CHAPTER 3. THE VERB AND ITS GRAMMATICAL CATEGORIES 11 страница
There is an interrelation between the communicative type of a sentence and negation. In declarative sentences the function of negation is to deny the truth of the proposition. In interrogative sentences (general questions) the use of the negator 'not' imparts an additional meaning to the question, that of surprise and astonishment. E.g. Don't you see the trick she is playing? Don't you understand? (G.Greene). In imperative sentences the negation changes the inducement from request or order to prohibition.
Negation is also interrelated with modality. When negation is used with modal verbs the sphere of negation is connected with the meaning of the modal verb. When the modal verbs participate in the expression of action modality (the meanings of ability, possibility, obligation etc.), the negation refers to the dictum, e.g. You must not do it - It's obligatory that you should not do it. You may not go there -You are permitted not to go there. But when the modal verbs express epistemic modality, the sphere of negation is not the dictum, but the modus. E.g. It can't be true - I do not believe that it is true.
Negation in English has some specific features different from Russian. l)English. sentences are mononegative whereas Russian sentences are polynegative. E.g. Mne uuxmo HUKo^^a Hul^e^o ne ^oeopum — No one ever tells me anything. When we describe English sentences as mononegative, we mean only the use of grammatical negators. Sentences with two grammatical negators sometimes occur in colloquial speech but they are considered to be substandard. But an English sentence may have a grammatical and a lexical/ word-building negator. The effect of using two negators in one sentence is usually the change of the meaning from negative to affirmative. E.g.- He is not unclever - He is clever. Such sentences differ from affirmative sentences proper by the degree of affirmation. A sentence with double negation usually expresses a lesser degree of affirmation and this device is known in stylistics as litotes (understatement).
Double negation may also occur in the structure of composite or semicomposite sentences and the meaning of such sentences is affirmative. E.g. / never told a woman I liked her when I did not (S. Maugham) -1 always told a woman that I liked her only when I really did. You cannot pick a local newspaper without seeing hisface(S. Turow) - Whenever you pick a local newspaper you see his face.
2) In English the negator tends to be placed in the modal part of the utterance, which makes the statement less assertive. E.g. I don't suppose you 'd want to give up waiting at tables ? (D. Steel).
|
|
|
3) The second part of a tag-question and the response to the utterance depend on the affirmative/negative character of the pervious remark. When the basic part of the sentence is affirmative, the tag is negative, and when the basic part is negative, the tag is affirmative. Correspondingly, the form of agreement to an affirmative statement starts with a ' Yes' and an affirmative sentence, whereas the agreement to a negative statement begins with a Wo' and a negative sentence and disagreement is expressed with a 'Yes' and an affirmative sentence. The meaning of agreement is also supported by the appropriate intonation. These points of cross-lingual difference require special attention in teaching English because the interference of the mother tongue is very strong here and Russian speakers of English often fumble with the choice of the appropriate form of agreement/disagreement to an initial negative utterance.
CHAPTER 2. THE STRUCTURAL ASPECT OF THE SENTENCE
1. Classification of sentences according to their structure.
2. The notions of valency, structural minimum and the elementary sentence.
3. The syntactic processes of extending and compressing the elementary sentence.
1. The sentence as we stated above possesses three main aspects: structural (it says how the sentence is built, semantic ( it says what the sentence is about), and communicative ( it says what for the sentence was pronounced and what is the most important information it contains).
The structural aspect of the sentence deals with the structural organization of the sentence, it reveals the mechanisms of deriving sentences and structural types of sentences.
According to their structure sentences are classified into simple (monopredicative structures) and composite (polypredicative structures) which are further subdivided into complex (based on subordination) and compound (based on coordination). Clauses within the structure of a composite sentence may be connected with the help of formal markers (conjunctions and connectives: relative pronouns and relative adverbs - syndetically) and without any formal markers -asyndetically. Thus we should differentiate between two structural varieties of composite sentences: syndetic and asyndetic types. This traditional view on the nature of asyndetic composite sentence was challenged by some scholars who suggested that asyndetic composite sentences should not be differentiated into complex and compound and should be treated as special type of a composite sentence and only syndetic composite sentences should be further subdivided into complex and compound [nocnenoB 1950, 338-345]. However, we share the opinions of the scholars who consider that the two types of composite sentences differ formally rather than semantically and asyndetic types of composite sentences are always semantically correlated with syndetic types [Blokh 1983, 298-300]. The scope of asyndetic sentences is much more narrow: asyndetic connection is observed in object clauses (/ wish I were his age), attributive clauses (You are the most wonderful person I've ever met), adverbial clauses of condition (Should you see him ask him to contact me) and result (/ was so surprised I could hardly speak).
|
|
|
Though the difference between the complex and compound sentences is based on the two different types of semantic relations: subordination and coordination, the borderline between complex and compound sentences is not always hard and fast. Here, as everywhere in the system of language, we come across marginal types. Sentences may have formal markers of subordination but the semantic relations between the clauses appear to be more coordinate than subordinate. Thus, the meaning of subordination is largely weakened in attributive continuative clauses introduced by the relative pronoun 'which', e.g. She said 'no' which was exactly what I had expected to hear (J. Fowles). The relations between the two clauses are closer to coordinate, which can be verified by the possibility to replace the subordinate connective ''which' by the coordinate conjunction 'and' without changing essentially the meaning of the sentence. Compare: She said 'no' and that was exactly what I had expected to hear. Another example of weakened subordination is observed in sentences introduced by the conjunction 'whereas'. E.g. She was very tall whereas her husband hardly reached her shoulder. The meaning of this formally complex sentence can be rendered by a compound sentence: She was very tall and her husband hardly reached her shoulder.
|
|
|
In the sphere of the compound sentence we have one type of sentences which semantically are close to a complex sentence. This is the type based on causative-consecutive relations between the clauses. E.g. / missed my bus therefore 1 was late. The same type of relations is expressed by a complex sentence, e.g. As I I missed my bus I was late. The difference between the two types of composite sentence appears to be more formal than semantic: the conjunction 'therefore' is conventionally referred to coordinative conjunctions, though the causative-consecutive relations are much closer to subordination than coordination: the consequence always depends on the cause.
Besides these pure types there are also peripheral types: semicomplex and semicompound sentences which contain structures of secondary predication: infinitival, participial and gerundial constructions, absolute constructions with or without a participle and structures with the so-called double predicate. These structures of secondary predication establish the relations of functional synonymy with the corresponding subordinate clauses or, in the case of semicompound sentences, with the corresponding clause of a compound sentence. E.g. There is so much work to be done — There is so much work that has to be done. She saw her daughter sitting up in bed - She saw that her daughter was sitting up in bed. She walked to the table dazed—She walked to the table and she was dazed. As always in the case of synonymy they are not absolute synonyms and the choice of the synonyms is dictated by various syntactic, semantic and pragmatic factors.
Thus, the structural classification of sentences can be presented by the following scheme:
Sentence
Simple Semi-composite Composite
Compound Complex
|
|
|
2. In the traditional grammatical theories that were logic-oriented the main instrument of syntactic analysis was the so-called simple unextended sentence, a structure that contains only two syntactic elements - the subject and the predicate. This understanding treated the sentence (unit of language) as an exact analogy of the logical proposition which consists of two parts - the logical subject and the logical predicate. However, one cannot expect logical and linguistic categories to be exactly parallel. Any attempt to establish the relations of absolute analogy between the logical and linguistic categories results in distorting the reality of the language. Depending .on the number of components, sentences are traditionally divided into unextended and extended and the simple unextended sentence (a sentence that contains only the subject and the predicate) is used as the instrument of syntactic analysis. However, a closer look at some of the so called simple unextended sentences shows that some of such sentences appear to be ungrammatical because they are semantically incomplete, e.g. * He put; * He took; *He gave etc. These sentences are meaningless because they lack some parts of the sentence without which the meaning of the verbs is not exposed. In other words, the valency of the verbs has not been realized. The Russian poet Daniil Kharms used this effect of incompletion to create a piece of nonsense poetry:
KaK -mo 6a6ywK.a Maxnyjia,
u mowmac oice napoeos
J],emfiM nodan u CKasan:
" fJeume Kawy u cyndyx.".
The effect of nonsense in this poem is created by the absence of parts of the sentence, required by the valency of the verbs 'uaxamb' and 'nodamb' and also by the semantic disagreement between the verb 'numb' and the objects that follow it.
The theory of valency was worked out by the German scholar G. Helbig, the French scholar L.Tesniere and the Russian scholars S.D.Katznelson, N.I.Filitcheva and B.A.Abramov. Valency, as it was defined in the chapter on the verb, is understood as the ability of the verb to combine with other parts of the sentence for the vei*b to realize its lexical meaning and thus become the semantic and structural centre of the sentence. L.Tesniere says that a sentence presents a little drama in the centre of which is the action (the verb), the main characters (he calls them actants) and there may also be minor characters (he calls them circonstants) [TeHBep, 1988]. Thus it is necessary to differentiate between the obligatory valency and obligatory parts of the sentence without which the sentence is ungrammatical and optional valency as well as optional parts of the sentence which give additional information about the event described in the sentence. Thus in the sentence The little boy put his big bag on the diner table the subject boy, the object bag and the adverbial modifier on the table are obligatory, whereas the attributes little, big and dinner are optional. And in the sentences She spoke in a hoarse voice and She looked at me -with her sad eyes the attributes hoarse and sad are obligatory because their deletion makes the sentences semantically empty:
* She spoke in a voice or * She looked at me with her eyes. Sometimes the deletion of some parts of the sentence changes the meaning of the sentence drastically, e.g. / never lent him fifty ponds without feeling that I was in his debt (S. Maugham); I never told a woman I admired her when I didn 't (J. Galsworthy). Compare: I never lent him fifty pounds....; I never told a woman I admired her...
The minimum structure of the sentence which includes the predicate and the obligatory parts of the sentence forms the structural minimum, or the structural scheme of the sentence. The structural scheme of the sentence belongs to the level of the language. The sentence based on this structural scheme is called the elementary sentence and it serves as the instrument of the syntactic analysis. A set of structural schemes specific of a language constitutes the syntactic basis of the language which serves for building up all the innumerable sentences as units of speech. Here are some of the most typical structural schemes of sentences in English:
1. N - V intrans. - The plane disappeared.
2. N - V trans. - Obj direct -Hike bananas.
3. N - V trans. - Obj. indirect - Obj. direct -1bought myself a present.
4. N - V intrans. - Adv. Mod. of place - He lives in France.
5. N - V trans. - Obj. direct - Adv. mod. of manner - He treated the boy cruelly.
6. N - V intrans. - Adv. mod. of manner/comparison. - She behaved like an angel.
The number of these structural schemes is limited for every language and constitutes its syntactic base. All the variety of sentences that occur in speech appear as the result of various modifications of the elementary sentence. These modifications may either extend or compress the elementary sentence. There are several processes of extending and compressing the elementary sentence and they may form various combinations. The most important processes of extending the elementary sentence, according to G.Pocheptsov are the following: extension, expansion, compounding, contamination, detachment and parcellation [ BypjiaKosa, rioneimoB 1981, 213 -23 0].
1) Extension. It consists in adding to a part of the sentence a unit of the same syntactic status. As the result of extension we have sentences with homogenous parts. E.g. / waited and -waited. Diana had of course seen -what happened between him and Lisa. It must have been fairly obvious: those looks, those sighs, those shudderings, those significant almost-touches. (I. Murdoch).
2) Expansion. It consists in modifying one part of the sentence by another, subordinated to it. Expansion results in the formation of subject, predicate, object and adverbial modifier groups. E.g. The train arrived at the station at 6. - The Moscow train arrived at the little station at 6 sharp.
3) Compounding consists in changing a part of the sentence (usually the predicate) from simple to compound. The predicate may be compounded by the introduction of either modal or aspective component or both of them at a time. E.g. It was a joke - It must have been a joke. They were friends - They used to befriends. His heart seemed to have stopped beating.
4) Contamination results in the formation of the so-called double predicate in which the verb becomes syncretic and fulfils a double function: that of a notional verb that of a link verb. E.g. He stood invisible. We waited breathless. Another case of syncretism is observed in the cases when the verb combines the functions of an auxiliary and a link, as in the following sentences:
It wasn 't snowing in the morning but clear, blue and cold (I. Shaw).
She was fat and smooth and quietly smiling (S.Maugham).
5. Detachment consists in accentuating a part of a sentence and is achieved by a pause in oral speech and by commas or dashes in writing. E.g. She offended him — solid, matter-of-fact, quick, clear -Fr en ch (J. Galsworthy).
6.The ultimate degree of detachment results in parcelation as the result of which the detached part of the sentence is separated from the rest of the sentence by a full stop and forms a separate syntactic structure. E.g. He resigned. This afternoon (A. Hailey); He went to a small restaurant for dinner. Alone (I. Shaw). The parcellated part usually occurs in the end of the sentence, but occasionally it may occur at the beginning of the sentence. But now. Lisa had taken Miles away from her and now she taken Danby too (I. Murdoch).
Both detachment and parcellation are very effective means of accentuating the most important information of the sentence and serve the needs of expressive syntax.
The processes of compressing the elementary sentence are less numerous and include substitution, representation and ellipsis.
1) Substitution consists in. replacing a part of a sentence or a whole sentence by a word-substitute. The most frequent substitutes are: it, this, one, so, do etc. E.g. "/ am very happy" "You look it" or: "Men often propose for practice. My brother Gerald told me so ( O. Wilde).
2)Representation is a use of a part of a syntactic unit or a or a part of a grammatical form to represent the whole form, e.g. "/ left Soames. " "You always wanted to. "( J. Galsworthy). Representation and substitution often go together, as in
the following extract: "Miles doesn't work on Sundays?"- "Sometimes he does, but he can always not if he wants to " (I. Murdoch).
3) Ellipsis is a process of deleting from a sentence one or more parts which are redundant from the informative point of view. The deleted parts can easily be restored either from the previous context or from analogous structures which exist in the language and, consequently, in the lingual memory of the speakers. According to the source of their restoration elliptical sentences are subdivided into syntagmatically restored (i.e. restored from the context) and paradigmatically restored (i.e. from the analogous structures that exist in the language and, consequently, in the speaker's lingual memory). Let's have examples of both the types.
1. Roses for Mrs Moor! (I.Murdoch) - Bring roses for Mrs Moor (paradigmatically restored)
2. What does a forty-year- old- man look like to a twenty-two-year-old girl? - Ruins of walls of Pompeii. The trenches of Verdun. Hiroshima. (I. Shaw). -syntagmatically restored.
However, we should bear in mind that such a restoration is necessary only for the purpose of linguistic analysis, for understanding the nature of the elliptical sentences, but not for the needs of communication. In the processes of real communication elliptical sentences always contain enough information and do not need any completion. Our every day speech usually abounds in elliptical sentence, as in the following dialogue:
Дата добавления: 2019-02-12; просмотров: 370; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы! |
Мы поможем в написании ваших работ!