CHAPTER 3. THE VERB AND ITS GRAMMATICAL CATEGORIES 14 страница
CHAPTERS. THE PARTS OF THE SENTENCE
1. The general characteristic of the parts of the sentence
2. The relations between parts of the sentence and parts of speech, parts of the sentence and semantic actants
3. The system of parts of the sentence in English
4. Borderline cases in the system of parts of the sentence
1. Analyzing the sentence from the point of view of its constituents we come down to the minimal units of syntactic analysis. These minimal syntactic units distinguished on the basis of their formal features (morphological forms and position in the sentence) are called parts of the sentence. A part of the sentence, in fact, is the realization of a notional word in the sentence, a syntactic form of a notional word. The theory of parts of speech has a long history, its basic positions were worked out by the traditional syntax and it was further elaborated by the semantic syntax with its focus on the relations between the syntactic (surface) and the semantic (deep) structures of the sentence. The theory of parts of the sentence was subjected to criticism by structural syntax and attempts were made to replace the traditional parts of the sentence by such notions as immediate constituents, tagmemes, strings etc., but the theory of parts of the sentence survived and no syntactic analysis is possible without addressing the notions of the subject, predicate and the other parts of the sentence. The vital necessity in this theory lies in the fact that, on the one hand, parts of the sentence reveal the peculiarities of the sentence structure, and, on the other, they are related to the elements of objective reality conceptualized by the human mind and reflected in the semantic structure of the sentence.
2. Thus, parts of the sentence establish the correlation between the two planes of the language: the formal and the semantic planes. From the point of view of their semantic aspect parts of the sentence denote certain elements of the situation which carry out their typical functions in the events described in the sentence and, consequently, certain typical functions in the semantic structure of the sentence which serves as a generalized representation of the event (such functions as the action, the agent, the object, the instrument). From the point of view of their formal properties parts of the sentence are characterized by certain formal features, such as their position in the sentence and also the fact that these positions are designed for words as representatives of certain parts of speech. (When we discussed parts of speech we characterized them as cognitive-discursive formations which, on the one hand, are designed for naming certain concepts, and on the other, for certain positions in the utterance).
|
|
|
Thus, in the study of the parts, of the sentence we have to consider the relations between: 1) the parts of the sentence and the parts of speech; 2) the parts of the sentence as components of the syntactic, or formal structure of the sentence and the semantic actants (semantic functions) as elements of the semantic, or deep structure of the sentence. The relations between these levels may be of two types: symmetrical and asymmetrical. Let us analyze these relations. There exists a fundamental symmetry between parts of speech and parts of the sentence: each part of speech is designed for carrying out its typical function in the sentence structure (for this reason parts of speech were described by I.I.Meschaninov as secondary formations, based on the parts of the sentence, as "crystallized parts of the sentence" ("BbiKpHCTajiJiH3OBaBiiiHecfl HJieHBi npefljioaceHHfl"). Each part of speech has its prototypical, or primary functions: the subject and the object for the noun, the predicate for the verb, the predicative and the attribute for the adjective and the adverbial modifier for the adverb. But this parallelism is not absolute. In the process of the language functioning it is regularly broken as words of different parts of speech reveal a tendency for a "syntactic disguise", i.e. they may be used in the syntactic positions of other parts of speech and thus reveal their secondary syntactic functions. This process is known as syntactic, or functional transposition and it was discussed in the chapter devoted to parts of speech. Let's just have a few examples of this process.
1) There was something classically precise, or perhaps it would be more accurate to say old-world in her diction (G.Greene).
2) From my secretary, -Eugenia Martinez, 1 receive the usual: mail, telephone message slips, and a dark look (S. Turow).
3) Let's walk out of the town and find somewhere to sleep (J. Steinbeck).
|
|
|
4) Well, did it comfort you any? (J. Steinbeck).
Analyzing the relations between the relations between the parts of the sentence and their semantic functions we also observe a fundamental parallelism between them: each part of the sentence is designed for a certain semantic function: the agent for the subject, the action for the predicate, the object or the addressee for the object, a qualitative or circumstantial modification of the action for the adverbial modifier and qualitative modification of the agent or an object for the attribute. Besides these primary functions parts of the sentence can be used in their secondary semantic functions. The process in which a part of the sentence is used in its secondary semantic function can be defined as metasemiotic transposition [Tep-MHHacoBa 1970, TBHinHaHH 1979, Kosjiosa 1997, 46-47]. Let us turn to the following sentences:
1) Tony shrugged casual shoulders (Ch. Lamb)
2) The lamps were still burning redly in the murky air... (J.Fowles) In the first sentence the word casual is used in the syntactic position of an attribute but semantically it is related to the action rather than to the agent which can be verified by paraphrasing the sentence: Tony shrugged his shoulders casually. In the second sentence the adverbial modifier redly is semantically related to the subject (the lamps were red) rather than the action. Such parts of the sentence which reveal asymmetry between their syntactic and semantic functions are known as transferred parts of the sentence [ HopMan 1994, 183; OcoKHna 2003]. Cases of metasemiotic transposition are rather rare because they present deviation from the conventional syntactic use of words in the sentence and they reveal the expressive potential of syntax, the ability of a speaker (writer) to use the language creatively. They refer to the use of the language in its aesthetic, or expressive function and are often an important component of a writer's individual style.
3. Traditionally the parts of the sentence are divided into principal (Subject and Predicate) and secondary (Object, Attribute and Adverbial Modifier), but this division is rather conventional and depends on which aspect of the sentence is taken into consideration. If we consider the role of the parts of the sentence in establishing the predicative nucleus of the sentence, the subject and the predicate are really the principal parts. But if we take into consideration the problem of valency and the structural minimum of the sentence we will see that with some verbs objects and adverbial modifiers can be as obligatory and important as the subject and the predicate, because without them a sentence becomes ungrammatical ( e.g. *She bought...; *He behaved... etc). As from the point of view of the actual division very often . it is the so-called secondary parts (objects, adverbial modifiers and attributes) that function as the rhemes of the sentence and carry the most important information. E.g. She lives with an invalid mother near Westbourne Grove (G.Greene). I met Somerset Maugham once (I. Shaw). Today you are sad and you tell a sad story (S. Maugham).
|
|
|
Thus we may conclude that the differentiation of the parts of the sentence into principal and secondary is conventional and depends on the aspect of the sentence which is taken into consideration. As for the relations between the subject and the predicate there is no unanimous opinion about the question which of them is the governing part and which is subordinated to it. There are at least three opinions about it:
1) The governing and therefore the most principal part is the subject and the predicate is subordinated to it because it agrees with the subject in number and person;
2) The main part is the predicate because it is the structural and semantic center of the sentence and, in accordance with its valency, it determines the number and the character of the rest of the sentence, including the subject.
3) The subject and the predicate are equal in their status. This point of view is supported by the fact that the structure of the sentence corresponds to the structure of the logical proposition which has two parts - the logical subject and the logical predicate and they are equal in their status and both are indispensable for the structure of the proposition. This view on the relations between the syntactic subject and predicate presupposes that neither of them is subordinated to the other. We share this opinion and yet we must point out that the subject and the predicate have their own specific "missions" in the sentence: the predicate serves as the structural and semantic nucleus of the sentence. It actually assigns to the subject (as well as to the other parts of the sentence their semantic functions in accordance with its valency , or its cognitive scheme. As for the subject, it "orders" the morphological form (number and person) of the predicate just because it occupies the first position in the sentence. As it was metaphorically put by N.D. Arutyunova, the subject is the master of the sentence and the predicate is its boss. The predicate organizes the semantic and the syntactic structure of the sentence, yet formally (morphologically) it agrees with the subject.
|
|
|
Now .we shall proceed to the analysis of all parts of the sentence.
The Subject. The subject in the English sentence carries out a triple function: structural, semantic and communicative. Its structural function is manifested in the fact that in English it is the obligatory part of the sentence, the English sentence must have a subject even if it is semantically empty (carries no semantic function in the sentence). For this reason English is referred to as a subject dominant language. According to some scholars there are only seven languages in the world in which the subject is obligatory in the sentence and English is one of these languages [Gillagan 1987]. In other languages, such as Russian or Spanish sentences may have no subject (compare: "Ceemaem" in Russian and No hablo Ingles ( / do not speak English ) in Spanish where the meaning of the subject / is encoded in the form of the verb 'hablo'. If the subject is semantically empty, or redundant, its position is taken up by the so called "dummy subjects", such as it, one Qtc._E.g. It never rains but pours. It's never too late to learn. One can never be too sure.
According to the semantics of the subject sentences can be classified into personal (At supper he was silent and ill at ease), general-personal ( We are foolish and sentimental and melodramatic at twenty-five}, indefinite-personal ( No one can tell what it may lead to) and impersonal (It rained heavily at night).
The subject fulfils several semantic functions in the sentence. The primary, or prototypical semantic function of the subject is to introduce the agent of the action or the bearer of the state or quality named by the predicate. The prototypicality of this function is also revealed in the fact that if we are asked to illustrate the use of the subject in the sentence we always give a sentence where the subject fulfils the semantic role of the agent, e.g. He gave me an apple. This is why the most typical words which are used in the subject position are nouns denoting human and living beings and personal pronouns. In our age of high technologies the subject is often the name of a device or a machine which are treated as agents. E.g. The telephone went dead. The computer got a virus. The A TN machine would not return my card..
In English there exists a phenomenon known as animacy. Its essence lies in the fact that the position of the subject is taken up by words denoting limbs, parts of a human face, location, time, emotions etc. which are presented as agents, e.g. His look traveled over the room. The end of September began to witness their several returns (J.Galsworthy). Outrage greeted the Employment Secretary in the Commons as he announced a drastic shake-up in adult job training (MS) In translating such sentences into Russian the structure of the sentence usually undergoes transformation and the position of the subject is taken up by a noun denoting a person. E.g. oh o6een esznndoM KOMnamy.
Besides the primary semantic, function the English subject can express several secondary, or less prototypical semantic functions, such as:
1) The causer of the action or a state. E.g. He annoys me. She amused everyone. The difference between the agent and the causer lies in the fact that causers do not act or do something deliberately but inadvertently affect other people's psychological state (this is why it is impossible to put a question "What does X do*?" to sentences with a causer subject or transform such sentences into imperative, cf. * Don't amuse me [Berk 1999, 16]. The causer subject may be both an animate and an inanimate entity, as in: Curiosity killed the cat. What keeps you awake? Sentences with a causer subject can be paraphrased with the help of such structures as He is the cause of my annoyance or I feel annoyed because of him. However, as it is pointed by L.Berk, sometimes the difference between the agent and the causer is very vague and can be explicated only in the context, e.g. His look intimidated me (causer) and Mr Brocklehurst constantly intimidated the girls (agent/
2) The object, or the recipient of the action. This function is usual for the sentences with the predicate in the Passive voice, e.g. / was taught French by a French lady (Ch. Bronte}. However, with such verbs as undergo, suffer etc. used in the Active Voice, the subject also expresses the meaning of the recipient and not the agent of the action, e.g. He underwent several operations. The army suffered a defeat. Such sentences can be paraphrased with the help of Passive constructions, e.g. He was operated on several times; The army was defeated.
3) The addressee of the action. This function is also expressed in sentences with the Passive voice when the indirect object becomes the subject of a passive construction, e.g. I was given a week's leave.
4) The instrument of the action, Q.g.The detergent washes clean.
5) The time of the action. E.g. Morning found him in bed. The 1940s and 1950s saw several desperate attempts to answer these and similar questions (P.Matthew).
6) The place of the action. E.g. Paris was sunny and London was foggy. Alaska is cold.
Subjects that express time and place have a marked adverbial quality and can be paraphrased with the help of adverbial constructions, e.g. It is cold in Alaska
7) Action. Forgetting serves a very important function and is a by-product of learning. All seeing is interpretation. Touching him made me feel itchy, but they were marvelous imitations (A. Miller).
The choice of the subject for carrying out this or that semantic function is determined %by various structural, semantic, and pragmatic factors. Thus, a desire or a necessity to conceal the agent of the action results in the use of a Passive construction with the subject expressing the object or the addressee of the action (Mistakes were made) or such depersonalized structures as 'It came to my knowledge that you have changed your plan'
It is also determined by the type of discourse. In English weather forecasts locative subjects are very frequent, e.g. Eastern parts of Britain will start the day dry and fairly bright with a touch of ground frost in some sheltered areas (MS). Locative subjects are also common in guide books and travel brochures, e.g. Cyprus is sunny most of the year. Temporal subjects are frequent in business English when people are trying to plan ahead, e.g. Wednesday is fine (We can meet on Wednesday).
From the point of view of its communicative function, i.e. its function in the utterance, or discourse the subject of the sentence is usually (though not always!) is associated with the theme, or the topic of discourse. As it is aptly put by Lynn Berk, "a topic does not become the topic until it is introduced into discourse"[Lynn 1999, 24], and it is usually introduced into the discourse as the predicate, predicative or an object. After it has been introduced, it becomes thematic (topicalized) and usually goes to the subject position. E.g. He introduced me to his -wife. She -was a tall beautiful woman in her thirties. After a person or a thing have been introduced into the narration (discourse) the subsequent reference to them is usually made by means of personal pronouns and therefore personal pronouns are most frequently used in the subject (i.e. thematic) position. When the subject carries out the rhematic function in the sentence it.is often shifted to the end position in the sentence by means of the 'there is' construction or by means of inverted word order. E.g. There was a low stone wall that overlooked the gardens twenty feet below (S. Sheldon). In the centre of the room, under the chandelier, as became a host, stood the head of the family, oldJolyon himself (J. Galsworthy).
Summing up the typological characteristics of the English subject we should point out its obligatory character in the sentence structure and its ability to be frequently used in its secondary semantic functions. These characteristics should be taken into consideration in learning English and teaching it to Russian learners.
The Predicate. It is the part of the sentence which expresses a predicative feature attributed to the subject of the sentence. Like the subject, the predicate also carries out a triple function in the sentence: structural, semantic and communicative. Its structural function consists in establishing the syntactic relations with the subject and other parts of the sentence. The semantic function of the predicate finds its expression in attributing certain features to the subject. Its communicative function is manifested in the fact that through the predicate and the expression of predication the sentence becomes a minimal unit of communication. As we have already mentioned the predicate is 'the structural and semantic centre of the sentence. Sentences without a predicate (one member, nominative sentences refer to the periphery of English syntax). In the structure of a simple, two-member sentence the predicate usually carries out the function of the rheme, e.g. He disappeared. They arrived.
According to the form of expression predicates are divided into verbal and nominal, e.g. The moon rose. The moon was pale. There exists one type of predicate which is very frequent in English and which presents a combination of such verbs as have, get, give, take and a verbal noun (give a look, take a bath, have a smoke etc.). E.g. He gave them all a little wave ( R.Waller). Traditionally such cases were referred to a third formal type of predicate, a phraseological predicate. However from the grammatical point of view the most important characteristic of this type of predicate is not so much its phraseological but its analytical character (and all analytical structures are characterized by a certain idiomaticity of their components). The distribution of functions between the components of this predicate is similar to those within an analytical form - the verb expresses the grammatical meaning and the verbal noun serves to name the action, i.e. to express a lexical meaning. It is noteworthy that the verbal nouns which participate in these constructions can be derived from durative verbs only. The semantic difference between the have a look (bite, say) construction and the corresponding verb lies in the fact that it denotes a single episode, an instance of the process whereas the corresponding verb denotes the whole ongoing process. Due to this semantic property the constructions of the have a look type specialize in expressing aspective (iterative) characteristics of the action. It becomes evident if we compare, e.g. / smoked and / had a smoke; He looked at her and He had a look or two at her. The verb just names an action whereas the combination of the verb and a verbal noun points out either a single occurrence (Have a look\) or at a number of occurrences (He took several glances in her direction). In spite of the distribution of functions between the verb and the verbal noun similar to analytical forms these structures cannot be treated as analytical forms proper because they do not have the same regularity as analytical forms (e.g. we can have a look, but cannot have a stare; we can have a bite, but not an eat, one can take a nap, but cannot take a slumber etc). Besides the regular verbs such as have, give, get and take some other verbs can occur in these constructions, e.g. She flipped a curt nod at Havers (E. George); She flashed a look at me (J.Fowles). For these reasons such constructions must be treated as half-analytical forms, intermediate between analytical forms of the verb and syntactic combinations of a verb and the so-called 'light' object which corresponds to the general analytical tendency of the English language [see: llIanaMOB 1967; Berk 1999, 31]. Another type of a half-analytical predicate in English is presented by the structure do+ Ving, e.g. / gravely doubt that the boss did any sleeping for two weeks (R.P. Warren). The lady in question did some lamppost leaning round Earl's Court a few years back (E. George). Such constructions denote actions that either lasted for some time or were regularly repeated. When Agatha Christie was asked about how she invented plots for her thrillers she is known to have said "I always do my thinking in the bath ".
Дата добавления: 2019-02-12; просмотров: 372; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы! |
Мы поможем в написании ваших работ!