

 

verbal inflex:
- s/ es he puts, watches

- d/ed learned

- t/n burnt, broken

 

Inflexions of absolute possessive pronouns

- s hers, ours

- e mine, thine

 

The number of inflexions in Ukr. far exceeds their number in Eng. since every national part of speech a variety of endings.

 

The express number, case and gender of nominal parts of speech and tense, aspect, person, number:

Петра, йому, всіма, двоє-двох-двома.

 

Some morphological categories in Eng. and Ukr. are expressed with the help of analytical means – prepositions, particles.

e,g to give smth to Peter

not far from the river

 

Analytically expressed are the degrees of comparison of adj. and adv.

e.g more calm, more/most interesting

 

In Ukr. the construction is less frequently used: більш, мнш важливий

7 Agglutination represents a mechanical adding of one or more affixal morphemes in pre-position, post-positional or in interposition to the root morpheme.

 

In Eng. there exists a large number of the parts of speech formed by agglutinating prefixes

e.g verbs: adhere, assure,co-exist

adj.: post-war, pre-war

statives: alike, aloof, afraid

 

Preposed agglutination apart from forming new parts of speech (e,g do- undo-overdo, схід- захід – вихід - прихід) can also perform gram. function. they may sometimes turn the intransitive verbs into transitive:

live – outlive

weap – beweap

vote – outvote

жити – пережити, прожити

спати – проспати

плакати – оплакати

 

In Ukr. pre-posed agglutination can change imperfective verbs into perfective:

бити-збити-забити-добити-розбити

 

Post –posed agglutination is observed in both contrasted languages, being in Ukr. even more frequent than in Eng.

All Ukr. infinitives are formed by adding to the root the post-positive morphemes:

- ти бити, мити

- ся злитися,

- ки спатки

- оньки питоньки

 

In Eng. most of the indefinite form infinitives are pure root-morphemed words (come, live, love,fly). There are only 5 verbal morphemes that are agglutinated post-positevely:

- ate create

- en blacken

- ify plurify

- ize realize

 

Post-positive agglutination helps to form nouns in the contrasted languages

e,g attendance, diary, freedom, employee, чужак, бідняк, дудар, борець, холодок

 

adverbs: nicely, гарно, швидко

Ukr. statives: можна, треба, жалко

numerals: fifty, sixty, одинядцять

 

Agglutination is a productive means of compounding (especially in Eng.): cross-examine, side-ways;

In Ukr.: шафа – холодильник, хоч-не-хоч

 

 

8 Suppletivity is the change of the whole stem of the word by means of which a different gram. meaning is expressed.

As a mean of gram. expression is observed in words, word – forms, morphemes.

At the Lexical level it helps express in Eng. and Ukr. sex distinctions in word –building

e.g boy –girl, bull – cow, man – woman, хлопець – дівчина, чоловік – жінка

 

 

In the system of lexico – gram. classes of words can express different categorical meanings of notionals at the lexical level: carry – bring, say –tell, брати – взяти

 

Suppl. forms of a verb paradigm can be used in Eng. and Ukr. to express some morphological categories:

e.g to be = am, is, are, was, were

are respectively the corresponding forms of tense (the Present and Past Indefinite)

 

The Ukr verb бути possesses only one suppletive form in present tense = є which is used for all persons in singular and plural.

 

Suppletive forms of categorial nature expressing degrees of comparison in some adj. and adv.:

good-better-the best

добрий – кращий – найкращий

 

Suppletivity of pronouns finds its expression and realization in Eng. and Ukr. at different levels:

a) level of the lexico –gram. class of words as a whole

e,g I, he,she, it; we, you, they

я, ти, він, вона, воно, ми, ви, вони

 

b) at the level of paradigmatic word forms

e.g I –me, he – him, she – her, we –us

я – мене, воно –його, він –його, ми –нас

 

c) at the level of diff. case forms

me, him, her, us, them

мене, мені,мною, його, йому, ним.

 

In Eng. there exist possessive absolute suppletive forms of pronouns unknown in Ukr: mine, hers, yours, ours.

 

Ukr has fully or partly suppletive forms of some interrogative and indefinite pronouns: хто-кого, кому, ким

що – чого, чому, чим

9 The set of basical grammatical notion include:

- meaning

- form

- opposition

- cstegory

- paradigm

 

The notion of the gram. meaning is integral as its definition incorporates the notions of meaning, form and opposition.

In general terms gram. category is qualified as the unity of gram. meaning and morphological way of its expression. The peculiar features of gram. meaning are selfevident.

Grammatical meaning is an abstract general notion referring to the group of class of words which is closely connected with lex. meaning but doesn’t depend on it.

 

Types of grammatical meaning.

Accord. to the reference to objective reality

- extrsalingual (mostly in Eng.)ate morphologically determined, situationally conditioned, the choice of the gram. form for its expression is free.

e.g Give me a book. Give me the book.

The gram. meaning of definitness and indefinitness, they depend on the situation and the speaker’s intention.

In the sentence Give me a book – names the object, Give me the book – he specifies the object.

 

- intralingua (mostly in Ukr)– morphologically predetermined, syntactically conditioned, the choice of gram. formis bound

e.g to see him – the objective case

the children’s toys

 

Accord. to the way of expressing gram.meaning:

- explicit are morphologically marked by a special inflection

e.g tables – s

прйш ов

 

- implicit are not formally expressed and morphologically marked. They are split into 2 types:

 

general is a part’s of speech meaning, which is pertained to all words of a class

substantivity = nouns

verbiality (the ability to express acts, states) = verbs

deixes = pronouns

quality – property = adjective

e.g red – implicit, general

 

dependant is the meaning of the word class which influences the realization of a certain gram. category. This meaning is of great gram. relevants because it correlates with a particular gram. category.

e.g gas – uncountable (number)

class – count (number)

 

countability/ uncontability are implicit but these meanings correlate to number and they are dependent.

 

qualitivenes/ relativeness = degrees of comparison

transitivity/ intransitivity = correlate of voice

 

Grammatical form is ameans of expressing of gram.meaning; form the point of view of the composition gram. form is a combination of a root or stem + inflextion

pen+s = pens

 

A set of gram. forms which differ from one another only by inflextions is called a lexeme.

e.g speak, speaks, spoke, speaking, spoken = lexeme

 

A set of gram. forms that have the same inflextion and differ in lexical meaning is called a form-class or categorical form

e.g pens,classes, children, data = form –class (morpheme of the plural form)

 

 

A set of gram. forms of the same part of speech is called paradigm.

boy

boys

boy’s possessive genitive

boys’ possessive genitive

this is the paradigm of countable anim. nouns

 

Gram. notions is a relations between forms of the same parts of speech by means of which a certain categorical property is expressed.

book –books

dog – dogs

class – classes

child – children

gram. form of th sing – gram. form of the plurality

this is relations between express the category of number

 

Hands come that the relation between 2 gram. forms is the opposition.

Members of the opposition are called opposems or opposites. They can be unmarked and marked.

- unmarked (called weak) = single table

- marked (strong) = plur. tables

 

There are 2 classifications of oppositions

1) According to the number of opposemes

- binary: consists of two opposemes

e.g the opposition of number sing. and plur.

 

- tertiary: consists of 3 opposems

e.g Ukr: the imperative, subjunctive, indicative

Eng.: degrees of comparison (positive, comaparative, superlative)

 

- polynomic are the oppositions consisting of more than 3 opposemes

e.g the category of case in Ukr nouns (N - хмара, G - хмари, D - хмарі, Akk. - хмару, Ins. - хмарою, Loc. – на хмарі, Voс. - хмаро)

the cstegory of mood in Eng

 

 

2) According to the qualitative raletions between opposemes

 

- private: is such a relationship between opposemes when the stron opposeme is characterized by the presence and the weak opposeme by the absence of a certain differential morphological property. They are always binary.

e.g table (weak opposeme) – tables (strong opposeme)

 

- equipollent is the opposition of opposemes where each opposeme has its own differential morphological property

e.g Ukr. N вода

G води

D воді

C воду

Ins водою

 

- gradual are the oppositions in which opposemes are different according to the intensity of the same differentisl morphological property

e.g long – longer – the longest = a quality of a substance

long = positive degree

longer = a more intensive presentation of quality, comparative degree

the longest = the most intensely represented property, the superlative degree

10 The parts of speech are classes of words, all the members of these classes having certain characteristics in common which distinguish them from the members of other classes. The problem of word classification into parts of speech still remains one of the most controversial problems in modern linguistics. The attitude of grammarians with regard to parts of speech and the basis of their classification varied a good deal at different times. Only in English grammarians have been vacillating between 3 and 13 parts of speech. There are four approaches to the problem:
1. Classical (logical-inflectional)
2. Functional
3. Distributional
4. Complex

 

The classical parts of speech theory goes back to ancient times. It is based on Latin grammar. According to the Latin classification of the parts of speech all words were divided dichotomically into declinable and indeclinable parts of speech. This system was reproduced in the earliest English grammars. The first of these groups, declinable words, included nouns, pronouns, verbs and participles, the second – indeclinable words – adverbs, prepositions, conjunctions and interjections. The logical-inflectional classification is quite successful for Latin or other languages with developed morphology and synthetic paradigms but it cannot be applied to the English language because the principle of declinability/indeclinability is not relevant for analytical languages.
A new approach to the problem was introduced in the XIX century by Henry Sweet. He took into account the peculiarities of the English language. This approach may be defined as functional. He resorted to the functional features of words and singled out nominative units and particles. To nominative parts of speech belonged noun-words (noun, noun-pronoun, noun-numeral, infinitive, gerund), adjective-words (adjective, adjective-pronoun, adjective-numeral, participles), verb (finite verb, verbals – gerund, infinitive, participles), while adverb, preposition, conjunction and interjection belonged to the group of particles. However, though the criterion for classification was functional, Henry Sweet failed to break the tradition and classified words into those having morphological forms and lacking morphological forms, in other words, declinable and indeclinable.

 

A distributional approach to the parts to the parts of speech classification can be illustrated by the classification introduced by Charles Fries. He wanted to avoid the traditional terminology and establish a classification of words based on distributive analysis, that is, the ability of words to combine with other words of different types. At the same time, the lexical meaning of words was not taken into account. According to Charles Fries, the words in such sentences as 1. Woggles ugged diggles; 2. Uggs woggled diggs; and 3. Woggs diggled uggles are quite evident structural signals, their position and combinability are enough to classify them into three word-classes. In this way, he introduced four major classes of words and 15 form-classes. Let us see how it worked. Three test frames formed the basis for his analysis:
Frame A - The concert was good (always);
Frame B - The clerk remembered the tax (suddenly);
Frame C – The team went there.
It turned out that his four classes of words were practically the same as traditional nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs. What is really valuable in Charles Fries’ classification is his investigation of 15 groups of function words (form-classes) because he was the first linguist to pay attention to some of their peculiarities.
All the classifications mentioned above appear to be one-sided because parts of speech are discriminated on the basis of only one aspect of the word: either its meaning or its form, or its function.

 

In modern linguistics, parts of speech are discriminated according to three criteria: semantic, formal and functional. This approach may be defined as complex and was put forward by academishian Sherba. The semantic criterion presupposes the grammatical meaning of the whole class of words (general grammatical meaning). The formal criterion reveals paradigmatic properties: relevant grammatical categories, the form of the words, their specific inflectional and derivational features. The functional criterion concerns the syntactic function of words in the sentence and their combinability. Thus, when characterizing any part of speech we are to describe: a) its semantics; b) its morphological features; c) its syntactic peculiarities.

 

Parts of speech is a set of words having the same:

- general implicit gram.meaning

- derivational affixes

- gram. categories

- combinability

- syntactic function in the sentence

 

 

11 The comprehensive approach was put forward by academisian Sherba, who suggested the subdivision of words acc. to 3 criteria:

1) Semantic criteria takes into account not concrete lexical meaning but the implicit general meaning which is characteristic of all words of a certain class.

e.g for nouns the general cat. meaning is substantivity, the ability to denote persons and non-persons;

for verbs = gen.mean. is verbiality – the ability to express action, processes and states;

for preposition = is relation or connection between persons or non – persons

 

Thus, the meaning of a word the is an intrinsic meaning of a word but it can not be taken separately in classifying words because the meaning of words of different classes can be overlapping.

 

2) The formal criteria deals with morphology of words which include:

- a system of inflections expressing some gram. categories

- a system of derivational word – building morphemes

It goes without saying that each notional,except statives, can be inflacted for certain gram. categories:

e.g nouns in Eng have the gram. category of number and case

Ukr. nouns = number, case, gender

adj. in both languages change or degrees of comparison;

Eng verbs are inflected for the categories of person, number, tense, phase, voice, mood, aspect while Ukr. verbs do not have aspect/phase

Respectively words in Eng. have specific paradigms:

e.g дерево (sing) – дерева (pl)- дерева

Ukr nouns have a tertiary number of apposition of sing. дерево, plur дерева, дерива – dual number (двойна)

Adj. in both lang. are inflected for degrees of comparison:

e.g large – larger – largest

гарний – гарніший – найгарніший

But no matter how helpful this critrian is it can’t supply the proper subdivision of words especially in Eng. because in some words gram. oppositions are neutralized (is the reduction of the opposition to one member)

e.g count. animate (student, students, student’s, students’), countab inanim (book, books)

 

Most notionals in Eng and specially in Ukr. have specific derivational affixes.

e.g en

re – rewrite

mis – misunderstand

supper

dis – dislike

out – outlie

 

3) Functional propeties of a class of words concern:

a) combinability is defined as the ability of words of one class to be combined with words of other classes thus forming up syntactical units of a particular type. In other words we may say that combinability is a syntactic connection od a word to a particular class.

But connaction of words are not equily significant for parts of speech classification

e.g This difficult job is not for me.

b) syntactical function in the sentence is also a characteristic feature of words of the same class. Nouns are generally used as subjects and obj.;

adj. mostly functions as attributes and predicatives;

adv= adverbials

verbs are predicates

But syntactical function never assumes the attitude of absolute correspondence between a part of speech and its function

e.g Noun = subj., object, attribute, predicative, adv. mod

Subj = nouns, pronouns, numerals, substantive adj, infinitive, gerund

 

Though syntactic vfunction is of less importance for word classif nevertheless there is a certain correspondence between class of words and its functioning.

 

12 It is commonly recognized that the notional parts of speech are nouns, pronouns, numerals, verbs, adjectives, adverbs.
The division of language units into notion and function words reveals the interrelation of lexical and grammatical types of meaning. In notional words the lexical meaning is predominant. Notional words constitute the bulk of the existing word stock while function words constitute a smaller group of words.

The notional classes of words are characterized by the following identical properties:

1) They are autosemantic. It means that notionals have full lexical meaning and direct reference to objective reality. It means that all notionals except Pronouns denote smth from objective reality. It means that each notional word has its own referent.

Pronouns are not denotators because they point out substances and properties without naming them. The meaning of the pronoun becomes concrete only in a certain situation or context. Thus notionals are words of full nominative value.

2) Notionals are open classes of words. It means that they can be derived with the help of word-building morphemes.

3) Notionals have gram. categories which are manifested by specific inflectional morphemes.

4) Notionals have varied combinability with one another and various connections with other parts of speech

5) Notionals have specific functioning in word –groups and sentences. In word –groups notional function as head/adjunct:

a fine day (adjunct, head)

In the sentence they perform the function of primary/ secondary parts of the sentence

6) As notionals have full nominant value, they may be logically stressed acc. to the situation or the speakers intention.

7) Notionals in Eng. and Ukr. can be substituted by special structural words:
nouns = pronouns

The girl entered the room. She ……

 

adj. by such/same

adv. by so

verbs by do

13 Fuctionals are semantic by their nature, it means that they are not the bearers of the full meaning. They express generalized meanings of:

- connection (preposition, conjunction)

- determination of articles

- specification of particles

2) they are closed sets of words (no derivation within them)

3) they do not perform functions in the sentence, they only help notionals to perform the functions of parts of the sentence

e.g John lives in London

4) They are characterized by varied combinability with notionals and with one another

e.g as soon as

5) They have no gram. categories, they are never inflacted

6) Generally functionals are not logically stressed though in the situation of contrest they may have emphases (logically stress)

The Category of case.

There isvery little of common in Eng and Ukr as far as the category of case is concerned. The only Isomorphic feature is the assene of the case category. In both lngs the case category is a pure gram. category which has it's own gram. meaning and morphological way of its expression. As to the scope of cases the meaning of cases Eng differs greately from Ukr. In Ukr nouns the case category is represented by a polynomic equipollant opposition of seven case forms in sing. and plural

- the nominative case хмара

- genetive case хмари

- dative хмарі

- accusative хмару

- instrumental хмарою

- locative хмарі

- Vocative хмаро

Things are quite different in eng nouns. There are four theories concerning the case deveopment in Eng. They are:

- the theory of positional cases

- the theory of prepositional cases

- the theory of possessive close position

- limited case system

1)Theory of positional cases is based on analogy of latin grammar. Within this theory besides the inflected genetive case the nominative, D Acc Voc cases are recognized according to the position a noun occupies in phrases and sentences.

---e.g I saw the girl -Acc case

--- Come here, girl - Voc case

I gave the book to the girl. – Dative case

 

2) The theory of prepositional cases recognizes some inflectional prepositions.The noun with some prepositions are reguarded as different case forms in some attributive and objective phrases. It concerns the prepositions of + noun, (genetive case), to for + noun (dative case). This theory can hardly pass any serious linguistic trial because in noun declentional languages all prepositions by vertur of functional nature are combined with a particular case form (so called prepositional govement). If so than any combination of a preposition + noun in Eng should be regarded as a specific case form. It results in recognizing practically unlimited number of cases in Eng nouns.

3) The theory of posessive clause position wa put forward by the russian linguist Vorontsova. Who thinks that the case category has got extinkt, with nouns losing all inflexions of case. It goes from this that Vorontsova doesn't recognize the apostrophy S morpheme as the inflexion of Genetive case. She considers the apostrophy S sign as a pure syntactic element resembling preposition. The only difference betveen apostrophy S sign and a preposition is that the appostrophy S is always in post position to the noun while preposition can have both left and right connections to the nouns.

In order to reject the case category in modern Eng nouns Vorontsova put forward arguments

1. Apostrophy S sign is optional, because the meaning rendered by it can be expressedothevise.

--- A mans voice - a voice of a man

2. The limited character of the apostrophy sign. The restricted usage of the apostrophy S sign is prooved by using only animate nouns in the genetive case form.

3. The loose character of the apostrophy sign which is prooved by the fact that this is the only morpheme tht can be attached not to a single noun but to the phrase and even the sentense.

4. The same inflexion of apostrophy S is added in the same form to singular and plural.

Contrarguments:

1. Not all phrases N S N can be replacer by a prpositional phrase. In numerous instances the transformation NSN is imposible

2. Modern eng fact show that inanimate nouns can also be used in genetive case. (The churce's roof, the novel's heroes).

Acc to the lates data obtained in linguistics 96 percent of total use of genetive case is with single nouns. 4 percent illustrates the use of the apostrophy S morpheme with pronouns or phrases and sentences

3. In most cases app S morpheme solves the morphological representation of the genetive case. But in regular plurals and in ancient greek names the genetive case is represented by a zero morpheme.

 

4) Theory of the limited case system

Is most widely spread in G teaching of English. It was formulated by such scholars as Henry Sweet, Otto Jesperson, for the developed by prof. Parcudarov, Smirnitskiy and others. This theory starts from the assumption that the case category is sintectico morphological category in m.eng nouns because the category expresses the relations of a noun with other words in the sentence. It is represented by a binary private opposition of the common and genetive case. The common case is:

1, Morphologically unmarked (zero)

2. Semantically extensive (indefinite)

3. Functionally unlimite (noun in a common case can perform different functions)

The genetive case form is morph marked by appostrophy S morpheme which is represented by 3 phonemically conditioned allomorphs (-s -z -iz) and may have zero representation in regular plurals and in the greek names.

It s semantically intensive. A moe concrete definite individual meaning.

The genetive case form is functionally limited. The only funktion of the dependive genetive is that an atribute of moduified noun.

There a 2 positional variant of genetive case:

- the dependent genetive

- the absolute independent genetive (without a modified noun)

There are 2 structural types of genetive case:

- group genetive

- double genetive (expressed twise)

(a college of my father's)

The category of gender

According to some language analysts (B.Ilyish, F.Palmer, and E.Morokhovskaya), nouns have no category of gender in Modern English. Prof.Ilyish states that not a single word in Modern English shows any peculiarities in its morphology due to its denoting male or female being. Thus, the words husband and wife do not show any difference in their forms due to peculiarities of their lexical meaning. The difference between such nouns as actor and actress is a purely lexical one. In other words, the category of sex should not be confused with the category of sex, because sex is an objective biological category. It correlates with gender only when sex differences of living beings are manifested in the language grammatically (e.g. tiger – tigress). Still, other scholars (M.Blokh, John Lyons) admit the existence of the category of gender. Prof.Blokh states that the existence of the category of gender in Modern English can be proved by the correlation of nouns with personal pronouns of the third person (he, she, it). Accordingly, there are three genders in English: the neuter (non-person) gender, the masculine gender, the feminine gender.

Standard Ukrainian distinguishes three genders ± masculine, feminine and neuter ± assigned on the basis of biological sex where applicable; otherwise,largely on the basis of the (morpho)phonological form of the noun stem. With few exceptions, nouns ending in consonants are masculine, nouns ending in –a and -я feminine, and nouns ending in -o or -e neuter. English nouns of courselack this grammatical category.

The category of gender is expressed in English by the obligatory correlation of nouns with the personal pronouns of the third person. These serve as specific gender classifiers of nouns, being potentially reflected on each entry of the noun in speech. The category of gender is strictly oppositional. It is formed by two oppositions related to each other on a hierarchical basis. One opposition functions in the whole set of nouns, dividing them into person (human) nouns and non-person (non-human) nouns. The other opposition functions in the subset of person nouns only, dividing them into masculine nouns and feminine nouns. Thus, the first, general opposition can be referred to as the upper opposition in the category of gender, while the second, partial opposition can be referred to as the lower opposition in this category.

As a result of the double oppositional correlation, a specific system of three genders arises, which is somewhat misleadingly represented by the traditional terminology: the neuter (i.e. non-person) gender, the masculine (i.e. masculine person) gender, the feminine (i.e. feminine person) gender.

The strong member of the lower opposition is the feminine subclass of person nouns, its sememic mark being "female sex". Here belong such nouns as woman, girl, mother, bride, etc. The masculine subclass of person nouns comprising such words as man, boy, father, bridegroom, etc. makes up the weak member of the opposit A great many person nouns in English are capable of expressing both feminine and masculine person genders by way of the pronominal correlation in question. These are referred to as nouns of the "common gender". Here belong such words as person, parent, friend, cousin, doctor, president, etc. E.g.:

The President of our Medical Society isn't going to be happy about the suggested way of cure. In general she insists on quite another kind of treatment in cases like that.

The capability of expressing both genders makes the gender distinctions in the nouns of the common gender into a variable category. On the other hand, when there is no special need to indicate the sex of the person referents of these nouns, they are used neutrally as masculine, i.e. they correlate with the masculine third person pronoun.

In the plural, all the gender distinctions are neutralised in the immediate explicit expression, though they are rendered obliquely through the correlation with the singular.

As we see, the category of gender in English is inherently semantic, i.e. meaningful in so far as it reflects the actual features of the named objects. But the semantic nature of the category does not in the least make it into "non-grammatical", which follows from the whole content of what has been said in the present work.

In Russian, German, and many other languages characterised by the gender division of nouns, the gender has purely formal features that may even "run contrary" to semantics. Suffice it to compare such Russian words as стакан — он, чашка — она, блюдце — оно, as well as their German correspondences das Glas — es, die Tasse — sie, der Teller — er, etc. But this phenomenon is rather an exception than the rule in terms of grammatical categories in general.

Moreover, alongside of the "formal" gender, there exists in Russian, German and other "formal gender" languages meaningful gender, featuring, within the respective idiomatic systems, the natural sex distinctions of the noun referents.

In particular, the Russian gender differs idiomatically from the English gender in so far as it divides the nouns by the higher opposition not into "person — non-person" ("human— non human"), but into "animate —inanimate", discriminating within the former (the animate nounal set) between masculine, feminine, and a limited number of neuter nouns. Thus, the Russian category of gender essentially divides the noun into the inanimate set having no meaningful gender, and the animate set having a meaningful gender. In distinction to this, the English category of gender is only meaningful, and as such it is represented in the nounal system as a whole.

The tense category

The category of tense expresses the logical category of time and on this background it denotes relations between the time of the action and the time of speaking. There is very little in common between Eng. and Ukr. as to the tense opoosems. In Ukr verb’s tense is represented by a tertiary equipollent opposition of the present, past, future (пишу, писав, напишу, буду писати.)

In Eng there are different approaches to tense opposition:

1) two –member opposition (the rejection of the future tense): Irtenieva, Block

2) polynomic opppsition

3) tertiary equipollent opposition:

present

past

future

 

1) Barchudarov thinks that:

- shall and will are modal verbs

- future meaning can be express otherwise (by Present Simple = the train arrives at 5 o’clock; Present Continious = the yare having exam this semester; modal verbs = you can do it in a week)

- shall, will + infinitive are not analytical forms but they are free synractic formulations

- shall can have forms on the past = should/ would in tense consequences = he said he would come

 

Counterarguments:

- not always shall/will may have modal meaning, sometimes the yare pure markers of the future tense = the performance will take place in a week.

- it’s true that the future semantics can be expressed by others tenses. But these means are restricted the future semantic (acc the timetable, near future), that’s why they are auxiliary

- shall/will is a specific analytical form because they can not be combined with any other form except the infinitive

- forms should/would +infinitive are rudiments of the Old Eng which doesn’t have any meaning and in some cases are not observed

 

 

2) The theory of temporal lines (prof. Irtenva = Иртеньева) thinks that all tense forms in Eng can be organized in 2 temporal lines. This opinion is based on the confusion of three gram. categories: tense, aspect, phase

 

 

3) The polynomic tense opposition recognizes more than 3 tense opposition. Actually the grammarians recognize the present, past and future in 4 paradigmatic forms: indefinite, continious, perfect, perfect – cont, which is the theoretical paradox.

This opinion is based on the categories of tense, aspect and phase.

e.g has come = Pres tense, Perf Tense = is impossible because within a gram. category the gram form may have one meaning of this category.

 

 

28. The Category of Aspect
Aspect is a grammatical category that expresses how an action, event or state, denoted by a verb, relates to the flow of time.In English the grammatical category of aspect is constituted by the opposition of the continuous aspect and the common aspect

It is realized through the opposition Continuous::Non-Continuous (Progressive::Non-Progressive). The realization of the category of aspect is closely connected with the lexical meaning of verbs.
There are some verbs in English that do not normally occur with continious aspect, even in those contexts in which the majority of verbs necessarily take the progressive form. Among the so-called ‘non-progressive’ verbs are Verbs expressing sense perception, that is involuntary reactions of the senses: to feel (чувствовать),to hear (слышать),to see (видеть),to smell (чувствовать запах),to taste (чувствовать вкус).However these verbs as well as other statal verbs may be sometimes used in continuous and perfect continuous forms, especially in informal English. Verbs expressing emotional state: to care, to detest, to envy, to fear, to hate, to hope, to like, to love, to prefer, to want, to wish. Verbs expressing mental state: to assume, to believe, to consider, to doubt, to expect, to find, to forget, to imagine, to know, to mean, to mind, to notice, to perceive, to remember, to suggest, to suppose, to think, to understand. The Slavic aspect is expressed with the help of pairs of correlating verbs. The aspect in English – if we accept the views supported by many researchers as to the aspectual nature of Continuous and Perfect tenses – is expressed by the word change of the same verb, therewith the word change of a special nature, i.e. analytical forms of the verb.

The most striking characteristic that they have in common is the fact that they are ‘stative’ - they refer to a state of affairs, rather than to an action, event or process. It should be observed, however, that all the ‘non-progressive' verbs take the progressive aspect under particular circumstances. As the result of internal transposition verbs of non-progressive nature can be found in the Continuous form: Now I'm knowing you. Continuous form has at least two semantic features - duration (the action is always in progress) and definiteness (the action is always limited to a definite point or period of time). the purpose of the Continuous form is to serve as a frame which makes the process of the action more concrete and isolated.

As for the ukrainian verb, it has two aspects, the perfective and the

imperfective. It is obvious at once that there is no direct correspondence between

English and Russian aspects; for instance, the English continuous aspect is not

identical with the ukrainian imperfective. The relation between the two systems is

not so simple as all that. On the one hand, the English common aspect may

correspond not only to the ukrainian perfective but also to the ukrainian imperfective

aspect; thus, he wrote may correspond both to написал and to писал. On the other

hand, the ukrainian imperfective aspect may correspond not only to the continuous

but also to the common aspect in English; thus, писал may correspond both to was

writing and to wrote.

 

 

29. Phase is the correlation of perfect, non –perfect forms has been different interpreted in the grammatical study of English.

Non – perfect form coincides with the present moment of speaking, Perfect opposing denotes precedence, priority of the action to the moment of speaking.

There are 3 approaches:

1) Tense approach. Perfect were recognized as tense forms giving the secondary temporal characteristics of the action. In terms of 2 temporal categories put forward by Prof Blokh perfect forms were treated as the category of retrospect. This opinion can hardly be taken as a retional analyses of the oppositional perfect non – perfect forms because as the form = has done = has 2 tense meanings – present/perfect tenses which contradicts the definition of the gram category and is based on the morphological confusion on: tense and time correlation (phase). Though, in fact, the forms – comes, has come = do not differ in time reference, they both referr to the present tense, but they differ in the way of correlation with the present moment.

Another proof that this 2 categories should be treated separately is that perfect/ non –perfect forms may be realize independently from the present forms = infinitive, genitive.

2) Aspect approach. Prof. Vorontsova thinks that perfect form represents the resultative aspect it’s hard to stick to this opinion because of the confusion of aspect and tense.

e.g has been reading = resultative, continious/ non – continious

One categorial meaning should be!

3) Smirnitskyi: Phase is a separate morphological category. He introduced the term of the time correlation. The category of phase is immanent morphol category realized by the binary private opposition of perf/ non-perf forms.

Non –prefect is morphologically unmarked and semantically extansive (expressing the general, wide categorial meaning)

Perfect opposeme is positively marked from the morphological point of view, by the discontinuous morpheme = have + en

This opposeme is semantically intensive, it expresses 2 basic meanings:

- correlation with the moment of speech

- presidence (has 2 realizing forms = resultiveness in the present tense; contrast form in the past tense) e.g When I met him he was grey – haired and fat, though he head been handsome

 

30. The category of voice
The form of the verb may show whether the agent expressed by the subject is the doer of the action or the recipient of the action (John broke the vase - the vase was broken). The objective relations between the action and the subject or object of the action find their expression in language as the grammatical category of voice. Therefore, the category of voice reflects the objective relations between the action itself and the subject or object of the action:

Relations of actions The category of voice
The category of voice is realized through the opposition Active voice::Passive voice. The realization of the voice category is restricted because of the implicit grammatical meaning of transitivity/intransitivity. In accordance with this meaning, all English verbs should fall into transitive and intransitive. However, the classification turns out to be more complex and comprises 6 groups:
1. Verbs used only transitively: to mark, to raise;
2.Verbs with the main transitive meaning: to see, to make, to build;
3. Verbs of intransitive meaning and secondary transitive meaning. A lot of intransitive verbs may develop a secondary transitive meaning: They laughed me into agreement; He danced the girl out of the room;
4.Verbs of a double nature, neither of the meanings are the leading one, the verbs can be used both transitively and intransitively: to drive home - to drive a car;
5.Verbs that are never used in the Passive Voice: to seem, to become;
6. Verbs that realize their passive meaning only in special contexts: to live, to sleep, to sit, to walk, to jump.
Some scholars admit the existence of Middle, Reflexive and Reciprocal voices. "Middle Voice" - the verbs primarily transitive may develop an intransitive middle meaning: That adds a lot; The door opened; The book sells easily; The dress washes well. "Reflexive Voice": He dressed; He washed - the subject is both the agent and the recipient of the action at the same time. It is always possible to use a reflexive pronoun in this case: He washed himself. "Reciprocal voice”: They met; They kissed - it is always possible to use a reciprocal pronoun here: They kissed each other.
We cannot, however, speak of different voices, because all these meanings are not expressed morphologically.

31. the problem of middle, reflexive and reciprocal voice

The voice identification in English is aggravated by the problem of “me­dial” voices, i.e. the functioning of the voice forms in other than the passive or active meanings. As a result, some linguists also distinguish Reflexive Voice (also called Middle Voice). In case of Reflexive Voice, the doer of an action and the object of the action coincide, that is the doer experiences his own ac­tions (e.g. She reconciled herself to the loss, You can express yourself freely).

The problem of Reflexive Voice is still under debate, since the model “transitive verb + reflexive pronoun” differs from the model of an analyti­cal form, characteristic of tense or passive forms. The controversial nature of reflexive constructions, on the one hand, and strict requirements which analytical forms must meet, on the other hand, prevent many scholars from distinguishing Reflexive Voice in English. The arguments put forward to refute Reflexive Voice are as fol­lows: 1) the model “transitive verb+reflexive pronoun” does not form a par­adigm, since it does not present any opposition to Active Voice both struc­turally and semantically (unlike, for instance, Ukrainian verbs in -ся); 2) the model “transitive verb+reflexive pronoun” may have no reflexive meaning, and vice versa, a verb without a reflexive pronoun may have the reflexive meaning created by its own semantic properties and by the context (cf. She dressed herself, she dressed her child, she dressed, similar examples may be found with the verbs to wash, to shave. H owever, in some cases the reflexive pronoun cannot be skipped, e.g. I warm and I warm myself cannot be mixed up as well as I amuse and I amuse myself).

There are also scientists who believe that reflexive meaning may be ob­served and distinguished only in a context. In other words, reflexive mean­ing is episodic, formed by a certain context, i.e. reflexive meaning is one of the facets of Active Voice, where the object is expressed by a reflexive pronoun. The reflexive pronoun has a dual nature, since it can function both as a lexical part of speech and a function word.

Some scholars distinguish so-called Reciprocal Voice. In the case