THE ADLINK (THE CATEGORY OF STATE)
§ 327. In Modern English there exists a certain class of words such as asleep, alive, afloat, which is characterized by:
1. The lexico-grammatica! meaning of 'state' '. He is a s I e e p = He is in a state of <leep.
1 The meaning of state embraces: a) psychic state (afraid, aghast), b) physical stale (asleep, awake), c) state in space (aslope, asquint), etc. See В. Н. Ж и г а д л о и др., op. cit, p. 170.
199
2. The productive prefix a-: swim,— aswim, shiver —
ashiver, etc.
3. Peculiar combinability: the words of this class are as-
sociated"~almost exclusively with link-verbs: to be alive, to
fall asleep, being adrift, etc.
4. The main syntactical function of a predicative comple
ment.
As we know, (see § 47) a class of words united by such features may be regarded as a separate part of speech. B. A. Ilyish has called it 'the category of state' by analogy with a similar class of words in the Russian language. Cf. Мне было приятно , грустно , обидно , where the last three words ending in -o denote different states and are associated with link-verbs. V. V. Vinogradov and other Soviet linguists call them 'words of the category of state', though many object to their being considered a separate part of speech.
Now 'words of the category of state' is hardly a felicitous apellation: it is cumbersome and the word 'category' has usually a different application. We suggest a handier term — adlinks, on the analogy of adverbs, or adlinks of state, to reflect their chief properties.
§ 328. Those grammarians who do not recognize adlinks as a separate part of speech usually consider them as a subclass of adjectives ' Let us compare adjectives and adlinks on the basis of the criteria we use to distinguish parts of speech.
1. The lexico-grammatical meanings of adjectives and adlinks are different. The former denote 'qualities', the latter 'states'. Lexically, qualities, or states, or actions can be denoted by words of different parts of speech. For instance the state of sleeping can be named by the verb (to) sleep, the noun sleep, the adlink asleep and the adjective sleepy. But in accordance with their lexico-grammatical meaning the verb sleeps presents the state as an action, the noun sleep as a substance, the adjective sleepy as a quality, and the adlink asleep as a state. Similarly the action of swimming is presented by the noun swim (to have a swim) as a substance, by the adlink aswim as a state and by the verb swim as an action. Thus we see that the meaning of 'state' common to the words asleep, awake, aswim, afire, afloat, etc. is an abstraction from
|
|
|
1 See «Иностранные языки в школе», 1958, № 5, p. 114.
200
the individual lexical meanings of these words. It is the le-xico-grammatical meaning of the whole class of adlinks.
2. The stem-building elements of the two parts of speech
are quite different. The characteristic prefix of adlinks is a-.
Adjectives have other affixes: -ful, -less, -ive, -ous, un-, pre-,
etc.
3. Adjectives possess the category of the degrees of compar
ison. Adlinks have no grammatical categories. Cf. sleepy —
sleepier — (the) sleepiest and asleep.
B. A. Ilyish thinks that adlinks possess the category of tense x. But this category (as well as the categories of mood, person, number, etc.) is expressed by the link-verb (is afraid, was afraid, were afraid, etc.), not by the adlink. As shown in § 26, the combination was afraid is not an analytical word. Cf. also fell asleep, dropped asleep, lay asleep.
4. The combinability of adjectives and adlinks differs
greatly. As we have seen (§'112), the most typical combinative
model of adjectives is its right-hand connection with nouns
(an ardent lover). Now this model is alien to adlinks. It is the
more striking since not only adjectives but almost any part
of speech, many combinations of words, clauses or combina
tions of clauses can have right-hand connections with nouns
in Modern English. Cf. the above remark. The we-know-that-
he-knows-that-she-knows development gets a bit wearing.
(Daily Worker).
Linguists who regard adlinks as adjectives try to explain the strange opposition of these 'adjectives' to combinations like *an asleep man either by rhythm (the unusual succession of two unstressed and two stressed syllables) or by the possibility of mistaking the a- in asleep for the indefinite article (then it would sound as a succession of two articles in *an asleep man) 2. But cases like an acute pain, an astute man, quite common in Modern English, show the fallacy of both theories.
In reality this negative combinability can be explained historically by the development of adlinks from prepositional phrases like the old English on slsepe (E. asleep), on life (E. alive), on flote (E. afloat). On a synchronic basis this peculiarity of adlinks shows that they are not adjectives, but a different part of speech.
|
|
|
1 Op. cit., p. 147.
2 O. Jespersen. A Modern English Grammar; v, II, p. 335.
201
Besides this negative combinability adlinks are characterized by several models of positive connection. The most typical of them is the left-hand connection with link-verbs (881 cases out of 1,000), which suggests the name 'adlink'.
E. g. He had been ashamed and afraid. (Abrahams). Adlinks often follow notional links (see § 195).
E. g. Then he would return and lie awake for hours. (Abrahams).
Other connections are seen in the following sentences. / woke at six the next morning, and found George awake. (Jerome). Lady Babs looked so pretty — prettier asleep even than a wake... For Barbara asleep was a symbol of that Golden age in* which she so desparately believed. (Galsworthy).
5. The syntactical functions of adjectives and adlinks do not coincide. Adjectives are mainly employed as attributes, and adlinks as predicative complements. This is why adlinks are often called predicative adjectives and adverbs (see The Oxford Dictionary] to suggest that the difference between these classes of words is purely syntactical. But adlinks form connections not only with finite link-verbs, parts of predications, but with verbid link-verbs as well, employed in various functions.
E. g. Under these conditions, he said, you would show 'none of the normally accepted signs of b e i n g alive'. (Daily Worker).
How lucky we are to be a I i v e\ (Asquith).
Summing up, we can say that adjectives and adlinks are different classes of words, i. e. that adlinks form a separate part of speech 1.
THE MODAL WORDS* (MODALS)
§ 329. As a part of speech the modals are characterized by the following features:
1. Their lexico-grammatical meaning of 'modality'.
1 See Л. О. П и п а с т. К вопросу о категории состояния в английском языке. «Иностранные языки в школе», 1951, № 5; Б С. X а й-м о в и ч. Существует ли «категория состояния? в английском языке? «Вопросы теории и методики преподавания английского языка», Днепропетровск, 1961.
|
|
|
202
2. Their negative combinability.
3. Their functions of parenthetical elements and sentence-
words.
§ 330. 'Modality' as a linguistic term denotes the relation of the contents of speech to reality as viewed by the speaker. When describing the meaning of 'modality' in the small group of modal verbs we are in fact dealing with lexical 'modality'. The 'modality' of the indicative, subjunctive and imperative moods is grammatical 'modality'. Now we are dealing with the meaning of 'modality' uniting a part of speech. This is lexico-grammatical 'modality'.
Modal words indicate whether the speaker is sure that the contents of his utterance correspond to reality, or he doubts it, or he regards it as something possible, probable, desirable, etc. Accordingly, modal words can be divided into several groups.
a) Those which denote various shades of certainty:
certainly, surely, of course, no doubt, assuredly, undoubtedly,
indeed, really, etc.
b) Those which denote various degrees of probability:
maybe, perhaps, possibly, probably, etc.
c) Those which denote various shades of desirability
(undesirability): happily, luckily, fortunately, unhappily,
etc.
§ 331. The relatively negative combinability of modal words manifests itself in various ways.
a) They are almost never used as adjuncts to some head
word.
b) They but seldom function as head-words to some ad
juncts, mostly adverbs of degree like very, quite, most, etc.
E. g... whom most probably they were compelled to respect. (Dreiser).
c) Their isolatabihty (§ 6) is greater than that of other
words. They very often make response sentences.
E. g. But you can take a carpet to Caesar in it if 1 send one? — Assuredly. (Shaw).
§ 332. Functioning as a parenthetical element of a sentence, a modal word is usually connected with the sentence as a whole.
|
|
|
203
E.g. Perhaps I shall never pray again. (Shaw).
Apparently, they were fully prepared for the coming of the visitors from England. (Tracy).
But sometimes it may be connected with a part of the sentence only,
Ё . g. We worked that land -\or maybe a hundred years. (Daily Worker).
§ 333. The usage of modals depends upon the type of sentence. They are found almost exclusively in declarative sentences, very rarely in interrogative and almost never in imperative sentences.
According to S. E. Kagan J there are 256 modal words in The Man of Property by J. Galsworthy. 250 of them are in declarative sentences, 6 in interrogative ones and none in imperative sentences. This fact can easily be accounted for. Interrogative and imperative sentences are used not in order to express one's knowledge of reality with various degrees of certainty or doubt. They are means of urging somebody else to say something or do something.
THE RESPONSE WORDS
§ 334. The response-words yes and no are characterized as a separate class by
a) their meaning of 'response statement',
b) their negative combinability,
c) their functioning as sentence-words.
§ 335. Practically every notional word can alone make a sentence in a certain situation of speech.
"How have you been?" "Good news, I hope". -
- "F i n e". (Dreiser). "Very". (Shaw).
But for most words this is not their principal function. Usually they are combined with other words to form a sentence:
1 See C. E. К а г а н. Модальные слова английского языка в различных по цели высказывания типах предложения. Автореферат диссертации, М., 1954, р. 9.
204
The hilly country in the middle of the north edge of Sussex, looking very pleasant on a fine evening at the end of Septem ber, is seen through the window of ... (Shaw).
There are words which are very often used as response sentences, e. g. the modal words.
"Are you paying room-rent where you are?" "C e r t a i n I y", answered Carry. (Dreiser).
But again this is not their only function. Though they rarely form combinations with other words, they usually modify the sentence they are used in.
/ was certainly rather taken aback when 1 heard they were engaged. (Shaw).
The words yes and no differ from other words in their being used almost exclusively as sentence-words. Thus it is not the situation of speech that makes them sentence-words, but they exist as such in the language. Therefore they must be regarded as a separate group or class of words.
§ 336. Their lexical meanings are those of 'affirmation' and 'negation'. Their lexico-grammatical meaning is that of 'response statement'. They confirm or deny a previous statement.
Yes represents a previous statement adding the lexical meaning of 'affirmation'. No does the same, but adds the meaning of 'negation'. In this respect yes and no resemble pronouns. They are some kind of anaphorical pro-sentences.
"At four, then, we may expect you?" "Yes", said Carrie. (Dreiser). "Can't you handle it?" "No", he said weakly. (Ib.).
THE INTERJECTION
§ 337. The interjection is a part of speech characterized by the following features.
1. It expresses "emotions or will without naming them.
2. It has no grammatical categories, no stem-building
elements of its own and practically negative combinability.
3. It functions as a sentence-word or as a parenthetical
element.
205
§338. Some interjections are homonymous with other words: why', well!, now', here!, there!, come!, dear!, fiddlesticks!, etc. Others are not: hey!, hallo!, ah!, hurrah!, pshaw!, alas!, etc.
§ 339. Interjections, like other parts of speech, may be simple (hallo!, come!, dear!), derivative (goodness!), compound (fiddlesticks!) and composite (hang it!, dear me!).
§ 340. Semantically interjections are usually divided into two groups: emotional (oh!, bless us!) and imperative (hush!, come!1).
§ 341. A. I. Smirnitsky 2 thinks that interjections form a peculiar type of sentence, like that of the response-words yes and no, but differing from it in the distinct emotional colouring.
THE SEMI-NOTIONAL PARTS OF SPEECH3
THE PREPOSITION
§ 342. The preposition is a part of speech characterized by the following features:
Kits lexico-grammatical meaning of 'relations (of substances)'.
2. Its bilateral combinability with a right-hand noun (or
noun-equivalent) and a left-hand word belonging to almost
any part of speech.
3, Its function of a linking word.
§ 343. Prepositions are not characterized by any grammatical categories or typical stem-building elements.
As far as their structure is concerned prepositions, like other parts of speech, fall into the following groups:
1. Simple or primitive, e. g. at, in, of, by, with, for, etc.
2. Derivative, e. g. below, beside, along, etc.
3. Compound, e. g. inside, within, into, throughout, etc.
4. Composite, e. g. instead of, in accordance with, owing to,
in front of, etc.
1 See Каушанская and others, op. cit., 1959, p. 207.
2 Op. cit., p. 392.
3 See § 51.
206
§ 344. Many prepositions are homonymous with adverbs (about, before, below, down, since, etc.), conjunctions (before, since, etc.), participles (regarding, concerning, etc.), lexico-grammatical word-morphemes (in, on, up, etc.).
§ 345. As elsewhere the lexico-grammatical meaning of prepositions is an abstraction from their individual lexical meanings. Let us compare the following combinations of words:
the book i n the bag,
the book о п the bag,
the book under the bag,
the book near the bag.
In all of them the preposition shows the relation of one noun to another, which reflects the relations of the corresponding substances in the world of reality. This meaning of 'relations (of substances)' common to all prepositions is their lexico-grammatical meaning. But each preposition in the expressions above shows a different relation revealing thus its individual lexical meaning.
It is much more difficult to define the lexical meaning of a preposition than that of a noun or an adjective, because prepositions usually have very general, abstract meanings. Nevertheless the lexical meaning of a preposition is always there, however weak or general it may be. We may call prepositions semi-notional words, but the term form-word often applied to them x is not adequate: they have not only form, but content as well.
§ 346. It is necessary to make some remarks in connection with the classification of prepositions according to their meaning into those of place, direction, time, etc.2. When we say that the prepositions at or by have local meanings in at the window, by the window and temporal meanings in at 6 o'clock, by six o'clock we simply add the meanings of the neighbouring words to those of the prepositions. Originally, a preposition like in is supposed to have had a concrete local meaning. But at present in is used with such a variety of words that it has a very vague and general meaning, some-
1 See M. Qanshina, N. Vasilevskaya, op. cit, p. 249.
2 See В. Л. Каушанская and others, op. cit., p. 209;
Л. С. Б a p x у д а р о в, Д. А. Ш т е л и н г, op. cit., p. 264.
207
thing like 'inside some sphere'. That sphere may be local as in Moscow, temporal, as in January, abstract as in love, in thought, etc.
Prepositions, like in, at, on, by, etc, which are used with all kinds of nouns, so that the local, temporal, etc. meanings of the prepositional construction do not depend on the preposition, but on the noun, may be called general prepositions. There are some other prepositions which might be called special. They are used chiefly with nouns of certain meaning. For instance, the preposition till can be used with nouns like midnight, dawn, time, but not with window, town, place and the like. That shows that till has acquired a temporal meaning. The causal meaning of the special preposition because of is so strong that it determines the meaning of the prepositional construction irrespective of the noun. Cf. because of the time (place, love, John).
Here are some special prepositions; of time: before, after, during, since, till, until; of place: across, along, among, behind, below, beside, in front of; of cause: because of, in view of, owing to.
§ 347. The combinability of the preposition is rather peculiar. As a rule, it is followed by a noun or a noun equivalent with which it is closely connected. At the same time it is associated with some preceding notional word belonging to nearly any part of speech. We may speak of stable right-hand connections and variable left-hand connections.
| \ Parts | of speech | Preposition | Noun (or noun-erjuivalent) |
| verb | think | of | John |
| adj. | clever | of | him |
| adlink | afraid | of | going |
| num. | three | of | us |
| pron. | many | of | them |
| noun | leg | of | mutton |
| adv. | west | of | it |
§ 348. Bilateral combinability is typical not only of prepositions but of other linking words as well: conjunctions, link-verbs and modal verbs. But the combinability of prepo-
208
sitions differs from that of all of them. As stated above, prepositions have stable right-hand and variable left-hand connections. Conjunctions and link-verbs have both connections variable (Cf. He is a student; afraid of being late). Modal verbs have both connections stable1 the subject on the left and an infinitive on the right.
§ 349. Of certain interest is the model 'verb + preposition 4 noun'. Sometimes the preposition is but loosely connected with the verb. In such cases one and the same verb can be followed by different prepositions depending on the sense, e. g. speak of (about, with, to) a person.
In other cases a verb is regularly followed by a fixed preposition, e. g. depend on (somebody, something).
§ 350. Though bilateral combinability is typical of prepositions, there are cases in the English language when either the left-hand or the right-hand connections are weakened or even lost altogether.
In the sentence In his opinion, they would get copped doing it (Galsworthy) the preposition in has retained no left-hand connection.
In the sentence Had he been laughed a t? (Galsworthy) the preposition at has retained no right-hand connection.
§351. The combinability of at in th'e last example resembles, to some extent, that of an adverb. Cf. to be laughed away (off).
On the basis of sentences like
They bought chairs to sit о п . I have no pen to write with. Children like to read and to be read t o. The book was not looked for.
and the fact that many prepositions are homonymous with adverbs A. 1. Smirmtsky thinks it possible to regard prepositions not as a separate part of speech, but as a group of adverbs 1.
We are definitely against that view.
1. The number of instances when prepositions lose their right-hand connections is comparatively small. According
a '
1 Op. cit., p. 376
209
to V. I. Artyukhova г it occurs in 65 instances out of 4,575 in The White Monkey by J. Galsworthy. That means that in an overwhelming majority of cases (98,6 per cent) the combinability of prepositions differs from that of adverbs.
2. Many prepositions such as to, at, for, from, among,
with, of, into, out of, in front of, etc. are not homonymous
with adverbs.
3. Those prepositions that are homonymous with adverbs
(down, along, before) are related with the latter by conversion
(see § 57). These relations, as we know, are typical of English
and connect words of different parts of speech. (Cf. home
n. —home adv.; since adv. — since conj. — since prep.).
§ 352. Though the lexico-grammatical meaning, the combinability and function of English prepositions are similar to those of the Russian counterparts, the role of prepositions in the two languages is different. This difference, however, depends not on the prepositions, but on the nouns they introduce.
The lexico-grammatical meaning of prepositions, 'relations (of substances)', approximates to the'grammatical meaning of case (see § 81).
In the Russian language with its six-case system the relations of substances are mostly denoted by case morphemes. Prepositions are but a secondary means of specifying these relations. In English the only positive case morpheme -'s shows but a very limited number of relations. So prepositions become a primary means of denoting relations of substances. . Their role, as we see, is determined by the grammatical system of the language.
In Russian the two means of expressing relations of substances are interdependent. Certain prepositions go with certain cases ( к дому , от дома , над домом , etc.). So the preposition is closely connected with the noun it precedes. It cannot be used without the noun. In English the preposition is much more independent. It can be separated from the noun, as in The house I speak of. Several prepositions may refer to one noun in the sentence, as in He ... played
1 В И Артюхова. Характер связей предлога в современном английском языке. «Зб1рник праць 1'сторико-ф1лолопчного ф-ту ДДУ», Хсзркш, 1958, р. 120.
210
with and read to the children- (Jerome). A preposition may refer not only to a word, but also to a word-combination (That is lor you to decide.) or a clause (7/ all depends on how he will act.).
THE CONJUNCTION
§ 353. The conjunction is a part of speech characterized by the following features.
1. Its lexico-grammatical meaning of 'relations between
substances, actions, properties, situations, etc.'.
2. Its peculiar combinability. As a rule, a conjunction
connects two similar units: words of a similar type or clauses.
3. Its function of a linking word.
§ 354. Conjunctions are not characterized by any grammatical categories or typical stem-building elements. As to their stem-structure conjunctions are, as usual, divided into simple (and, but, or, that, till, if, etc.), derivative (until, unless, because, provided, etc.), compound (although, whereas, etc.) and composite (as if, in order that, as soon as, either ... or, neither ... nor, etc.).
A variety of composite conjunctions is the group of the so-called correlative conjunctions which go in pairs: both... and, either ... or, no sooner ... than, etc.
§ 355. Many conjunctions are homonymous with adverbs and prepositions (after, since, before), pronouns (that, so, neither), participles (supposing, provided).
§ 356. The lexico-grammatical meaning of conjunctions is an abstraction from their lexical meanings. The latter are also very general, abstract and rather weak. Therefore conjunctions can be treated as semi-notional words (see § 50), though not as form-words *, since they are not devoid of content.
§ 357. As regards the nature of the relations they serve to express conjunctions are usually divided into two subclasses: coordinating (and, or, both ... and, etc.) and subordinating (if, that, as soon as, etc.) conjunctions.
1 See M. Ganshina, N. Vasilevskaya, op. cit., p. 252.
211
The former connect syntactical units which are equal in rank, discharge the same functions. The latter are used to show the dependence of one unit on another.
Cf. This is crystal clear and the government admits it. (Daily Worker).
I f they did so, their complete fare would be refunded, (Daily Worker).
§ 358. The combinability of coordinating conjunctions is bilateral like that of prepositions. But there are essential differences.
1. The right-hand combinability of prepositions is stable,
that of conjunctions is variable.
2. With prepositions there is no correlation between the
right-hand and the left-hand connections. With conjunctions
it is different. A conjunction usually connects a noun with
a noun (or pro-noun), a verb with a verb, a clause with a
clause. In this sense a conjunction connects homogeneous
elements, while a preposition mostly connects heterogeneous
elements'.
3. A preposition cannot introduce a clause without a con-
nectiv.e word, as a conjunction does. Cf. It depends on when
(where, how, why) he does it, not * It depends on he does it.
§ 359. The combinability of subordinating conjunctions is somewhat different from that of coordinating ones.
1. Subordinating conjunctions connect mostly clauses, not
words.
Compare, however, cases like Though young, he is a skilled worker. He is skilful though young.
2. Very often a subordinating conjunction begins a cen-
tence, so that it precedes both clauses it connects.
Cf. They would hold a sitdown strike и n I e s s the P. and 0. Company arranged for them to continue their journey by sea. (Daily Worker)
Unless the P. and 0. Company arranged for them to continue their journey by sea, they would hold a sitdown strike.
§ 360. The division of conjunctions into coordinating and subordinating ones is chiefly based on their lexio-al meanings and the types of units they connect.
212
Coordinating conjunctions are used in simple and in compound sentences. In other words, they are used to connect both words and clauses equal in rank. It is to be observed, however, that some coordinating conjunctions never occur in simple sentences (so, for), while others (both ... and, as well as) are used only in simple sentences 1.
Subordinating conjunctions uniting clauses not equal in rank, naturally2 occur in complex sentences as a meanj of connecting subordinate clauses with their main clauses. There i§ a smalj group (that, if, whether) introducing the so-called noun-clauses, i. e. subject, object, predicative and appositive clauses. Most subordinating conjunctions introduce adverbial clauses of time, place, condition, purpose, result, cause, condition, comparison, etc.
§ 361. According to their meanings coordinating conjunctions are divided into
a) copulative (and, both... and, neither ... nor, not only ...
but also, as well as, etc.) denoting addition, combination,
interdependence,
b) adversative (but, still, yet, however, nevertheless, etc.)
denoting contradiction,
c) disjunctive (or, either ... or) denoting separation,
choice.
§ 362. Though for and so are considered coordinating conjunctions, they are in fact intermediate between coordinating and subordinating conjunctions.
Like subordinating conjunctions they introduce clauses of cause and result. They are not used in simple sentences.
Like coordinating conjunctions they are always placed between the units they connect. The clauses they introduce are more independent than the corresponding clauses introduced by subordinating conjunctions. This is expressed by the intonation and punctuation marks: the for and so clauses are often separated by a semicolon 2.
§ 363. The conjunctions are not numerous, but of very frequent occurrence in speech.
1 See В. Н. Ж и г а д л о, И. П. И в а н о в а, Л. Л. И о ф и к,
ор ей., р. 205.
2 В. Л. Каушанская and others, op. cit., p. 214.
213
In different situations and speech environments conjunctions may acquire various shades of meaning. The conjunction and, for instance, connotes 'consequence' in The nudges were biting, an A he walked on (Galsworthy) and 'contrast' in She is the beauty of the family a n d I am quite plain. (The Times).
THE ARTICLE
§ 364. The two words a(n), the form a separate group or class characterized by
a) the lexico-grammatical meaning of '(in)definiteness', •b) the right-hand combinability with nouns, c) the function of noun specifiers.
§ 365. The lexical meaning of a(n) in Modern English is a very weak reminder of its original meaning (OE. an = one). In spite of the long process of weakening there remains enough of the original meaning in a(n) to exclude the possibility of its being attached to a 'plural' noun.
The lexical meaning of the in Modern English is a pale shadow of its original demonstrative meaning.
The general lexico-grammatical meaning of these words, as usual, is not identical with their individual lexical meanings. It abstracts itself from the meaning of 'oneness' in a(n) and the 'demonstrative' meaning in the. Perhaps, the names ofjhe articles ('definite', 'indefinite') denote Jh_e„nearest approach to this lexico-grammatical meanTngT wBich, for lack of a better term, might be defined as that of 'definiteness — indefi-niteness'.
§ 366. One might be tempted to regard the two articles as members of an opposeme, and the meanings of 'definiteness', 'indefiniteness' as the particular meanings of some grammatical category. Language facts, however, contradict such views. As we know, the members of an opposeme must belong to the same lexeme and have identical meanings (barring those opposed). Now a(n) and the do not belong to one lexeme and their meanings are not identical. Besides the meaning of 'indefiniteness' a(n) possesses the meaning of 'oneness' not found in the. The 'demonstrative' meaning of the is alien to a(n).
For similar reasons a book — the book are not analytical members of some noun opposeme, and (he, a(n) are not grammatical word-morphemes.'
214
1) A(n) and the are not devoid of lexical meaning as
grammatical word-morphemes are.
2) Their meanings are not relative. The has the meaning
of 'definiteness' not only when opposed to a(n). Cf. snow —
the snow, books — the books.
All this corroborates the view that the articles are individual words with individual lexical meanings united by the general lexico-grammatical meaning of '(m)defi- niteness'.
§ 367. Some grammarians speak of the 'zero article' 1 or the 'zero form of the indefinite article' 2. We are definitely against these terms.
A grammatical zero morpheme is created in an opposeme owing to the relative nature of grammatical meanings. As shown above, the articles are not grammatical morphemes and their meanings are not relative. They are words, and the absence of a word cannot be regarded as a zero word. We do not speak of zero prepositions or zero particles. There is not more reason to speak of zero articles.
§ 368. The common features in the combinability of the articles are due to their belonging to the same part of speech, in other words, the lexico-grammatical combinability of the articles is the same. Both of them have right-hand connect ions with the same part of speech, nouns.
The difference in their combinability can be explained by the difference in their lexical meanings.
§ 369. In accordance with its meaning 'one of many' the indefinite article is used to denote one thing of a class .and is therefore a classifying article.
Thus the sentence / bought a pencil is roughly equivalent to another (clumsier) sentence / bought one of those things called pencils. He is a student is equivalent to He is one of those (people) called students.
Naturally, the indefinite article with its meaning of 'oneness'is not used with a 'plural' noun, but it can be used with a noun in the singular denoting the whole class, as An eagle is a very strong bird.
1 А . И. Смирницкий, op. cit., p. 382.
2 M. Ganshina, N. Vasilevskaya, op. cit., p. 41.
215
The lexical meaning of a(n) explains why it is not-normally used with 'uncountable' nouns like snow, meat, bravery or 'countable' nouns used in «n 'uncountable' sense.
E. g. We have duck for dinner.
Conversely, abstract uncountables regularly occur with the indefinite article if used to denote kinds or varieties of some abstract concept, state, quality, etc.
E. g. It had been a long and frustrating courtship. (Greene)
The indefinite article is not used with proper nouns because its meaning 'one of many' does not go with the 'individualizing' sense of a proper noun. A Paris would denote one of many Parises, which is absurd. But when a proper name is used as a common noun (e. g. a Byron = a poet) it may be associated with the indefinite article.
E. g. A new Shakespeare is yet to come. (The Tribune)
§370. In compliance with its 'demonstrative' meaning the definite article points out or individualizes one object or a class of objects denoted by the noun it is associated with, and is therefore an individualizing or limiting article.
When a man says to his friend / have bought the book, it is clear that both the speaker and the hearer bear in mind a definite particular book, not 'one of many'. In The hawk is a bird of prey, the hawk as a class of birds is singled out from other classes.
Now, since it is possible to 'point out' almost any object or substance, the definite article may be used with most nouns and different noun grammemes.
Abstract nouns: There were moments when I was bewildered by t he terror John inspired. (Bronte).
Material nouns: / sat down in her boudoir, happy to breathe the air consecrated so lately by her presence. (Ib.).
'Singular' and 'Plural' nouns: At intervals, while turning over the I e a v e s of my book, I studied the a s p e с t of that winter afternoon. (Ib.).
Only proper names, which individualize without the help of the definite article, are mostly not associated with the. But there are cases when the is used. The said Eli za, John and Georgiana were now clustered round their mama. (Ib.)
216,
N о t e 1. In cases like the Hague, the Ukraine, the Volga, etc. the is an indispensable part of the name. It does not function as an article specifying a noun, but as part of a composite noun 1.
Note 2. In a book of this kind it seems superfluous to give numerous rules pertaining to the use of articles in speech. They can be found in any practical grammar. Most of them are covered by the principles stated above.
§ 371. Owing to its classifying force the indefinite article often draws the attention of the listener (or reader) to the word it is used with 2. This is not the case when the definite article is employed.
Cf. The curtain rose and a girt stepoed out. The curtain rose and the girl stepped out.
In the first example the attention of the listener is attracted to the fact that it was a girl (not a boy, an old man, etc.) who stepped out. In the second sentence the listener's attention is drawn to the action of stepping out. So the indefinite article is associated with some novelty of information, the definite article points out an object as something familiar.
THE PARTICLE
§ 372. The particle as a part of speech is characterized by the following features:
1. Its lexico-grammatical meaning of 'emphatic specifi
cation'.
2. Its unilateral combina,bility with words of different
classes, groups of words, even clauses.
3. Its function of a specifier (see § 471).
§ 373. Particles have no grammatical categories, no typical stem-building elements.
As far as their structure is concerned, they may be s i m-p 1 e (just, still, yet, even, else), derivative (merely, simply, alone), compound (also).
1 See A. Adams, op. cit., p. 57: "There are two kinds of 'the' ...
restrictive 'the' and" lexical 'the'. I call lexical 'the' — the Alps, the
Missis<sipt (river), the United Kingdom."
2 Б. А. Ильи ш, op. cit., p. 125.
217
§ 374. Very few particles (else, merely, solely) are not horftonymous with other words. Most of them are identical in form with adverbs (exactly, precisely, simply, never, still), adjectives (even, right, just, only), pronouns (all, either), conjunctions (but), articles (the).
§ 375. As we knowr, the definitions of the lexico-grammati-cal meanings of parts of speech are not general enough (see § 39). With particles it is, probably, more so than elsewhere because they are less uniform.
In most of them the meaning of 'emphatic specification' is quite obvious.
Only sixteen hundred talents, Pothius. (Shaw).
Why, man, Ireland was peopled just as England was. (Ib.).
/ never thought of that then. (Ib.).
/ notice that there is but one chair in it. (Ib.).
But there are particles in whose meanings there is as much 'emphatic specification' as there is 'action' in the verb belong or 'substance' in the noun faith. There are, for instance, the connective particles also, too, else, either г .
They seem to resemble the conjunction and lexically, but their properties are different. Compare, for instance, the particle too and the conjunctions and, if in the following sentence. / / life is dull, you can be dull too, a n d no harm is done. (Shaw). Different lexically, the conjunctions if, and have the same lexico-grammaticai meaning of 'relations between...' in accordance with which each of them shows the relation between two clauses without interfering lexically with their content. The particle too in fact 'specifies' the pronoun you (you too can be dull), but as a condition of that specification it requires, in accordance with its lexical meaning, that the content of the clause, of which the specified word is part, should be similar to the content of the previous clause. Thus it connects the two clauses lexically.
§ 376. As a rule, the combinability of particles is unilateral and variable. They can specify different classes of words or clauses. Most of them precede the unit they specify, but some
1 For the semantic classification of particles see В. Л. К а у ш а н-c к а я and others, op. cit., p. 218 — 219.
218
particles follow it, as in the case of too. Here are a few illustrations of the combinability of the particle only.
By George, if she о n I y knew that two men were talk ing about her like this! (Shaw).
A sestertius is о n l у w о г t h a loaf of bread. (Ib.).
You look only f i f t у in it. (Ib.).
Is it nothing to you what wicked thing you do if о n I y you do it like a gentleman? (Ib.).
§ 377. Like most particles not can be used with different classes of words or clauses (not he, not the student, not beauti ful, not forty, not yesterday, not to see, not seeing, not when he comes).
The peculiarity of not (n't) as a predicate negation in don't, can't, won't, etc. will be described in 'Syntax', § 393.
SYNTAX
INTRODUCTION
§ 378. The basic unit of syntax is the sentence. There exist many definitions of the sentence, but none of them is generally accepted 1. But in the majority of cases people actually experience no difficulty in separating one sentence from another in their native tongue. This is reflected in writing, where the-graphic form of each sentence is separated by punctuation marks (.!?) from its neighbours.
Though a sentence contains words, it is not merely a group of wdrds (or other units), but something integral, a structural unity built in accordance with one of the patterns existing m a given language. All the sounds of a sentence are united by typical intonation. All the meanings are interlaced according to some pattern to make one communication.
§ 379. A communication is a directed thought. Much in the same way as the position of a point or the direction of a line in space is fixed with the help of a system of coordinates, there exists a system of coordinates to fix the position or direction of a thought in speech. Naturally, only phenomena
1 See C. Fries, op. cit., ch. II 'What is a sentence?' Here is another brief survey of the problem in Form in Modern English by Brown D. W., Brown С. В., Bailey D., New York, 1958, p. 29: "A wholly satisfactory answer to the question 'What is a sentence?' is yet ts be formulated, although hundreds of attempts have been made. Of these, two have been most often used in grammar books: (1) A sentence is a group of words that expresses a complete thought and (2) A sentence is a group of words that contains an unsubordinated subject and predicate. The first of these, a 'notional' definition, fails because it is wholly subjective and begs the question.' There is no objective standard by which to judge the completeness of a thought, and ultimately we are reduced to the circular assertion that 'a complete thought is a thought that is complete'. On the other hand, the second definition is not more than half truth, for it rules out all verbless sentences, which, as we have already noted, may be just as 'complete' and independent as the verb sentences."
220
present at every act of speech can serve as the axes of coordinates. They are: a) the act of speech, b) the speaker (or writer), c) reality (as viewed by the speaker).
If taken in their concrete significance, these phenomena are variables because they change with every act of speech. But if taken in a general way, they are constants because they are always there whenever there is language communication. As constants they are fixed in the language, as variables they function in speech.
§ 380. The act of speech is the event with which all other events mentioned in the sentence are correlated in time. This correlation is fixed in English and other languages grammatically, in the category of tense and lexically in such words as now, yesterday, to-morrow, etc.
The speaker is the person with whom other persons and things mentioned in the sentence are correlated. This correlation is fixed grammatically in the category of person of the verb and lexico-grammatically in such words as /, you, he, she, it, they, student, river, etc. (see § 148).
Reality is either accepted as the speaker sees it, or an attempt is made to change it, or some irreality is fancied. Cf. The door is s/iut. Shut the door. If the door were'shut .. The attitude towards reality is fixed grammatically in the category of mood and lexically or lexico-grammatically in words like must, may, probably, etc.
The three relations — to the act of speech, to the speaker and to reality —can be summarized as the relation to the situation of speech. Now the relation of the thought of a sentence to the situation of speech is called predicati-vity. This is the name of the system of coordinates directing the thought of a sentence and distinguishing a sentence from any group of words. Predicativity is as essential a part of the content of the sentence as intonation is of its form. The sentence can thus be defined as a communication unit made up of words (and word-morphemes) in conformity with their combinability and structurally united by intonation and predicativity.
Hence intonation may be regarded as the structural form and predicativity as the structural meaning of the sentence.
§ 381. Within a sentence, the word or combination of words that contains the meanings of predicativity may be called the predication.
221
In the sentence He mused over it for a minute (Conan Doyle) the predication is he mused. He indicates the person, mused — the tense and mood components of predicativity.
In the sentence Tell me something there is a rne-word predication tell containing the mood component of predicativity. The person component is only implied 1. As we know (§ 249), imperative mood grammemes have the lexico-gram-matical meaning of 'second person'.
§ 382. The simplest relation to the situation of speech can be found in a sentence like Rain which when pronounced with proper intonation merely states the phenomenon observed. Does a sentence like this contain the relations to the act of speech, the speaker and reality? Yes, it does. First of all, the noun rain, like any noun, is associated with the third person (§ 148). As for the meanings of mood and tense, the following is to be taken into consideration.
As we know, the general meanings of tense, ,mood contain three particular meanings each: present — past — future (tense), indicative — imperative — subjunctive (mood). Two of these meanings are usually more specific than the third. The two specific tenses are the past and the future. The two specific moods are the imperative and the subjunctive. Now, when there are no positive indications of any tense of mood the sentence is understood to contain the least specific of those meanings.2 In the sentence Rain the present tense and the indicative mood are implied. Cf. the Russian Жара . Позд но . Он студент , etc.
In the sentence Teal the imperative intonation expresses •the difference in the modal component of predicativity.
Thus, Rain. Tea! are sentences both as to their forms (intonation) and their meanings (predicativity). They are living patterns in the English language because many sentences of the same type can be formed. The lexical meaning of Rain is irrelevant (cf. Snow, Hail, Fog) when we regard the sentence as a language model, but it is relevant when the sentence is used in actual speech.
1 "The situation generally makes it so obvious who the second person
subject of imperatives is, that its expression is the exception rather
than the rule" (A Martinet, op cit , p 59)
2 They correspond to the centre or zero point of the system of
coordinates.
222
§ 383. Of much greater importance are sentences of the type / live. The word / contains the person component of predicativity and the word live carries the tense and mood components. Thus the sentence / live has predicativity plainly expressed by a positive two-member predication.
The sentence / live regarded as a model is much more productive than the model Rain because the predication can express different relations to the situation of speech: different persons, different tenses, different moods. It is hardly necessary to say that in actual speech an almost limitless variety of sentences are built on this model by combining words of different lexemes.
§ 384. The main parts of the sentence are those whose function it is to make the predication. They are the subject and the predicate of the sentence.
The subject tells us whether the predication involves the speaker (7, we ...), his interlocutor (you ...) or some other person or thing (he, John, the forest ...). The predicate may also tell us something about the person, but it usually does not supply any new information. It merely seconds the subject, corroborating, as it were, in a general way the person named by the subject (I am ..., you are ..., he, John, the forest is ...). Neither does the predicate add information as to the number of persons or things involved Here it again seconds the subject. In this sense we say that the predicate depends on the subject. But in expressing the tense and mood components of predicativity the predicate is independent.
§ 385. Since a person or thing denoted by any noun or noun equivalent (except /, we and you) is a 'third person' (see § 148) and a sentence may contain several nouns, there must be something in the sentence to show which of the nouns is the subject of the predication. The Indo-European languages use the follo'wing devices:
a) the nominative case ( Встретил зайца медведь ),
b) grammatical combinability ( Цветы солнце любят ,
Цветы солнце любит 1) Two windows has this house.
(Nursery rhyme).
1 A Martinet writes: "Everything would be simpler if the nominative case were always unambiguously distinguished from the other cases There would then never be any need to resort to the mark of the plural agreement to indicate which noun is the subject". (A Functional View of Language, Oxford, 1962)
223
с) the position of the noun ( Б ы т ие определяет сознание ).
In English the nominative case has been preserved only with six pronouns. Grammatical combinability, as shown in the previous paragraph, is important, but it plays a much smaller role than in Russian. It is not observed, for instance, in cases like / (he, she, they, John, the students) spoke ... So the position of the noun or noun-equivalent is of the greatest importance.
E.g. John showed Peter a book of his.
When position and combinability clash, position is usually decisive, as in the sentence G e о г g e' s is a brittiant idea, George's are brilliant ideas. The subject is George's, though the predicates agree in number with the nouns idea, ideas. Similarly in What are those things \ The above are samples of minerals, etc.
§ 386. It would be wrong to maintain that the only function of the main parts of the sentence is to contain the syntactical meanings of predicativity. The latter has been defined as the relation of the thought to the situation of speech. So there must be some thought whose relation to the situation of speech is expressed in the sentence in terms of person, tense, mood. Naturally, the main parts of the sentence contain part of that thought, and if the sentence consists of the main parts alone, they contain al!4the thought. This is the case in a sentence like Birds fly. The subject birds does not only inform us that it is neither the speaker, nor his interlocutor, but some other person or thing that is involved. It does much more. As a noun it names that thing. The predicate fly does not only show the relation to the act of speech and reality. As a verb it names an action characterizing the thing named by the subject.
Thus we may speak of the (1) predicative (structural) and (2) non-predicative (notional) characteristics of the subject birds.
1. It contains the person component of predicativity,
2. It names the thing about which the communication
is made. In other words, birds is both the structural aftd the
notional subject of the sentence.
The predicate fly has similar characteristics;
1 See § 390
224
1. It contains the tense and mood components of predica-
tivity.
2. It names an action characterizing the thing denoted by
the subject.
So fly is both the structural and the notional predicate of the sentence.
§ 387. In the sentence It rains the notional value of the subject is zero since it does not name or indicate any person, thing or idea. This is why it is (not quite adequately) called an 'impersonal' subject. But its predicative (structural) meaning is as good as that of any other subject: it shows that neither the speaker nor his interlocutors are involved.
In the sentence He is a student the notional value of is is next to zero, which prevents it from being recognized as the predicate of the sentence. Though is contains the tense and mood components of predicativity like any other predicate, it is regarded as only part of the predicate.
One cannot fail to notice that different criteria are used with regard to the subject and to the predicate. It is assumed that the former can be devoid of notional value, while the latter cannot.
When arguing against the traditional view that is in the sentence He is in Moscow is the predicate, A. I. Smirnitsky writes: "We cannot say that is is the predicate because the lexical meaning of this verb is colourless and indefinite" *.
The reason why modal verbs and other semi-notional verbs are not regarded as predicates is of the same nature.
§ 388. We think it essential to apply the same principles to the subject and predicate alike. The correlation between the structural and the notional in the principal parts of the sentence may be of four types: 1) The structural and the notional are united in one word.
E. g. Birds fly.
2) The structural and the notional are in different units.
I !
E. g. It is necessary to act.
l______ l
1 See А. И. Смирницкий. Синтаксис английского языка. 1958, p. 113—115.
J/47 Хаймович и др
225
3) Only the structural is given in the sentence.
E. g. Is it raining? It is.
4) Only the notional is present.
E. g. What is he doing? Writing.
The differentiation of the structural and the notional is not an artificial device. As shown below, it is a characteristic feature of the analytical structure of the English sentence.
§ 389. In the sentence Birds fly, as we have seen, the syntactical and the lexical meanings of the subject and the predicate go together. But English has a system of devices to separate them.
To begin with, the overwhelming majority of verb forms in English are analytical J. When the predicate is an analytical verb, the structural and the notional parts of the predicate are naturally separated, the former being expressed by a grammatical word-morpheme, as in the sentences Mother is sleeping, I shall wait, etc.
When the sentence contains a finite link-verb or a modal verb, the structural and notional predicates are different words as in He is late, She can swim.
The structural and the notional (part of the) predicate are often separated in English by adverbs and other words.
E. g. He i s often late.
You must never d о it again. We s h a I I certainly come.
In interrogative and negative sentences the structural (part of the) predicate is usually detached from the notional (part of the) predicate and is placed before the subject or the negation.
/ s mother sleep ing? "Mother i s not sleeping. Shall I wait? You must not cry.
When the predicate is expressed by a synthetic form and contains no word-morphemes, as in the sentence Birds fly, special word-morphemes do, does, did are introduced to separate the structural and the lexical meanings of the predicate verb in interrogative and negative transforms of the sentence.
1 See § 12. '
226
D о birds fly"? Birds d о not fly. He smiles. Does he s т i I el He smiled. Did he smile?
The same phenomenon is observed in sentences like Little does he e v p e с t it, indeed. Only then did we b e g i n. Also for emphasis in sentences like We d о like it, But he d i d so wan t, and the writing said he never would. (Galsworthy).
Now observe the so-called 'contracted forms', so widely used in colloquial English: I'm sure, He's writing, We'll come, You're students, They've left, etc. They are another manifestation of the tendency to bring together the structural meanings by isolating them from the notional (part of the) predicate.
The tendency to detach the structural part of the predicate from its notional one is obvious in disjunctive questions.
He i s working, ins't he? They haven't come yet, have they? You know him, don't you? You can swim, can't you?
The same tendency is evident in sentences like John graduated last year and so did Mary. John hasn't mar ried yet. Neither has Peter. He was glad the play had ended as it had. (Galsworthy).
But especially manifest is the tendency in short replies of the type He does, They will, etc. When in answer to the question Has John really promised that? we say He has, we repeat the predicative part of the previous sentence, leaving out the notional part.
Thus, we must say that the tendency to detach the struc tural from the notional is a typical feature of the English predicate, which is connected with the extensive use of grammatical word-morphemes and semi-notional verbs. The ties between analytical morphology and syntax are obvious. *
1 This is what W. Twaddell says about the function of what he calls 'verb auxiliaries': "Recent research on English verb grammar has increasingly revealed the crucial functions of the auxiliaries as grammatical sentence elements...". After describing their main syntactical uses he continues: "These four grammatical functions of auxiliaries are a peculiar feature of English grammar. It must be noted that they are not mere 'privileges' for auxiliaries: an auxiliary is an indispensable component in any English construction of sentence negation, interrog-
'/47*
227
§ 390. The subject is in most cases a word uniting the syntactical meaning of 'person' with the lexical meanings. But English has developed special word-morphemes to separate them, as in the dialogue below.
— It is necessary to warn her, isn't it!
— It is.
The subject it has no notional value, but it contains the predicative meaning of 'person'. The correlated but detached lexical meaning is in the infinitive to warn. Thus, it has only the form, but not the content of a word. In content it is a grammatical morpheme, and we may, consequently, regard it as a grammatical word-morpheme. But it differs from the grammatical word-morphemes already described in not forming part of an analytical word while making part of a sentence. Hence the conclusion that grammatical word-morphemes divide into rporphological and syntactical ones. It in the sentences analysed is a syntactical word-morpheme used to detach the predicative meaning of the subject from its lexical meaning.
Another syntactical word-morpheme of this type is there in the following dialogue.
— There is no money in it, is there"?
— There is.
As a result of a long course of development this there has lost its lexical meaning, its connection with the pro-adverb there, and acquires the predicative meaning of the subject when it occupies its position. There shows, like most subjects, that neither the speaker not the listener are involved.
In the sentences above there is the subject owing to its position, though the predicate agrees in number with the noun money, which is the notional correlative of there. W. Twaddell writes: "Like the interrogative subjects who (what) which? the empty subject there is itself unmarked for number. A following verb displays the number agreement appropriate to the predicative noun complement or to an earlier noun or pronoun reference. "Who is coming? Which are staying? What's the best way to Newport? What are those things?" — Similarly, "There is a tide in the affairs of men. There are more things
ation, stress for insistence, and echo-repetition". (The English Verb Auxiliaries 1960, p. 13—14.)
228
in heaven and earth. There happen to be several good reasons. There does not seem to be any objection". l
§391. Let us now consider the grammatical word-morphemes do, does, did in sentences like Does she ever smile"? We do not know him, etc.
A. I. Smirnitsky 2 is of the opinion that does ... smile, do ... know and did come (in He did come) are analytical forms of the verb serving to express interrogation, negation, and emphasis respectively. There are good reasons, however, for disagreement, since the do-word-morphemes in the above formations differ essentially from morphological word-morphemes.
1) Morphological word-morphemes are combinable, e. g.
shall have been asked. The word-morphemes do, does, did form
no combinations with any morphological word-morphemes.
They appear in the sentence only in case there are no
morphological word-morphemes that could be separated from
the rest of the analytical word for syntactical purposes.
2) All the words of the lexemes represented by have, be,
shall and will are used as word-morphemes, e. g. have written,
has written, had written, to have written, having written.
With do it is different. Only those words are used which have
the syntactically important meanings of predicativity: do,
does, did, not doing or to do. One says Do riot come, but not
to come (* to do not come is impossible), not coming (* doing
not come is impossible).
3) The use of the do-word-morphemes, (unlike that of
morphological word-morphemes) fully depends on the type
of the sentence 3. Compare, for instance, do and are in the
following questions:
What books do you sell? What books sell best?
What books are you selling'? What books are selling besfi
Thus, the do-word-morphemes are not parts of analytical words that enter the sentence together with the whole word, as is the case with morphological word-morphemes. They are syntactical word-morphemes used in certain types of sen-
1 Op cit., p. 17.
2 Морфология английского языка, р. 88—91.
3 H. Gleason writes: "The auxiliary did occurs in English only
where sentence structure demands it" (Introduction to Descriptive Lin
guistics, Rev ed , N Y., 1961, p. 174).
l /j8 Хаймсшич и
229
tences when the predicate verb contains no morphological word-morphemes.
§ 392. A unit of a higher level, as we know, contains units of the next lower level. A sentence contains words, not morphemes — parts of words. So morphological word-morphemes cannot be regarded as parts of the sentence as long as they remain parts of analytical words. In spite of the fact that in the sentence He is writing predicativity is conveyed by he is, we cannot treat is as the predicate because it is part of the word is writing. Only the whole word is writing can be regarded as a part of the sentence. Still, the predicate is writing consists of two parts: the structural part is and the notional part writing. Only when the notional part of the verb is dropped does a morphological word-morpheme become the structural predicate of a sentence, as, for instance, in short answers He is, She has, We shall, etc.
It is not so with syntactical word-morphemes. They are nor parts of words, but parts of sentences, more exactly, structural parts of sentences. In It is cold, for instance, the syntactical word-morpheme it is the structural subject of the sentence. In Does he smoke? the syntactical word-morpheme does is the structural predicate.
§393. Every predication can be either positive or negative.
He is. — He isn't.
It rains. — // does not rain.
Speakl —Don't speakl
The 'positive' meaning- is not expressed. It exists owing to the existence of the opposite 'negative' meaning. The latter is usually expressed with the help of not (n't) which we might call the predicate negation. It is a peculiar unit differing from the particle not in several respects.
a) The particle not has right-hand connections with various classes of words, word-combinations and clauses.
E. g. You may come any time, but not when I am busy. Not wishing to disturb her, he tip-toed to his room. May I ask you not to cry at me? The predicate negation has only left-hand connections with the following 24 words and word-morphemes which H. Palmer and A. Hornby call
230
anomalous flnltesl and J. Firth names syntactical opera tors 2: am, is, are, was, were, have, has, had, do, does, did, shall, should, will, would, can, could, may, might, must, ought, need, dare, used 3. In the sentence, as we know, all these words and word-morphemes are structural (parts of) predicates.
b) Unlike the particle not, the predicate negation is regu
larly contracted in speech to n't and is as regularly fused
with the preceding structural (part of the) predicate into units
differing in form from the sum of the original components
do + not — don't [dount], will + not =• won't [wount],
shall + not — shan't [Ja:nt], can + not — can't [ka:nt].
c) The predicate negation remains with the predication
when the latter is reduced to its structural parts alone.
E.g. Is mother steeping"? She isn't. He has bought the book, hasn't h e?
d) The predicate negation may represent the whole predi
cation like a word-morpheme.
E. g. Are we late! I believe not. Here not substitutes for we are not or we aren't late.
Hence we must regard the predicate negation as a special syntactical unit, as a syntactical word-morpheme of negation. It differs from other means of expressing negation.
Cf. He d i d n ' t return. There isn't any book on the table. He n e v e r returned. There is n о book on the table.
§ 394. In English there are 'predications' which retain only the notional part of the predicate without its structural part. They are known as secondary predications or complexes (see § 310), and contain a verbid instead of a finite verb.
1 See The Advanced Learners' Dictionary of Current English by
A. Hornby, E. Gatenby, H. Wakefield, London, 1958, p. VII.
2 Studies in. Linguistic Analysis. Oxford, 1957, p. 13.
3 Here is what W. Twaddell says on the subject: "True sentence
negation requires an auxiliary to precede the signal -n't (not), any
other location of 'not' specifically makes the negation partial, affecting
part but not all of the sentence The unstressed suffix -n't is not only
the normal negative signal with an auxiliary: it occurs only with auxili
aries and the related copula 'be'". (Op. cit., p. 13).
V,8*
231
| ial complex» |
John smokes
John smoking participial complex John ... {to) smoke \ infinitival com-
| plexes |
(for) John to smoke
As we see, the complexes possess only the person component of predicativity. The other two components can be obtained obliquely from some actual predication. That is why the complexes are always used with some predication and why they are called 'secondary' predications. In the sentence / felt him tremble the complex him tremble borrows, as it were, the tense and mood components of predicativity from the predication / felt and becomes obliquely equivalent io an actual predication He trembled into which it can be transformed. Thus a complex may be regarded as a transformation (transform) of some actual predication, the verbid acting as an oblique or secondary predicate.
§ 395. The terms 'transform', 'transformational' have become popular among linguists after the publication in 1957 of Syntactic Structures by Noam Chomsky. Chomsky's transformational grammar is a theory for grammatical description of linguistic structure. It is a generating grammar in the sense that it is a body of rules to generate an infinite set of grammatically correct sentences from a finite vocabulary. As B. Strong has it, it "combines great precision with a cumbersomeness that unsuits it for ordinary purposes." l
In this book we do not deal wi th transformational grammar as a theory, and we use the term transform as it is defined by R. Long. 2 Transforms are "Syntactic patterns that closely parallel other syntactic patterns, from which they are conveniently considered to derive, but that are nevertheless distinct in form and use. Thus the main interrogative Was Jane there"? is conveniently regarded as a transform of the main declarative Jane was there. Clauses with passive-voice pred-icators 3 are obviously transforms of clauses with common voice 4 predicators. / gave him the book can profitably be con-
1 Modern English Structure, Lnd., 1962, p. 81.
* The Sentence and its Parts, p. 508—509.
8 Predicates.
* Active voice.
232
sidered a transform of / gave the book to him, and an economics teacher of a teacher of economics."
Similarly, the sentence The bus being very crowded, John had to stand can be regarded as a transform of the sentence As the bus was very crowded, John had to stand or the participial complex as a transform of the subordinate clause.
Likewise can the infinitival complex of the sentence It is not possible for him to do it alone be treated as a transform of the subordinate clause in It is not possible that he should do it alone.
The gerundial complex in / resent your having taken the book can be viewed as a transform of the subordinate clause in / resent that you have taken the book.
As we see, the complexes retain the lexical meanings of the clauses, but they are deprived of the predicative (structural) meanings of mood and tense, which they borrow, as it were, from the finite verb.
This correlation of structural and non-structural predications is also part of the system of a language regularly detaching the structural part of the predicate from the'notional one.
THE STRUCTURE OF A SENTENCE
§ 396. As defined (§ 3), when studying the structure of a unit, we find out its components, mostly units of the next lower level, their arrangement and their functions as parts of the unit.
Many linguists think that the investigation of the components and their arrangement suffices. Thus Halliday writes: "Each unit is characterized by certain structures. The structure is a syntagmatic framework of interrelated elements, which are paradigmatically established in the systems of classes and stated as values in the structure. ... if a unit 'word' is established there will be dimensions of word-classes the terms in which operate as values in clause structures: given a verb /noun/ adverb system of word classes, it might be that the structures ANV and NAV were admitted in the clause but NVA excluded" 1.
1 Systematic Description and Comparison in Grammatical Analysis, in Studies in Linguistic Analysis, Oxford, 1957.
8 Хаймовнч и др.
233-
Now 'a syntagmatic framework of interrelated elements' may describe the structure of a combination of units as well as that of a higher unit, a combination of words as well as a sentence or a clause. The important properties that unite the interrelated elements into a higher unit of which they become parts, the function of each element as part of the whole, are not mentioned.
Similarly, Z. Harris thinks that the sentence The fear of war grew can be described as TN^N^V, where Т stands for article, N for noun, P for preposition and V for verb. l
Such descriptions.are feasible only if we proceed from the notion that the difference between the morpheme, the word and the sentence is not one of quality but rather of quantity and arrangement.
Z. Harris does not propose to describe the morpheme (as he calls it) is as VC, where V stands for vowel and С for con sonant. He does not do so because he regards a morpheme not as an arrangement of phonemes, but as a unit of a higher level possessing some quality (namely, meaning) not found in any phoneme or combination of phonemes outside the morpheme.
Since we assume (§§ 1, 2, 3) that not only the phoneme and the morpheme, but also the word and the sentence are units of different levels, we cannot agree to the view that a sentence is merely an arrangement of words.
In our opinion, The fear of war grew is a sentence not because it is TNPNV, but because it has properties not inherent in words. It is a unit of communication and as such it possesses predicativity and intonation. On the other hand, TNPNV stands also for the fear of war growing, the fear of war to grow, which are not sentences.
As to the arrangement of words in the sentence above, it fully depends upon their combinability. We have TN and not NT because an article has only right-hand connections with nouns. A prepositional phrase, on the contrary has left-hand connections with nouns; that is why we have T/VP/V, etc.
§ 397. The development of transform grammar (Harris, Chomsky) and tagmemic grammar (Pike) is to a great extent
1 Co occurrence and Transformation in Linguistic Structure, "Language", 1957, v. 33, № 3, pt. 1. Russian translation in «Новое в лингвистике», вып. II, М., 1962.
234
due to the realization of the fact that "an attempt to describe grammatical structure in terms of morpheme classes alone — even successively inclusive classes of classes — is insufficient". J
As defined by Harris, the approach of transformational grammar differs from the above-described practice of characterizing "each linguistic entity ... as composed out of specified ordered entities at a lower level" in presenting "each sentence as derived in accordance with a set of transformational rules, from one or more (generally simpler) sentences, i. e. from other entities of the same level. A language is then described as consisting of specified sets of kernel sentences and a set of transformations". 2
For English Harris lists seven principal patterns of kernel sentences 3:
1. NvV (v stands for a tense morpheme or an auxiliary
verb, i. e. for a (word-) morpheme containing the meanings
of predicativity).
2. NvVPN
3. NvVN
4. N is N
5. N is A (A stands for adjective)
6. N is PN
1. N is D (D stands for adverb)
As one can easily see, the patterns above do not merely represent arrangements of words, they are such arrangements which contain predicativity — the most essential component of a sentence. Given the proper intonation and replaced by words that conform to the rules of combinability, these patterns will become actual sentences. Viewed thus, the patterns may be regarded as language models of speech sentences.
One should notice, however, that the difference between the patterns above is not, in fact, a reflection of any sentence peculiarities. It rather reflects the difference in the combinability of various subclasses of verbs.
The difference between 'NvV and 'NvVN', for instance, reflects the different combinability of a non-transitive and a transitive verb (He is sleeping. He is writing letters. Cf. to
| I960 |
1 K. Pike, op cit., p. 34.
" Structural Linguistics Preface for the fourth impression, Chicago,
3 See «Новое в лингвистике», вып. II, М., 1962, р. 628, 8'
235.
sleep, to write letters). The difference between those two patterns and 'N is A' reflects the difference in the ornbina-bility of notional verbs and link verbs, etc.
A similar list of patterns is recommended to language teachers under the heading These are the basic patterns for all English sentences:
1. Birds fly.
2. Birds eat worms.
3. Birds are happy.
4. Birds are animals.
5. Birds give me happiness.
6. They made me president.
7. They made me happy \
The heading is certainly rather pretentious. The list does not include sentences with zero predications or with partially implied predicatjvity while it displays the combinability of various verb classes.
S. Potter reduces the number of kernel sentences to three: "All simple sentences belong to one of three types: A. The sun warms the earth; B. The sun is a star; and C. The sun is bright." And as a kind of argument he adds: "Word order is changeless in A and B, but not in C. Even in sober prose a man may say Bright is the sun." 2
§ 398. The foregoing analysis of kernel sentences, from which most English sentences can be obtained, shows that "every sentence can be analysed into a center, plus zero or more constructions ... The center is thus an elementary sentence; adjoined constructions are in general modifiers". 8 In other words, the essential structure constituting a sentence is the predication; all other words are added to it in accordance with their combinability. This is the case in an overwhelming majority of English sentences. Here are some figures based on the investigation of modern American non-fiction 4.
1 R. E. Bertsch. Linguistic Birds and Sentence Structure. "The
English Journal", 1962, № 1.
2 S. Potter. Language in the Modern World. Harmondsworth, 1960,
p. 82.
3 Z. Harris, op cit., Preface for the fourth impression.
* See Hook's Guide to Good Writing. N. Y., 1962, p. 399.
236
| No | Pattern | Frequency of occurrence (per cent) | |
| as sole pattern | in combination | ||
| 1 | Subject + verb | 25,1 | 5,3 |
| Babies cry. | |||
| 2 | Subject + verb + object | 32,9 | 5,9 |
| Girls like clothes. | |||
| 3 | Subject + verb .«^predi- | 20,8 | 6,4 |
| cative | |||
| Dictionaries are books. | |||
| Dictionaries are useful. | |||
| 4 | Structural subject-!- verb 4- | 4,3 | 0,9 |
| -t- notional subject | |||
| There is evidence. | |||
| It is easy to learn knitting. | |||
| 5 | Minor patterns | 7,9 | |
| Are you sure? | |||
| Whom did you invite? | |||
| Brush your teeth. | |||
| What a day! | |||
§ 399. Some analogy can be drawn'between the structure of a wor^d and the structure of a sentence.
The morphemes of a word are formally united by stress. The words of a sentence are formally united by intonation.
The centre of a word is the root. The centre of a sentence is the predication.
Some words have no other morphemes but the root (ink, too, but). Some sentences have no other words but those of the predication (Birds fly. It rains. Begin.).
Words may have some morphemes besides the root (un bearable). Sentences may have some words besides the predication (Yesterday it rained heavily.).
Sometimes a word is made of a morpheme that Is usually not a root (ism). Sometimes sentences are made of words that are usually not predications (Heavy rain).
237
Words may have two or- more roots (blue-eyed, merry-go- round). Sentences may have two or more predications (He asked me if I knew where she lived.).
The^ roots may be co-ordinated or subordinated (Anglo- Saxon, blue-bell). The predications may be co-ordinated and subordinated (She spoke and he listened. He saw Sam did not believe).
The roots may be connected directly (footpath) or indirectly, with the help of some morpheme salesman. The predications may be connected directly (7 think he knows) or indirectly, with the help of some word (The day passed as others had passed.).
The demarcation line between a word with more than one root and a combination of words is often very vague (cf. blackboard and black board, brother-in-law and brother in arms). The demarcation line between a sentence with more than one predication and a combination of sentences is often very vague.
Cf. She'd only to cross the pavement. But still she waited. (Mansfield).
§ 400. As we know, a predication in English is usually a combination of two words (or word-morphemes) united by predicativity, or, in other words, a predicative Combination of words. Apart from that the words of a predication do not differ from other words in conforming to the general rules of combinability. The rules of grammatical combinability do not admit of *boys speaks or *he am. The combination *the fish barked is strange as far as lexical combinability is concerned, etc.
All the other words of a sentence are added to those of the predication in accordance with their combinability to make the communication as complete as the speaker wishes. The predication Boys play can make a sentence by itself. But the sentence can be extended by realizing the combinability of the noun boys and the verb playjnio The three noisy boys play boisterously upstairs. We can develop the sentence into a still more extended one. But however extended the sentence is, it does not lose its integrity. Every word in it is not just a word, it becomes part of the sentence and must be evaluated in its relation to other parts and to the whole sentence much in the same way as a morpheme in a word is
238
not just a morpheme, but the root of a word or a prefix, or a suffix, or an inflection.
§ 401. Depending on their relation to the members of the predication the words of a sentence usually fall into two groups — the group of the subject and the group of the predicate 1.
Sometimes thefe is a third group, of parenthetical words, which mostly belongs to the sentence as a whole. In the sentence below the subject group is separated from the predicate group by the parenthetical group.
That last thing of yours, dear Flora, was really remarkable.
§ 402. As already mentioned (§ 54), the distribution and the function of a word-combination in a sentence are usually determined by its head-word: by the noun in noun word-combinations, by the verb in verb word-combinations, etc.
The ^adjuncts of word-combinations in the sentence are added to their head-words in accordance with their combina-bility, to develop the sentence, to form its secondary parts which may be classified with regard to their head-words. 2
All the adjuncts of noun word-combinations in the sentence can be united under one name, attributes. All the adjuncts of verb (finite or non-finite) word-combinations may be termed complements. In the sentence below the attributes are spaced out and the complements are in heavy type
He often took Irene to the theatre, instinctively choosing the modern Society plays with the modern Society conjugal problems. (Galsworthy).
The adjuncts of all other word-combinations in the sentence may be called extensions. In the sentences below the extensions are spaced out.
You will never be free from dozing and dreams. (Shaw).
1 These groups are regarded as the immediate constituents of a
sentence L Bloomfield says: "Any English-speaking person, who concerns
himself with this matter, is sure to tell us that the immediate consti
tuents of Poor John ran away are the two forms poor John and ran away "
2 See Л С. Бархударов, Д. А. Штелинг, op cit., §461.
239
She was ever silent, passive, gracefully averse. (Gals-worhty).
The distribution of semi-notional words in the sentence is determined by their functions — to connect notional words or to specify them. ' Accordingly they will be called connectives or specifiers. Conjunctions and prepositions are typical connectives 2 Particles are typical specifiers.
The peculiarities of all these words and combinations of words as parts of the sentence will be discussed in the corresponding chapters of this book.
THE CLASSIFICATION OF SENTENCES /
A. As to Their Structure
§ 403. Sentences with only one predication are called simple sentences. Those with more than one predication have usually no general name 3. We shall call them composite sentences.
In a composite sentence each predication together with the words attached is called a clause.
Composite sentences with coordinated clauses are com pound sentences.
She's a very faithful creature and I trust her. (Cronin).
Composite sentences containing subordinated clauses are complex sentences.
// / let this chance slip, I'm a fool. (Cronin).
In a complex sentence we distinguish the principal clause (I'm a fool) and the subordinate clause (If I let this chance slip) or clauses.
1 See A. Martinet A Functional View of Language Oxford, 1962,
p. 52: "If in a phrase such as with a smile, smile is considered the centre
of the phrase . . a is centripetal . with centrifugal: a is connected with
the rest of the sentence only through smile, which it helps to specify,
with connects smile with the rest of the sentence^.
2 In his book Connectives of English speech f Fernald deals chiefly
with prepositions and conjunctions
3 Sometimes they are called periods, but as the opposite of simple
sentences the term does not seem to fit H Poutsma names them compo
site sentences, a term we adopt heie.
240
We may also differentiate compound-complex (He seems a decent chap, and he thinks Ferse at the moment is as sane as himself. Galsworthy), and complex-compound (When that long holocaust of sincerity was over and the bride had gone, she subsided into a chair. Galsworthy) sentences.
There may be several degrees of subordination in a complex sentence.^,
It was almost nine o'clock before he reached the club, where he found Lord Henry sitting alone. (Wilde).
The clause where he found Lord Henry sitting alone is subordinated to the subordinate clause before he reached the. club and is therefore of the second degree of subordination.
§ 404. The clauses of a composite sentence may be joined with the help of connective words (syndetically) or directly, without connectives (asyndetically).
E. g. We consent to be in the hands of men- in order that they may be in ours. (Galsworthy). You're modern, Fleur; I'm mediaeval. (Ib.).
§ 405. A simple sentence or a clause containing some words besides the predication is called extended. An unextend- ed sentence (clause) contains no other parts but the subject and the predicate.
A sentence (clause) with several subjects to one predicate or several predicates to one subject is called a contracted one.
E. g. Diana crossed to the window and stood there with her back to Dinny. (Ib.).
§ 406. The dominating type of sentence (clause), with full predication, i. e. containing both the subject and the predicate, is called a two-member sentence (clause). All other types are usually called one-member sentences (clauses). Here are some examples of one-member sentences.
Put your money on Old Maid. (Galsworthy).
A cup of teal
Thanks.
These sentences are representatives of certain types that are established in the language system alongside of the two-
241
member type. They are not speech modifications of some other type of sentence, as the so-called 'elliptical' sentences are (see § 418).
B. As to Their Categories
§ 407. The sentences He is a student — Is he a student? form a syntactical opposeme. Their forms differ >only in the type of intonation and the relative position of the members of the predication. The only difference in meaning is that between 'declaration' and 'interrogation'. These two meanings can be regarded as the manifestations of the general meaning of a grammatical (syntactical) category which has no name yet. The category shows whether the sentence is presented as a statement or as a question. Let us call it the category of presentation. Like any grammatical category this is a system of opposemes whose members differ in form to express only (and all) the particular manifestations of the general meaning of the category (§ 23).
The meaning of 'declaration' is expressed by a falling tone and by placing the subject before the predicate. The meaning of interrogation is expressed by a rising tone and by placing the structural (part of the) predicate before the subject.
Are you alluding to me? (Shaw). Shall I announce hini? (lb.). Is there no higher power than that? (Ib.). Do you call poverty a crime? (Ib.).
In the last example a special syntactical predicate, the syntactical word-morpheme do is introduced and placed before the subject.
§ 408. With regard to the category of 'presentation' English sentences divide into those that have 'presentation' opposites and those which have not. Imperative and exclamatory sentences mostly belong to the latter subclass-'In these sentences the opposeme of 'presentation' is neutralized. The member of neutralization (see § 43) usually resembles that of 'statement' (Go to the blackboard. Let us begin. Lookout!) But often it takes the form of the 'interrogation' member (Would you mind holding your tongue? (Hornby). Pass the salt, will you? Isn't she a beauty/) or an 'intermediate' form (How pretty she is!)
242
§ 409. Not all interrogative sentences are syntactical opposites of declarative sentences.
The meaning of 'interrogation' in 'special questions' (otherwise called W/z-questions) is expressed either lexically : (when the subject or its attribute in a statement are replaced by the interrogative pronouns who, what, which or whose) or lexico-syntactically (when some other part of a statement is replaced by some interrogative pronoun). In either case they are not opposites of the corresponding statements because they differ lexically. Compare:
She Who
was thinking about you. (Shaw). was thinking about you?
Sweetie's Whose
thoughts were far from me. (Ib.). thoughts were far from me?
The horrible What
thought will break my heart. (Ib.) thought will break my heart?
B.
| is | The cat the cat? | is | on | the | tiles. | (Ib.) | |
| Where |
My son has become a thief. (Ib.)
has my son become?
She returned my love. (Ib.)
What did she return?
§ 410. The alternative question Are you going out or do you prefer to stay at home? is a compound sentence containing two coordinated interrogative clauses each of which is the syntactical opposite of a declarative clause. Only the intonation of the second clause is not interrogative.
Note. In cases like Are you going out or not? Are you. going to Moscow or to Leningrad?
1 "The expression Who came signals a question, not because of a different arrangement, but solely because the signal of question is in the \\or I alto as a word". (Ch. C. Fries, op cit ).
243
the part following the conjunction or may be regarded as representing a clause similar to the preceding one in everything but the appended words and the intonation.
Disjunctive questions are peculiar complex sentences the principal clause being a statement and the subordinate clause the syntactical opposite of its«predication with regard to two categories, 'presentation' and 'information.' (See next §.)
You don't smoke, do you? She is beautiful, isn't she?
§ 411. The sentences below form opposemes of some syntactical category.
Open the door. It is raining.
Do you like it? You know.
Don't open the door.
It is not raining. (It isn't
raining.)
Don't you like it?
You don't know.
In these opposemes meanings of 'affirmation' and 'negation' are the particular meanings of some syntactical category. It is difficult to find a name for such a general category covering statements, questions and orders. Seeing that in modern science the components of a 'yes-no' system are used as units of information, 1 we shall call the category under discussion the category of information.
The meaning of 'affirmative' information is expressed by a zero form, and the meaning of 'negative' information' by means of the predicate negation, the syntactical word-morpheme not (n't) placed after the syntactical (part of the) predicate.
§412. As already noted (§393), thenegativeword-morp^me not (n't) expresses full negation, as distinct from the partial negation of such negative words as not, no, never, nothing, etc. In most cases full negation excludes the necessity of partial negation in English, and vice versa. Hence the well-known assertion: "In English two negatives in the same construction are not used as in Russian: He does not come so
P 2H
1 See, for instance, «Новое в лингвистике», выпуск III, М., 1963, 539.
early, or: He never comes so early. Compare with the Russian:
Он никогда не приходит так рано." '
The difficulty is only in defining what is meant by "the same construction". It is not a sentence, because there can be two (or more) negatives in a composite sentence.
E. g. / с a n' t understand why he d i d n' t come yesterday.
It isn't even a simple sentence, for there may be a negative word attached to some verbid in the sentence, besides the negation connected with the predicate verb.
E. g. Would it not be better not to tell your father? (London) 2.
The corresponding rule can, probably, be worded thus: In English two negatives are not used in the same verbal construction. A verbal construction is a verb with all the 'non-verbs' attached.
§ 413. Not every sentence containing a negation is the syntactical opposite of an affirmative sentence. There was nobody in the room is not the opposite of There was somebody in the room. Here the difference is in the lexical meaning of somebody and nobody. Similarly in There is a book on the table, and There is no book on the table the difference is lexical (no versus a). Only a sentence containing the predicate negation, the syntactical word-morpheme not (n't), can be the 'negative' member of an 'information' opposeme, because (like any grammatical word-morpheme) not (n't) adds no lexical meaning.
s
§414. With regard to the'category of information English sentences divide into those that have opposites of the category and those which have not. Since 'negative information' is expressed in English only by means of the predicate negation, all the sentences that have no predicates are outside the category. Rain. No rain, are not members of a syntactical opposeme. They only resemble the corresponding members and may be
1 M. Ganshina and N. Vasilevskaya, op. cit., p. 266.
2 Л. С. Бархударов, Д. А. Штелинг, op. cit., p.284.
245
said to possess lexico-grammatical.meanings of 'affirmative' and 'negative' information. In exclamatory sentences the category of information is mostly neutralized. The member of neutralization usually resembles that of 'affirmation'. What a lovely day! But often it takes the form of the member of 'negation'. Isn't it marvellous!
§ 415. Let us compare the following pairs of sentences:
Come Do come -
He came He did come
I'll see him I shall see him
It's raining ft is raining
The sentences above can be regarded as opposemes of the category of expressiveness. The two particular meanings are those of 'emphatic' and 'non-emphatic' expressiveness.
'Non-emphatic' expressiveness has a zero form, whereas 'emphasis' is expressed by a strong accent on a word-morpheme (morphological or syntactical). In sentences like He did come a special syntactical word-morpheme is placed before the notional verb to receive the stress.,1.
Combinations of Sentences
§ 416. The sentence is usually the limit of grammatical analysis. Conrbinations of sentences have never got adequate attention on the part of linguists. Yet the necessity of extending linguistic analysis beyond the bounds of the sentence has of late been frequently emphasized. 2
1 H. Gleason writes: "The difference between The boy ran away
and The boy did run away is not a matter of the presence or the absence
of did. Only of the stress position. Did is there only to provide a meaning
less carrier for that stress in the required position If anything else
were available did would not occur. Compare The boy will run away.
The boy will run away". (Op cit p 174—175).
2 See K. Pike, op. cit., p 30- "We are forced to insist that linguistic
analysis must take as part of its essential domain the treatment of
units larger than the sentence. Without these higher-level units there
are not available adequate matrices for determining sentences themselves."
See also Z. Harris. Structural Linguistics. Preface for the Fourth Impression: "Exact linguistic analysis does not go beyond the limits of a sentence: the stringent demands of its procedures are not satisfied by the relations between the sentence and its neighbors, or between parts of one sentence and parts of its neighbors. There are however structural features which extend over longer stretches of each connected
246
We should naturally consider the analysis of a word incomplete without its combinability. But for some reason the combinability of sentences is not regarded important. One might think that each sentence is an absolutely independent unit, that its forms and meanings do not depend on its neighbours in speech. But it is not so. As H. Kufner has it, "In a very real sense very few groups of words which we would unanimously punctuate as sentences can really be called complete or capable of standing alone ... Most of the-sentences that we speak ... are dependent on what has been said before". 1
It goes without saying that in a book of this kind the uninvestigated problem of the combinability of sentences cannot get adequate treatment. We can only point out some lines of approach.
§ 417. As we have already noted (§ 399), the demarcation line between a sentence and a combination of sentences is very vague. Some part of a simple or composite sentence may become detached from the rest and pronounced after a pause with the intonation of a separate sentence. In writing this is often marked by punctuation. Here are some examples from A Cup of Tea by Mansfield.
She'd only to cross the pavement.
Give me four bunches of those.
Give me those stumpy little tulips.
But still she waited. And that jar of roses. Those red and white ones.
The connection between such sentences is quite evident. The word-combination those red and white ones can make a communication only when combined with some sentence whose predication is understood to refer to the word-combination as well.
But even in case a sentence has its own predication, it may depend on some other sentence, or be coordinated with it, or otherwise connected, so that they form a combination of sentences. In the first of the examples above this connection is expressed by the conjunction but. The following sentences are connected by the pronominal subjects.
piece of writing or talking. These can be investigated by more differentiated tools."
1 H. Kufner, op. cit., p. 1—2.
247
Rosemary had been married two years. She had a duck of a boy ... They were rich. (Mansfield). l
The sentences below are connected by what we might be tempted to call 'pronominal predicates', and by the implicit repetition of the notional predicate (group) of the first sentence.
Come home to tea with me. Why won't you? Do. (Mansfield).
The second sentence might be extended at the expense of the first into Why won't you come? or even Why won't you come home to tea with me! Similarly, the third sentence is understood by the listener as Do come, or Do come home to tea with me. .
§ 418. We find no predication in the second sentence of the following dialogue.
— How is the little chap feeling?
— Very sorry for himself. (Galsworthy).
But this is not a sentence of the Rain type, with a zero predication. Here we know the subject, it is the chap-oi the first sentence. And we know the structural predicate is. So the person who asked the question perceived the answer as if it had the predication fully expressed: The little chap is very sorry for himself.
Traditionally sentences like very sorry for himself, with some part (or parts) left out are called incomplete or elliptical. But as a matter of fact they are quite complete in their proper places in speech. They would become incomplete only if isolated from the sentences with which they are combined in speech, i. e. when regarded as language units with only paradigmatic relations, without syntagmatic ones. 2
When a speaker combines a sentence with a previous sentence in speech, he often leaves out some redundant parts
1 Speaking of the 'definite restrictions on order' found in sequences
lojiger than sentences, H. Gleason writes: "For example, John came.
He went away, might imply that John did both. But He came. John
went away, certainly could not have that meaning." (Op. cit., p. 57.)
2 J. Hughes writes: "Meaningless expressions like I'm sorry, he
isn't. Yes, completely, become quite easy to classify if we may count as
part of the immediate utterance anything in the utterance just made by
the previous speaker. — Is Mr B. in> I'm sorry, he isn't (in). — Was
the factory destroyed by the fire? Yes, (it was) completely (destroyed by
the fire)." (The Science of Language. N. Y., 1962;.
248
that are clear from the foregoing sentence, otherwise speech would be cumbersome. A sentence is thus often reduced to one word only.
— Where are you going, old man? — Jericho. (Galsworthy).
— What have you got there, daddiest? — Dynamite. (Shaw).
Theoretically, one and the same sentence may be represented differently in speech, depending on the sentence it is combined with. Suppose, we take the sentence John returned from Mos cow yesterday. If this sentence is to be the answer to Who returned from Moscow yesterday? it may be reduced to John. As an answer to When did John return from Moscow? it may be reduced to Yesterday. In answer to Where did John return yesterday from? it may take the form of Moscow. Thus, John. Yesterday. Moscow, may be regarded as positionally conditioned speech variants of a regular two-member sentence. In this they differ from one-member sentences (§ 406).
The sentence on which such a speech variant depends may be called the head-sentence of which it is an adjunct.
§ 419. The sentence-words yes and no are regularly used as adjuncts of some head-sentences.
— "Have you been talking to Hilary?" — "Yes." (Gals
worthy).
— "I've never really got over my first attack." — 'Wo",
said Dinny with compunction. (Ib).
In the same function we find the typically English short predications of the '/ do' type.
— "/'// go, Dinny, if Hallorsen will take me." — "He
shall". (Ib.)
Sometimes the two go together.
— "He wouldn't want me." — "Yes, he would." (Ib.).
Дата добавления: 2019-02-12; просмотров: 1407; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы! |
Мы поможем в написании ваших работ!