Is inviting - is being invited
Invited - was invited
Has Invited - Has been Invited
Should invite – Should be invited
From the point of view ofform, the passive voice is the marked member of the opposition. Its characteristic is the pattern “be+P II”. The active voice is unmarked. Its characteristic is the absence of that pattern.
The active voice signals that the action denoted by the predicate verb is performed by the referent of the grammatical subject of the sentence and passes onto the referent of the grammatical object. In symbolic notation it is: S à O.
The passive voice expresses reception of the action by the referent of the grammatical subject. In symbolic notation it is: S ß O.
The problem of Voice is connected with that of in/transitive verbs.
In MnE the passive voice is used much more often than in Russian since not only transitive but many intransitive (+ prepositional) objective verbs can be used in the passive voice:
E.g. They admired her à She was admired (by them).
They laughed at him à He was laughed at.
With the verbs capable of taking 2 grammatical objects at a time the speaker can put any of the objects in the position of the subject of the corresponding passive sentence, e.g.:
I gave the book to the boy à1) A book was given to the boy. 2) The boy was given a book.
However, Some forms of the active voice find no parallel in the passive: viz. the forms of the Future Continuous, Pr /Past / Future Perfect Continuous (e.g. will be inviting, has been inviting, had been inviting, will have been inviting).
There some non-passivisable verbs whichfind no parallel in the passive, e.g:cost, belong, resemble.
In MnE even AN ADVERBIAL MODIFIER OF PLACE of an active construction sometimes may become the grammatical subject of a passive construction, e.g.: Nobody lived in the house àthe house was not lived in.
Not all grammatical forms of the “ be + P. II” pattern may be treated as passive forms. Sometimes they represent the compound nominal predicate in the active voice, e.g.:
1.The window was broken at the moment. (Here the P. II has become an adjective. This is the compound nominal predicate).
2. The window was broken by a boy. (this is a simple verbal predicate, passive )
In the above examples we observe the phenomenonof the neutralization of the opposition (difference) between the morphological form of the passive voice and the syntactical form of the compound nominal predicate with the pure link-verb “to be”. Only a living context can de-neutralize the categorical status of the predicate in such cases, i.e. show whether the predicate is a simple verbal predicate or a compound nominal predicate
|
|
|
Thus the context may have both the “voice-suppressing”, “statalizing” effect and “voice-stimulating” or “processualizing” effect (see Blokh, 1983). As a rule, action-modifying adverbials, prepositional objects serve as “contextual stimulators”, also some forms of the predicate-verb itself, viz.: the Fut., Cont., and Perfect forms because they denote actions, not states.
The big problem is the problem of the existence of the so-called medial voices, voices other than the active or passive voice. In addition, the following 3 voices have been suggested:
1.the reflexive Voice: (he dressed himself; he found himself in darkness – here the subject is at the same time its own object of the action. In symbolic representation: SPO)
2. the reciprocal (they greeted each other)
If we recognize the forms of the reflexive and reciprocal voice, then we must treat the reflexive and reciprocal pronouns as voice auxiliaries (i.e. as word-morphemes), but they can hardly be treated as voice auxiliaries because they still remain positional parts of the sentence (namely: direct objects, preserving their lexical meanings (Blokh, 1983, 181). So, such forms can hardly constitute new “voices”, though they are grammatically relevant.
The same problem concerns the existence / non- existence of the middle Voice in MnE, e.g.: 3. the middle Voice (e.g.: the door openedas distinct from: I opened the door; The book sells well).
The meaning of the verbs in the above examples is not active, since the actions expressed by them do not pass from the subject to an object. On the contrary, these actions are confined to the referents of the grammatical subjects which are at the same time their own objects of the actions (S=O). I.e. the actions are represented here as if going on of their own accord, within themselves.
In this connection, B.A. Ilyish proposed to give a broader definition to the active voice so as to cover by the definition cases like:
|
|
|
He sells books; The book sells well.
He proposed to give a new name to the newly defined voice – the Common Voice. According to
B.A. Ilyish, such a definition would cover under one name all the above cases of active-passive use of the verbal forms.
Blokh M.Y. holds the point of view that the middle Voice uses of the above verbs are cases of neutralizing reduction of the voice opposition.
Lecture 12
The category of mood.
The category of mood is an explicit verbal category expressing the relation of the action denoted by the predicate to reality, as stated by the speaker.
There are 3 moods in E.: 1) Indicative mood (which expresses an action as a real one or planned as real),2) the Imperative mood (which does not expressan action but it expressesa request, an order or inducement ( побуждение )to do it and 3) the Subjunctive Mood, which expresses the hypothetical action (non-real, desirable, presupposed, contradicting the reality).
I.The Indicative mood expresses an action as a real one or planned as real, it has no special form of expression & it includes the Indefinite, Continuous, Perfect & Perfect Continuous verb forms in all temporal spheres and in two voices. H. Sweet calls it a fact mood. Its modal meaning of reality can be considered as a zero category of modality (according to V.V. Vinogradov) compared to more specific modal meanings of the Imperative or the Subjunctive mood forms. According to form & meaning, it is a non-marked, weak member of the opposition.
II.The Imperative mood.
The Imperative mood does not express an action but it expresses a request, order to do it. Therefore, the Imperative mood does not include tense and phase forms A set phrase «have done with it!» (=Хватит . Перестань . Достаточню )can hardly be considered as an opposition to the form «do it!».
Not typical for the Imperative mood are the Continuous forms either. It has no expressed category of person and number though it is usually addressed to the 2nd person.
|
|
|
The Imperative moodis close to the Infinitive in form and meaning. Both do not express an action. The Infinitive names the action, while the Imperative mood calls, induces (побуждает) to the action.
In this connection a number of authors do not single out the Imperative mood.They consider that it does not exist and that the Infinitive is used in its stead.
This is an erroneous point of view due to the existence of the negative forms of the Imperative mood and the Infinitive, viz.: don’t go :: not (to) go. The presence of the analytical form don’t go/be make us include the Imperative mood into the set of other mood forms.
NB! Specific intonation makes the Imperative mood close ( сближает ) to the Interjection. Compare: come here! (the lexical meaning of come is retained here = подойди !) & come, now!(=успокойся, ну хватит, ну перестань).
A vexed problem is made by forms “let us go”( пойдемте , давайте пойдем ). In the above form the verb let is more devoid of lexical meaning than in “let him go’(= пусть идет ), wherethe verb let retains its lexical meaning “to allow”.
Besides,direct address (непосредственное обращение) to those present is more felt in the form “let us go/ do it” unlike (чего нет) in“let him go’.
In addition, there is a close connectionbetween let and go in “let us go”. On the other hand, the oblique case of pronouns us, him in“let us/him go” testifiesto the fact that these are indirect objects to the verb let. And this denotes that let is not an auxiliary verb and consequently “let us go”,“let him go’ are not analytical constructions.
The analysis of the forms “let us/him go” shows that here there is a new shade of meaning as compared to the Imperative mood. In “let us go” there is a new shade of meaning – that of «invitation to the action», while in“let him go” there is a shade of “permission, non-interference” into the action.
(In “let us go” = invitation to the action,
in“let him go” = “permission, non-interference” into the action).
|
|
|
Besides, the form “Let me go” does not always have the meaning of the Imperative mood, e.g. let me do it can be characterized as “offering your services”(=предложение своих услуг).
All the above, helps it to understand that combinations of the kind “let us go”can hardly be considered as full-fledged (=полноправные) analytical forms of the Imperative mood, though they are involved (втягиваются) into the sphere of the Imperative mood.
III. The Subjunctive (and the Oblique) Moods
According to Krylova, Gordon:
In MnE there are 11 models of Oblique moods They can be classified into 4 classes:
1. Should/ would according to persons; ‘d – for all persons.
2. Would for all persons. (e.g. I wish you would do it).The isolation of this system of forms does not take place because in the entire system of the English verb there is a tendency the unification of the auxiliary verb. Here we have specializationin meaning – The form expresses a desirable action in future in relation to another action.
3. Should for all persons.(E.g. It’s cruel I should make him suffer so! + may/might, can/could)
4. Synthetic forms Be, did, were for all persons.
The problem of the number of moods in E. is the most controversial problem. There is one point clear: there are at least 2 moods in E, one of them being the Indicative mood. A lot of opinions are as to the number of the oblique Moods.
1)The polar points of view are those by M. Deutschbein (who found 16 moods in E.). Foreign linguists didn’t clearly distinguish between Subjunctive mood as a system of the forms of the verb and other lexical means of expressing modality.
2) H. Sweet singled out the Conditional mood (should/would see), Permissive mood (may/might see), the Compulsive mood (was/were to see), the Tense mood (=cases of homonymy with the Indicative mood). The last one (unlike the previous ones) was singled out not in accordance with meaning.
3) G. Curme singles out 2 (two) subtypes in the Subjunctive mood – a) Optative Subjunctive (synthetic forms: I knew, I were +& combinations with modal verbs). ) and b) Potential Subjunctive (may come, & other combinations with modal verbs).
4) L.S Barkhudarov (who held that there are no oblique Moods at all in E. on the assumption that the mood auxiliaries should, would still preserve their modal meanings of obligation and volition and may be used in free word combinations like any full-fledged verbs. As for If I knew and If I had known Barkhudarov considers:they are the Past Ind. and the Past Perf. in special contextual environment. – C. 130).
5) Smirnitsky distinguished (4) four Oblique moods in English: the Subjunctive I, the Subjunctive II, the Suppositional Mood, the Conditional Mood.
Presumably ( предположительно , по-видимому), according to A. Smirnitsky, In MnE there are the Indicative mood, the Imperative mood, and 4 Oblique moods: the Subjunctive I, the Subjunctive II, the Suppositional Mood, the Conditional Mood.
6) Khlebnikova I.B. finds five Oblique moods: Conditional Mood (=I should/ He would go), the Subjunctive Mood (were, wrote, which includes all the synthetic mood forms), the Oblique moods which do not constitute one system (e.g. however it might be, for fear that it would cause trouble).
7) G.Vorontsova finds 3 Oblique moods: 1) Optative (Imperative, Desiderative, Subjunctive) 2) Speculative (Dubitative, Irrealis) 3) Presumptative.
Such controversy of views is due to absence of direct correspondence between the form and meaning of the oblique mood forms.
a) One and the same form renders different grammatical meanings of hypothetical action(Cf.
He should come may express
Necessity (необходимость) :
It is necessary that he should come;
it is time he knew/had known
doubt: we feared lest he should come;
compulsion (заставительность ): I order that he should come.
(желательность) Desirability: I wish he knew/ he had known it (long before);
(Гипотетичность для выражения сравнения)Hypotheticity to express сomparison:
He spoke as ifhe knew/ had known
Unreal condition: if he knew/had known.
I insist that you should go(Suppositional); If I knew about it I should go(Conditional); I should go there (modal phrase);
b)One and the same meaning may be rendered by different grammatical forms, e.g.:
Conditional action ( Условное) can be expressed by forms:
If he come/came;
should he come;
Desirable (Желательное) action can be expressed by forms:
If he knew/had known;
That he should come;
He may/might come;
If he were.
It is necessary that you should go there (the Suppositional); It is necessary that you gothere (the Subjunctive I);
Depending upon the criterion the grammarian takes as a basis for his classification of moods, he will arrive at different results. Deutschbein took the criterion of form for his classification of moods, while A. Smirnitsky considered form and meaning of the predicate.
Дата добавления: 2018-10-26; просмотров: 436; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы! |
Мы поможем в написании ваших работ!