Brief Outline of Other Approaches to Semantic Syntax
V.V. Bogdanov calls the semantic model of a sentence a predicate structure (npeduKamnoe eupaotcemie). A predicate structure, in his opinion, includes one predicate sign (odun
337
npeduKamnbiu shok) and a zero, one or more non-predicate signs (it nyjib, odun luiu necKOJibKO uenpeduKamubix SHaxoe). Predicate signs express properties, actions, or relations. They generally function as predicators (npeduKambi). The central seme of non-predicate signs is 'thingness' ('eeufHocmb'). Non-predicate signs function as arguments. Just like W.L. Chafe, V.V. Bogdanov assumes the predicator to be central in the predicate-argument structure.
Taking into consideration the number of arguments, V.V. Bogdanov draws a distinction between predicate structures with a zero, one, and more than one argument. Zero-argument predicators (nyjibMecmnbie npeduKamu) describe the state of the atmosphere. They are characteristic of inflected languages, e.g.:
Ceemaem (PyccKas rpaMMaTHKa).
One-argument predicators (odnoMecmnbie npeduKamu) express actions, states, and properties. Cf.:
They are reading (V. Evans).
He is happy (V. Evans)
He is clever (V. Evans).
Multi-argument predicators (MnozoMecmnbie npeditKamu) express relations, e.g.:
/ love my mother (Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English).
Arguments, according to V.V. Bogdanov, can be expressed not only by non-predicate signs but also by predicate signs. The predicate sign in the function of an argument is called by him an embedded predieator (efuuovenHbiu npeduKam). In-the--surface structure of a sentence, embedded predicators find their expression in verbal and adjectival nouns, infinitives, and gerunds. It is usually aspective, modal, and causative predicators that take embedded predicators. Aspective predicators indicate the phase of an action: its beginning, continuation, or end. Cf.:
She began to read (J. Parsons).
He continued to live with his parents after his marriage (A.S. Hornby, A.P. Cowie, A.C. Gimson).
We stopped talking (A.S. Hornby, A.P. Cowie, A.C. Gimson).
Modal predicators show the attitude of the speaker to the action, e.g.:
You ought to have done that earlier (A.S. Hornby, A.P. Cowie, A.C. Gimson).
338
Causative predicators cause something to happen, e.g.:
They made me repeat the story (A.S. Hornby, A.P. Cowie, A.C. Gimson).
N.Y. Shvedova studies sentence meaning exclusively on language material, without resort to the structure of the extra linguistic situation.
E.V. Paducheva declares that the meaning of a sentence is the sum total of the meanings of its constituent lexemes, the grammatical meanings of the word forms, and the meaning of the syntactic construction.
|
|
|
Semantic syntax is in the process of development. That's why it has a lot of debatable points. The brief outline I gave you of semantic syntax is by no means exhaustive. But I hope you have a rough idea now what it deals with.
PRAGMATICS
Pragmatics focuses its attention on the functional side of language. Much of what is now referred to pragmatics was studied by the Greeks and Romans in Rhetoric.
The term 'pragmatics' was introduced by Ch. Morris in the 20-s of the 20 century. A close study of semiotics has led Ch. Morris to the conclusion that it admits of a tripartite division into syntactics (syntax), semantics, and pragmatics. Syntax, in his opinion, studies the ways in which signs are combined. Semantics concerns the relationship between signs and their designata. The designatum of an expression, according to R. Carnap, is what he, who uses it, intends to refer to by it, for example, to an object or a property or a state of affairs. Pragmatics deals with the origin, uses, and effects of signs. So, the evolution of linguistics can be presented in the following way: from syntax through semantics to pragmatics.
Until recently, pragmatics has been the neglected member of the traditional three-part division of the study of signs. The problems of pragmatics have been treated informally by philosophers and by some linguists, who generally ignored pragmatic problems or pushed them into semantics and syntax. Abroad, pragmatics came into the foreground in the 70-s, in Russia - in the 80-s of the 20th century.
339
Linguists generally regard a speech act as a basic minimal unit of pragmatic analysis [J.R. Searle]. A speech act is the production of a sentence, 'sentence representative', or sentencoid under certain conditions.
Дата добавления: 2018-09-22; просмотров: 662; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы! |
Мы поможем в написании ваших работ!