Types of syntactic links and forms of their expression. Means of expressing syntactic links and functions

To express the relationship between word forms in a phrase, sentence, certain markers are used - syntactic means.

Syntactic links can be expressed in various ways (means ):

- morphologically,

With the help of word arrangement (word order),

intonation,

With the help of function words (unions, allied words, prepositions, postpositions, particles, relative pronouns),

By way of syntactic foundation .

Morphological mode of formal expression syntactic links(morphosyntactic method) consists in the special use of morphological forms of the word to express syntactic links.

A subordinate relationship can manifest itself in the form of coordination, control, a combination of coordination and control, adjacency.

Coordination - it is a morphological assimilation of one word to another. It consists in repeating one, several or all grammes of one word (dominant word, core) in another (dependent word, adjunct) associated with it, i.e. the dependent word repeats the grammatical forms of the main word: The girl saw a new doll. Girl had seen but (in the form of a verb, a feminine gramme is repeated );doll new wow (in the form of an adjective, the gramme is repeated accusative). Agreement is widely used as a means of expressing defining relationships.

Management consists in the fact that one word causes the appearance of certain grammes in another word associated with it, which do not repeat the grammes of the dominant word, i.e. the dominant component requires the statement of the dependent component in a certain grammatical form: wish friend at happiness; meet a friend but childhood;He loves his country; English He loves his country; German Er liebt seine Heimat; lat. Amat patriam.

The combination of coordination and control takes place in combination of a numeral with a noun: two steps, two doors, two steps, two doors.

In some languages, the link indicator is not in the dependent word (as in Russian and other European languages), but in the dominant word. The main word thus indicates that another word depends on it: pers. ketab e xub"good book" ketab"book" + link indicator -e and adjective xub"good" without any morphological indicators). A noun has an indication that it has an attribute. Wed See also: Azeri. at bash And "horse head" ( at"horse" in them. n. and bash"head" with a connection indicator - And). In Iranian studies and Turkic studies, the term "izafet" is used to designate such constructions.

We can talk about two types of marking - vertex and dependent marking, the essence of which is that the syntactic relationship between two components (words) can be morphologically marked on the main component, the top (head), or maybe on the dependent (dependent). For example, a possessive relation in a genitive construction is marked on a dependent element - a possessor ( house of men s ), and in a construction of another type, called “izafetny”, it is marked on the main element - possessed (Hung. ember haz a, lit. 'man's house-his').

The phenomenon of vertex marking, exotic from the point of view of the Eurocentric approach, was noted by researchers of North American languages. American researcher Johanna Nichols offered to look at the languages of the world from the point of view of how vertex and dependency marking are distributed in them. Some languages show a trend towards sequential vertex or sequential dependency marking. Thus, two Caucasian languages, Chechen and Abkhazian, implement polar strategies in this regard: the first uses exclusively dependent marking, the second uses exclusively vertex marking. Other languages are less consistent and fall between these two extremes.

The propensity for vertex or dependency labeling is a historically stable characteristic of languages. Thus, the languages of North and Central America (Iroquois, Salish, etc.) consistently tend to vertex marking, while the Nakh-Dagestan, Indo-European and Dravidian families tend to dependency marking.

Nichols suggested the predominance of one or another type of marking in certain geographical areas. In particular, the researcher notes that dependency marking is typical for Eurasia, while vertex marking is typical for North America.

A universal syntactic means is word order (arrangement). The expression of syntactic links using word order is manifested:

Like a juxtaposition

And as fixing certain places for certain members of the proposal.

Word order is characterized by a tendency to direct juxtaposition of related constituents, i.e. to their positional proximity, adjacency to each other. Usually they talk about the adjunction of a syntactically dependent word to a syntactically dominant one.

A juxtaposition is a staging next to what is related in meaning: very nice, run fast and others. In the given examples, there is a positional contiguity . Similar cases of matching words: (eng.) a wise man said at last and others. This way of expressing a subordinating relationship is widespread in analytical languages.

Within the framework of juxtaposition, preposition and postposition are distinguished. If the subordinate word is in front of the dominant one, then they say about the preposition: interesting book. If the subordinate word follows the dominant one, then we are dealing with a postposition: to read a book. In English, in combinations like N-N: a round table "round table" And a table round"table circle" noun, standing in preposition to another noun, performs the function of definition (cf. also: cold winter ‘Cold winter’ – winter cold‘winter cold’).

The predominant use of the preposition or postposition of the definition is one of the important typological characteristics of the syntactic structure of different languages.

Syntactic links can be expressed using the syntactic basis : subway builders - subway builders. In compound words, syntactic relations between components are preserved to some extent, but these relations turn out to be, as it were, petrified. Along with compound words, which are the nominative units of the dictionary, there are words that are equivalents of variable syntactic combinations: twenty-five rubles = worth twenty-five rubles; 35 meters long = 35 meters long. These compound words are built on specific model in the very process of utterance, they do not exist "in advance", prior to the act of speech in the memory of the speaker. In terms of structure, these are words, and in terms of function, they are phrases.

In some languages, the syntactic foundation has received wide use. Yes, in German the attributive combination of two or more nouns is used very often: Damenkleid-"women's dress"; Ubergangserscheinungen– "transitional phenomena"; Substantive group- "native group".

Sometimes a whole sentence can be framed as a compound word. Thus, in incorporative languages, the whole sentence is formed like a compound word: first, the meanings of the roots are transmitted, then there are derivational affixes, and then relational affixes. Yu.S. Maslov (1977) gives an example of incorporation from the language of the Nootka Indian tribe:

unikw-ihl-"minih-is-it-a

roots affixes

The meanings of the roots: 1) "fire" or "burn", 2) "house". Affix meanings: 3) pl. hours; 4) diminutiveness; 5) past. vr.; 6) express. incl. Meaning of the whole: "There were some lights in the house."

When incorporating, an integral syntactic construction arises, which externally resembles a word, but internally expresses a complete message, which corresponds to a sentence.

5.5. Sentence as a communicative and mental unit

The basic unit of the syntactic structure of any language is a sentence that has the potential to express a thought and convey a message. Yu.S. Maslov, defining the sentence as the central concept of syntax, emphasizes that the sentence is the main cell in which human thought is formed and expressed and through which verbal communication of people is carried out. A sentence is the smallest communicative unit of a language.

A sentence is a constructive unit of a language. A syntactic construction is any combination of words or a group of words that have a direct connection [Kasevich 1977]. For example, in a sentence My friends congratulated me on my new victory combinations : my friends, friends congratulated, congratulated me, a new victory, congratulated me on the victory are constructs.

The whole sentence is also a construction. And such word combinations , how: me with a victory, me with a new one, friends with a victory etc. are not constructions, because the connection between the words here is not direct, but indirect, for example: congratulated me on my victory(connection of word forms me with victory done through the word congratulated).

According to D.N. Shmelev, a construction is a syntactically meaningful association of words [Shmelev 1976].

Sometimes constructions are called models (structural diagrams), according to which sentences and phrases are built. For example, two sentences with different content: Grandma is sleeping. The sun is shining from the point of view of syntactic modeling are considered identical. They are built according to the same model: N1 - Vf (noun in the nominative case + verb in the personal form, between which a predicative connection is established).

The syntactic structure of a sentence is the set of syntactic links of a given sentence. Structural schemes, syntactic models are models legalized in a given language, according to which sentences are built. Structural diagram is an example, a template.

Scientists note that syntactic models belong to the language only as abstract models, and their specific content with one or another lexical material depends on speech conditions, is a fact of speech, is determined by the content of the statement, the intention of the speaker. However, it should be noted that there are certain rules for filling in the structural models of a sentence with words of certain semantic categories, in other words, not only the schemes themselves belong to the language, but also the rules for their lexical filling. In speech, this model is filled with specific words in accordance with the needs of communication.

The constructive units of a language can be characterized in three aspects:

Formal structural (combat);

semantic;

Pragmatic.

To construct a communicative unit of language - sentences necessary kind connection is a predicative connection . The essence of the predicative connection lies in the fact that the connected components are equal, “none of the parties is either dominant or dependent” [Peshkovsky 1956]. Such a connection is called coordination, interdependence (interdependence).

A predicative connection is found not only between traditional subjects and predicates, but also between other syntactic forms, which are interdependently combined by a predicative connection to express the typical meaning of a sentence. G.A.Zolotova calls the connection between predicatively combined central components of a sentence conjugation. Conjugation is a connection between the components of the predicative minimum of a sentence, in which certain syntactic forms of words are combined to express one or another typical meaning in one of the forms of person, tense, modality, while retaining the ability to realize other meanings of these categories: I'm having fun; It's freezing outside and etc.

Let us take the following as a working definition of a sentence: a sentence is a predicative syntactic unit of a language capable of functioning as a statement, or, according to A.A. Reformatsky, a sentence is a statement containing a predicative syntagma.

When defining a proposal, heterogeneous features are taken into account, so the number of definitions of a proposal is in the hundreds. Some linguists find it hopeless to give a satisfactory definition of a sentence. According to A.A. Potebny, it is necessary to give several definitions of the sentence, to revise these definitions in connection with the development of linguistic science.

An interesting point of view on the nature of the proposal was expressed by L.V. Shcherba. In his opinion, it is ridiculous to ask what the offer is. It is necessary to establish, first of all, what is available in the linguistic reality in this area, and then to give the "observed" phenomena one or another name. In relation to the Russian language and to European languages, we encounter the phenomenon of greater or lesser completeness of statements of various types, characterized by a variety of specific intonations - narration, question, command, emotional statements. The examples are obvious. Further, we observe such statements where something is affirmed or denied relative to something else, in other words, where a logical judgment is expressed with a completely differentiated subject and predicate: My uncle–general; The doctor must be a good diagnostician. These are two-part sentences. According to Shcherba, one or another of our apperceptions of reality at the moment of speech is expressed by means of an utterance, in other words, recognition of one or another segment and subsuming it under those available in a given language. general concepts: It's getting light; Fire! The grass is green on the clearing. Under such circumstances, Shcherba notes, it turns out to be completely unclear what is meant when we say "proposal."

N.D. Arutyunova notes that, like any other language unit, a sentence can be represented by indisputable, classical samples, reference sentences, "one hundred percent sentences" that do not cause a shadow of doubt among linguists, for example: Kids are playing.

The classical sample of the sentence is compared with syntactic constructions that deviate from the classical sample in some respects, and their common and distinctive features are revealed. This sets the properties of the offer. For example, compare the sentence Kids are playing with syntactic constructions: Children playing, children playing, how children play, today children play, and tomorrow ... Based on the comparison, the following features of the proposal are revealed:

1) communicative autonomy (message);

2) intonation of completeness (intonation completeness of a segment of the text);

3) the ability to use in a zero environment;

4) the presence of an absolute tense morpheme, correlating the content of the utterance with the moment of speech;

5) grammatical independence, which implies that the word forms included in the sentence depend on each other in a certain way, but do not depend on the word forms that are outside this sentence;

6) structural integrity, which boils down to the fact that the formal connections that operate within the sentence cease to operate outside of it, where relations of a different kind arise.

©2015-2019 site
All rights belong to their authors. This site does not claim authorship, but provides free use.
Page creation date: 2016-02-16

In phrases, sentences and texts, words (more precisely, word forms) with their signifiers and signifiers are used as building material. Performing tasks such as connecting words in speech, designing sentences and texts (expanded statements) as integral formations, dividing the text into sentences, and sentences into their components (constituents), distinguishing sentences and statements of different communicative types, expressing the syntactic functions distinguished in the sentence constituents and their syntactically dominant or subordinate status, falls to the share formal syntactic means. In most cases, several formal indicators are used simultaneously (for example, intonation indicator + linear indicator, or arrangement).

The most universal syntactic means is intonation. Formally, it is the presence of intonation that distinguishes the sentence-statement and the sounding text as communicative units from the phrase. It ensures the unity of communicative formations with all its components (primarily melodic and dynamic components). Phrasal intonation can highlight sentences in a text and syntagmas in a sentence, ensure the integration of a phrase and syntagma around stressed words, highlight the most important semantic links of a sentence and syntagma, delimit the topic and rheme of an utterance. Intonation means can help distinguish between interrogative and declarative, exclamatory and non-exclamatory sentences, signal the presence of enumerative constructions, etc.

The other most versatile syntactic device is word order (their arrangement), and in more complex structures and order of proposals. The word order in sentences is characterized by a tendency to direct juxtaposition of related constituents, i.e. their positional proximity, adjoining to each other. (Here we mean positional adjacency in general, regardless of whether the given syntactic connection is expressed or not expressed morphologically. In the Russian grammatical tradition, adjunction as a morphologically unmarked syntactic connection is delimited from morphologically marked agreement and control, although in reality the adjunction of a dependent word to a dominant is not excluded in the case of a syntactic connection such as agreement and control.) Usually they talk about the adjunction of a syntactically dependent word to a syntactically dominant one (for example, about the adjunction of a definition to a noun being defined: English Blue eyes "blue eyes"; Kalm. Khureh Mahla"lamb hat"; Chukot. ergatyk treeg'e"tomorrow I will come").

If the subordinate word is in front of the dominant one, then they speak of preposition (regressive word order: interesting lecture). If the subordinate word follows the dominant one, then we are dealing with a postposition (progressive word order: read text). The predominant use of the preposition or postposition of the definition is one of the important typological characteristics of the syntactic structure of different languages. Thus, the preposition of the definition dominates in the Slavic and Germanic languages, the postposition of the definition is feature Romance languages.

Adjacency as a contact method of syntactic connection can be resisted remote location syntactically related words. Yes, in it. In a sentence with several objects, the one that is more closely related to the verb (usually the object of the addressee) can be separated from it by other objects. Sometimes they try to explain such distancing by the fact that in Proto-Indo-European there could be a tendency to the final position of the verb, to which, accordingly, a more closely related word adjoined.

If a given dominant word has several subordinate words, one of the dependent words can, together with the dominant word, form frame structure, closing other dependent words. Such a frame is formed, for example, in English. language article and noun: A new book"new book" (in both cases).

The order of words in a sentence can be free and fixed. In typological studies of languages, the relative position of the subject (S), verb (V) and object (O) is taken as the basis. There are 6 options: SVO, SOV, VOS, OSV, VSO, OVS.

Some languages tend to have a free word order. For example, Russian and latin languages, which have rich possibilities for morphological marking of syntactic functions (members of a sentence). Wed: Students take an exam.- Students take the exam.- Students take an exam. - - Pass the exam students.- The students take the exam.- Students take the exam. Other languages, especially those where syntactic functions are not morphologically marked, tend to have a fixed word order. So, in Spanish language out of 6 possible options are implemented 4, and in fr. only two. German word order. sentences are more strict than in Russian. language. In English the sentence is stricter than in it., but freer than in fr.

In principle, the arrangement of words should correspond to the movement of thought (the principle of iconicity of linguistic signs). In this case, one speaks of an objective word order, which performs a kind of iconic function (first, what is initial in the description of this state of affairs is called). But deviations from the standard word order for a given language are allowed:

a) with inversion, due to the need to distinguish between communicative types of sentences. Yes, in it. In a declarative sentence, direct word order is common, with the subject in the initial position (Er kommt morgen "He will come tomorrow"), while in an interrogative sentence ( general question) verbal predicate precedes the subject (Kommt er morgen? "Will he come tomorrow?");

b) when putting forward in the initial position a word that serves to link the sentence with the pretext (Now we are studying an introduction to theoretical linguistics. Lectures for this course are given by Professor N);

c) when placing the thematizable in the initial position, i.e. used as a topic, a component of an utterance (for example, the topic of an utterance can be an indication of the actor: My grandson will go to Moscow tomorrow, destination indication: My grandson will go to Moscow tomorrow, etc.);

d) when the speaker expresses his emotions (in this case, an unusual, emphatic arrangement of words is supported by emphatic stress: THIS teacher I do not want to take the exam);

e) if necessary, express an additional value (for example, an approximation value: two hours- two hours).

Close to positional adjacency syntactic structure, used to create incorporative structures in which roots (or bases) freely connect. Corporate complexes can serve:

to express attributive relationships (Koryak, echvy-in "shshta"sharp knife" kytpylv "yoty-v" achata"steel knife");

to express the relationship between an action and its object or circumstance (Chukot. Tumg-yt copra-ntyvat-ghat"Comrades have set nets", letters, "set nets", Myt-vinvy-ekvet-yrkyn"Let's go secretly");

to build a sentence as a whole (Lang. Nootka unikw-ihl-‘minih-‘is-it-a"There were several lights in the house", lit.

Further, as a formal way of expressing syntactic relations and functions, the use of official, words(unions and allied words, particles, prepositions and postpositions, connectives).

Morphological markers are widely used in affixal languages. They signal the presence of control, in which the syntactically dominant word predetermines the presence in the structure of the word forms of the dependent word of one or another gramme (for example, the gramme of one of the indirect cases), and agreement, in which one or more grammes of the word form of the dominant word are repeated in the structure of the word form of the dependent word, those. there is a kind of assimilation of one gramme complex to another (for example, in the Russian adjective, when it is used attributively, its word form contains grammes of case, number, and also, in the case of singular, and gender: difficult exam). In languages that have a concordant grammatical category of nominal classes of a noun, indicators of a certain class appear in syntactically related words: lang. Lingala Lo-lenge lo-ye l-a lo-beki lo-nalo-ko lo-zali lo-lamu "The shape of this pot of that one is good."

It is possible to simultaneously use control indicators and coordination indicators: five tables(here the connections are multidirectional: the numeral controls the noun and itself at the same time agrees with it); cargo. Deda shvils zrdis "The mother (abs. n.) of the son (Dat. n.) raises (nast, temp.)" (here the verb agrees with the subject (postfix -5) and simultaneously governs the noun, requiring its use in dat. n. ).

The syntactic link indicator usually appears in the word form of the dependent word. But it can, however, characterize the word form of the dominant word.

In Arabic studies (and under its influence in the descriptions of the Turkic and Iranian languages), the presence of the so-called isafet: Persian. Ketabe xub" good book", lit. ketab "book" + -e "indicator of attributive connection" + xub "good" (without any morphological indicators) 1 ; at bashi"horse + head + link indicator".

Unlike izafet, idafa is a connection of two nouns - - dominant and dependent, in which the leading component with its so-called conjugate form, which has neither the necessary endings nor the definite article, already thereby signals the presence of a component dependent on it: Arab, jaamuusatu-ya-fallahi"peasant's buffalo".

Morphological indicators can mark the syntactic functions of nouns (subject, objects, predicative, definition, circumstances), adjectives (definition, predicative), verb (predicate), etc.

The most important means of expressing the relationship between the components of the phrase and the members of the sentence are:

1) word form, i.e. with the help of the ending, a connection is made between words both in a phrase and in a sentence: solve a problem, solve a problem, solve a problem; passion for sports, devotion to the motherland, second wind;

2) official words:

but) prepositions(together with the form of the word): books to read, left home, fight for primacy, a house with columns, talk about a trip;

b) unions(only in the offer): book and notebook, autumn or winter, read and wrote;

3) word order(in a sentence); compare: early autumn(attribute relations) – autumn early(predicative relations); five kilometers(exact number designation) – five kilometers(expressing an approximate amount); Sick brother is back(definition - adjective indicates a sign) - Brother returned sick(the adjective indicates the state and is part of the predicate);

4) intonation(only in the offer): It will rain, let's go to the forest(the intonation of the enumeration indicates the relationship of homogeneity); It will rain - let's go to the forest(conditional intonation indicates a conditional or temporary relationship). Come home and change And When you get home, change your clothes; She danced well. Execution cannot be pardoned; The forest drops its crimson dress.

The doctrine of the phrase in Russian syntactic science

The problem of phrases has long attracted the attention of Russian linguists. In the first grammatical works, the main content of syntax was the doctrine of "word composition", i.e. about the combination of words in a sentence. Already in the "Russian Grammar" A.Kh. Vostokova (1831) is given quite detailed description word-combination systems of the Russian language. However, in the works of N.I. Grecha, G.P. Pavsky, F.I. Buslaeva, K.S. Aksakova, N.P. Nekrasov, N.I. Davydov's problem of phrases is relegated to the background, since in the middle of the 19th century. the main subject of syntax was the sentence.

Interest in the problem of word combinations revived at the end of the 19th century, and the problem itself became central in the linguistic system of F.F. Fortunatov and his students. Fortunatov considered syntax to be the doctrine of the phrase, and he considered the sentence as one of the types of the phrase. These views are reflected in the work of A.M. Peshkovsky "Russian syntax in scientific coverage" (1914; 7th ed. - 1956), in the book by M.N. Peterson "Essay on the Syntax of the Russian Language" (1923).

In a number of textbooks and teaching aids for higher and secondary schools, the phrase began to be considered as a pair of words related in meaning and grammatically, separated from the sentence.

Of interest is the interpretation of the phrase A.A. Shakhmatov (“The Syntax of the Russian Language”, 1941, p. 274): “ phrase such a combination of words is called, which forms a grammatical unity, revealed by the dependence of some of these words on others. According to Shakhmatov, the syntax of phrases deals mainly with the secondary members of the sentence in their relation to the main members or in mutual relation to each other, while the syntax of the sentence deals with the main members of the sentence in their relation to the sentence or in mutual relation to each other. The sentence is also a phrase, but the phrase is complete, and the rest of the phrases are characterized as incomplete. Phrases fall into two types: independent in which the dominant word appears in not dependent form(subject of a two-part sentence or main member one-part sentence plus a grammatically related word), and dependent in which the dominant word appears in a dependent form (all other phrases). As these arguments of Shakhmatov show, word combinations are distinguished by him from the sentence. The combination of the subject with the predicate is not included in the number of pairs that form the phrase, so the grammatical relationship between both main members is studied in the syntax of the sentence.

The question of whether to consider the combination of the subject with the predicate as a phrase in the terminological understanding of this word is fundamental, since it is connected with the distinction between the concepts of a sentence and a phrase: with a positive solution to the question, i.e. recognizing the existence of predicative phrases, the sentence may turn out to be a special case of the phrase or, what is the same, the phrase itself may be a sentence; on the contrary, with a negative solution to the issue, i.e. non-recognition of the existence of predicative phrases, a sharp line is established between the sentence and the phrase.

The issue of subdividing phrases into subordinating (generally recognized type of phrases) and coordinating (combinations of homogeneous members of a sentence) is also controversial. We find recognition of the second type in many authors (for example, in A.M. Peshkovsky), but other researchers separate groups of homogeneous members from phrases (for example, V.V. Vinogradov).

Thus, the fundamental questions of the theory of phrases are the following: 1) does the phrase exist outside the sentence, in which it enters as a constructive element along with a separate word, or is the phrase isolated from the finished sentence; 2) whether there are "predicative phrases", i.e. whether the phrase forms a pair consisting of a subject and a predicate; 3) whether there are “composing phrases”, i.e. whether the phrase forms a group of homogeneous members (the so-called open rows, open combinations). It is easy to see that the solution of the last two questions depends on the solution of the first, since both predicative relations and combinations of homogeneous terms exist only in the composition of a sentence.

A fundamentally new solution to the problem under consideration as a whole is given by V.V. Vinogradov. In the book "Russian language" (1972, p. 12) he writes: " phrase is a complicated naming. It has the same nominative function as the word. It, like a word, can have a whole system of forms. In the field of vocabulary, this concept corresponds to the concept of phraseological unit language."

In connection with the analysis of the syntactic system of A.M. Peshkovsky acad. Vinogradov writes: “... The idea suggested by A.M. Peshkovsky acad. F.F. Fortunatov, that the concept of a sentence can be derived from the concept of a phrase. A phrase and a sentence are concepts of different semantic series and different stylistic planes ... A sentence is not at all a kind of phrase, since there are also sentence words. But even in its inner essence, in its constructive features, it is not directly derivable from the phrase. The phrase ... as well as the word, is construction material used in the process of linguistic communication. The sentence is a work of this material, containing a message about reality” (see: Idealistic foundations of the syntactic system of Prof. A.M. Peshkovsky, its eclecticism and internal contradictions / / Questions of syntax of the modern Russian language. 1950. P. 38).

As it is clear from the above quotation, Acad. Vinogradov strictly distinguishes between the concept of a sentence and the concept of a phrase. The basis for this is the presence of special features for each of these concepts: a sentence is a unit of message, a communicative unit, and a phrase is a unit of naming, designation. The sentence contains a complete content with the appropriate intonation, is characterized by the presence of the category of modality, while the phrase does not have these features. In the phrase there are only subordinating relations (see below), and in the sentence, along with them, there are also coordinating, explanatory, connecting relations.

As for the relationship between a phrase and a word, they are brought closer by the function they perform, and phrases, like words, have inflection forms that express the connection of this phrase with other words or phrases in a sentence, for example: brother's book, brother's book, brother's book etc. (the core word changes); old house, old house, old house etc. (both members of the phrase have the same forms of inflection). Word combinations can and should be studied not only as part of a sentence as its structural elements, but also outside of it as lexico-semantic units formed according to the laws of a given language. At the same time, there is a significant difference between the phrase and the word: the elements of the phrase (word) are designed separately, and the elements of the word (morpheme) are merged together (cf .: snow retention - snow retention ).

The following follows from what has been said: 1) phrases are not the result of splitting the sentence into parts - a pair of words interconnected by subordinating relations, but along with individual words they are part of the sentence as its structural elements, performing the lexical-semantic function of the complex naming of objects and phenomena; much less often, as a result of the interaction between phrases and sentences, separate types of phrases are formed in the latter, which, being isolated from the sentence, acquire a nominative meaning; 2) the number of phrases does not include pairs formed by the subject and the predicate, since here there are relations that arise only in the sentence (predicative relations); 3) do not form phrases as well as constructions related by so-called semi-predicative relations, i.e. a separate turnover and the word to which it refers; 4) a group of homogeneous members (coordinative combination) does not form phrases, since it is not a complex name for phenomena of objective reality. True, paired combinations of words such as father and mother (parents), husband and wife (spouses), day and night (day), etc., forming the so-called closed combinations, the components of which are connected by connecting (less often opposing) unions, are used in nominative function and thus enter the category of phrases.

To express the relationship between word forms in a phrase, sentence, certain markers are used - syntactic means.

Syntactic links can be expressed in various ways (means ): morphologically, with the help of word arrangement (word order), intonationally, with the help of auxiliary words (conjunctions, allied words, prepositions, postpositions, particles, relative pronouns), by the method of syntactic basic construction .

The morphological method of formal expression of syntactic relations (morphosyntactic method) consists in the special use of morphological forms of a word to express syntactic relations.

A subordinate relationship can manifest itself in the form of coordination, control, a combination of coordination and control, adjacency.

Coordination - it is a morphological assimilation of one word to another. It consists in repeating one, several or all grammes of one word (dominant word, core) in another (dependent word, adjunct) associated with it, i.e. the dependent word repeats the grammatical forms of the main word: The girl saw a new doll. Girl had seen but (in the form of a verb, a feminine gramme is repeated );doll new wow (in the form of an adjective, the gramme of the accusative case is repeated). Agreement is widely used as a means of expressing defining relationships.

A special use of agreement is observed when replacing the word-name with the word-substitute, for example: built House. He soon to be populated.

Control consists in the fact that one word causes the appearance of certain grammes in another word associated with it, which do not repeat the gramme of the dominant word, i.e. the dominant component requires the statement of the dependent component in a certain grammatical form: wish friend at happiness; meet a friend but childhood;He loves his country; English He loves his country; German Er liebt seine Heimat; lat. Amat patriam.

The combination of coordination and control takes place in combination of a numeral with a noun: two steps, two doors, two steps, two doors.

In some languages, the link indicator is not in the dependent word, but in the dominant word. The main word thus indicates that another word depends on it: pers. ketab e xub"good book" ketab"book" + link indicator -e and adjective xub"good" without any morphological indicators). A noun has an indication that it has an attribute. Wed See also: Azeri. at bash And "horse head" ( at"horse" in them. n. and bash"head" with a connection indicator - And); Turkish turk dili'Turkish language'. In Iranian studies and Turkic studies, the term "izafet" is used to designate such constructions.

There are two types of labeling - vertex and dependency marking, the essence of which lies in the fact that the syntactic relationship between two components (words) can be morphologically marked on the main component, the top (head), or maybe on the dependent (dependent). For example, a possessive relation in a genitive construction is marked on a dependent element - a possessor ( house of men s ), and in a construction of another type, called “izafetny”, it is marked on the main element - possessed (Hung. ember haz a, lit. 'man's house-his').

The propensity for vertex or dependency labeling is a historically stable characteristic of languages. Thus, the languages of North and Central America (Iroquois, Mayan, Salish, etc.) consistently tend to vertex marking, while the Nakh-Dagestan, Indo-European and Dravidian families tend to dependency marking.

A universal syntactic means is word order (arrangement). The expression of syntactic links with the help of word order appears: 1) as a juxtaposition and 2) as the assignment of certain places to certain members of the sentence.

juxtaposition- this is a setting next to what is connected in meaning: very nice, run fast etc. In the above examples, there is a positional abutment. Similar cases of matching words: (eng.) a wise man said at last and others. This way of expressing a subordinating relationship is widespread in analytical languages.

Within the framework of the juxtaposition, one distinguishes preposition and postposition. If the subordinate word is in front of the dominant one, then they say about the preposition: interesting book. If the subordinate word follows the dominant one, then we are dealing with a postposition: to read a book. Two hundred people(preposition of the numeral), two hundred people(postposition of the numeral). In English, in combinations like N-N: a round table"round table" and a table round"table circle" noun, standing in preposition to another noun, performs the function of definition (cf. also: cold winter'Cold winter' - winter cold‘winter cold’).

The predominant use of the preposition or postposition of the definition is one of the important typological characteristics of the syntactic structure of different languages.

Syntax links can be expressed using syntactic foundation: subway builders - subway builders. In compound words, syntactic relations between components are preserved to some extent, but these relations turn out to be, as it were, petrified. Along with compound words, which are the nominative units of the dictionary, there are words that are equivalents of variable syntactic combinations: twenty-five rubles = worth twenty-five rubles; 35 meters long = 35 meters long. These compound words are built according to a certain model in the very process of utterance; they do not exist "in advance", before the act of speech in the memory of the speaker. In terms of structure, these are words, and in terms of function, they are phrases.

Syntactic basic construction is rarely used in Russian. It has become widespread in some languages. So, in German, the attributive combination of two or more nouns is used very often: Damenkleid-"women's dress"; Ubergangserscheinungen– "transitional phenomena"; Substantive group- "native group".

The syntactic base structure is used to express various syntactic relationships, for example, to express the relationship between an action and an object. Sometimes a whole sentence can be framed as a compound word. Thus, in incorporative languages, the whole sentence is formed like a compound word: first, the meanings of the roots are transmitted, then there are derivational affixes, and then relational affixes. Yu.S. Maslov (1977) gives an example of incorporation from the language of the Nootka Indian tribe:

unikw-ihl-"minih-is-it-a

roots affixes

This is a special form of rendering a complete utterance. The parts of such a complex that have merged into one whole retain their lexical meaning, which they realize in other combinations. When incorporating, an integral syntactic construction arises, which externally resembles a word, but internally expresses a complete message, which corresponds to a sentence.

Let's give examples of incorporation.

Amerindian Tsimshian:

Tyukligilod'epdalot‘He started to hide it down somewhere’

t- the subject of the action;

yuk- indicator of the beginning of action;

league is an indicator of direction uncertainty;

lod'ep- downward direction indicator;

dal-' poking, hiding

ot- object index (this).

Chukchi language:

Tymyngyntorkyn‘I take out my hands’

you -'I'

myngy -'arms'

nto -'output'

rkyn -‘doing’

Incorporative complexes are not given in advance in the language, are not reproduced in ready-made, but are constructed in the process of speech. The number and order of incorporated stems is variable and is determined each time by the context of speech. There are no special indicators of the connection between the components of the word-sentence. The incorporating languages include many North American Indian languages, as well as the Chukotka-Kamchatka languages.

7. Sentence as a constructive unit of language

Syntactic construction- this is any combination of words or a group of words that have a direct connection [Kasevich 1977]. For example, in a sentence My friends congratulated me on my new victory combinations : my friends, friends congratulated, congratulated me, a new victory, congratulated me on the victory are constructs. The whole sentence is also a construction. And such word combinations , how: me with a victory, me with a new one, friends with a victory etc. are not constructions, because the connection between the words here is not direct, but indirect, for example: congratulated me on my victory(connection of word forms me with victory done through the word congratulated).

According to D.N. Shmelev, a construction is a syntactically meaningful association of words [Shmelev 1976].

Sometimes structures are called models(block diagrams) on which sentences and phrases are built. For example, two sentences that are completely different in content: Grandma is sleeping. The sun is shining from the point of view of syntactic modeling are considered identical. They are built according to the same model: N1 - Vf (noun in the nominative case + verb in the personal form, between which a predicative connection is established).

The constructive units of a language can be characterized in three aspects:

Formal structural (combat);

semantic;

Pragmatic.

To construct a communicative unit of a language - a sentence, the necessary type of connection is predictive connection. The essence of the predicative connection lies in the fact that the connected components are equal, “none of the parties is either dominant or dependent” [Peshkovsky 1956]. Such a connection is called coordination, interdependence (interdependence).

A predicative connection is found not only between traditional subjects and predicates, but also between other syntactic forms, which are interdependently combined by a predicative connection to express the typical meaning of a sentence. G.A. Zolotova calls the connection between predicatively combined central components of the sentence conjugation. Conjugation is a connection between the components of the predicative minimum of a sentence, in which certain syntactic forms of words are combined to express one or another typical meaning in one of the forms of person, tense, modality, while retaining the ability to realize other meanings of these categories: I'm having fun; It's freezing outside and etc.

As a working definition of a sentence, we will accept the following: a sentence is a predicative syntactic unit of a language capable of functioning as a statement, or, according to A.A. Reformatsky, a sentence is a statement containing a predicative syntagma.

When defining a proposal, heterogeneous features are taken into account, so the number of definitions of a proposal is in the hundreds. Some linguists find it hopeless to give a satisfactory definition of a sentence. A.A. Potebnya believed that it was necessary to give several definitions of the sentence, to revise these definitions in connection with the development of linguistic science.

An interesting point of view on the nature of the proposal was expressed by L.V. Shcherba. In his opinion, it is ridiculous to ask: "What is a proposal?" It is necessary to establish, first of all, what is available in the linguistic reality in this area, and then to give the "observed" phenomena one or another name. In relation to the Russian language and to European languages, we encounter the phenomenon of greater or lesser completeness of statements of various types, characterized by a variety of specific intonations - narration, question, command, emotional statements. The examples are obvious. Further, we observe such statements where something is affirmed or denied relative to something else, in other words, where a logical judgment is expressed with a completely differentiated subject and predicate: My uncle–general; The doctor must be a good diagnostician. These are two-part sentences. According to Shcherba, one or another of our apperceptions of reality at the moment of speech is expressed by means of an utterance, in other words, recognition of one or another segment and subsuming it under the general concepts available in a given language: It's getting light; Fire! The grass is green on the clearing. Under such circumstances, Shcherba notes, it turns out to be completely unclear what is meant when we say "proposal."

1) communicative autonomy (message);

2) intonation of completeness (intonation completeness of a segment of the text);

3) the ability to use in a zero environment;

4) the presence of an absolute tense morpheme, correlating the content of the utterance with the moment of speech;

5) grammatical independence, which implies that the word forms included in the sentence depend on each other in a certain way, but do not depend on the word forms that are outside this sentence;

6) structural integrity, which boils down to the fact that the formal connections that operate within the sentence cease to operate outside of it, where relations of a different kind arise.

N.Yu. Shvedova [LES 1990] gives the following definition of a simple sentence: in a narrow, proper grammatical sense, a simple sentence is such a unit of a message that, being formed according to a grammatical pattern specially designed for this, has the meaning of predicativity (i.e. a category that, with a whole complex of formal syntactic means, correlates the message with one or another definite or indefinite temporal plan of reality) and its own semantic structure, finds them in the system of formal changes and has a certain communicative task, expressed by intonation and word order.

The above definition emphasizes the following properties of the proposal: 1) the presence of a certain construction model; 2) semantic structure; 3) predicativity; 4) communication; 5) modalities.

Communicative independence is a feature that is mandatory for any sentence and is not inherent in non-sentences - words, morphemes, etc.

The sentence expresses a separate (not necessarily complete) thought, i.e. one that is formally separated from thoughts adjacent to it and can be independently transmitted in one act of communication: This building–new. But a sentence can be not only a means of expressing thoughts, but also a means of expressing other acts of consciousness, for example, emotional, volitional: Go home!

The proposal is a multifaceted phenomenon. In syntactic science, several aspects of considering a sentence are distinguished: constructive, semantic, functional, etc.

8. Predicativity. Modality

That which makes a sentence a sentence, i.e. a complete, separate part of the text, grammatically and intonationally independent of adjacent parts of the text, is predicativity.

There are different approaches of linguists to the definition of the concept of predicativity. The academic "Grammar of the Russian Language" (1960) notes that "the meaning and purpose of the general category of predicativity that forms a sentence is to refer the content of the sentence to reality.

Predicativity as a logical-syntactic category is mostly implicit, more precisely, it does not have a specific set of grammatical forms. At the same time, it should be borne in mind that the implicitly expressed meaning follows from what is expressed explicitly, and therefore is covered by the broad concept of formal expression [Bondarko 1972]. The potential predicativity of words combined in a sentence largely depends on their lexico-semantic affiliation and their position, place in relation to other components of the sentence (for example, isolations have predicativity). Constructs that are specifically designed to be messages have the category of predicativity. The presence of the category of predicativity is the most important feature of a simple sentence as an independent grammatical (syntactic) category.

Some constructions themselves already have the category of predicativity, which is expressed in them by special grammatical means: Children draw. And some constructions only under certain conditions become statements, acquire predicativity. In such constructions, intonation plays an important role in the design of predicativity: Still would! The less properties of predicativity the construction itself has, as such, the more significant is the role of intonation in its design as a predicatively significant unit.

It is advisable to distinguish between predicativity as a certain grammatical arrangement of a construction and predicativity as a property acquired by a construction to be an intonationally complete statement [Shmelev 1976]. Intonation design is not just a kind of voicing of the formula, but a component of the formula itself. Intonation is a grammatical means of formulating a sentence and acts as one of the constant characteristic features of a sentence. It is in this sign - the presence of intonation of the message - that one of the fundamental differences between a sentence and a phrase lies. Intonation depends on the context, word order and vocabulary of the utterance. A sentence exists as a unity of its composition, intonation and word order.

The communicative significance of many constructions can vary depending on their intonational articulation. However, it is not entirely reasonable to consider the intonation factor as relating only to the "communicative plan" of the utterance [Shmelev 1976]. In some cases, intonation can change the main purpose of the design. . Books–in the closet; The books in the closet already seemed uninteresting to him.

One of the syntactic categories of a sentence is modality. This is a universal language category, which finds expression in one way or another in all known languages. Modality determines the modal characteristic of the predicative axis of the sentence. Modality expresses the relation of the content of the statement (more precisely, the predicative sign) to reality from the point of view of the speaker.

It is customary to distinguish between two main types of modality - objective and subjective. Objective modality - the main modal meaning of the sentence is a necessary constructive feature of each sentence.

The scope of objective modality coincides with the scope of one of the morphological inflectional categories of the verb - mood. Modality is often expressed in terms of inclination If he had arrived on time, we would have had time to do everything. In addition to the verbal category of mood, modality can be expressed modal verbs, in service words ( would, let, let, yes, so that), word order, intonation.

Subjective modality includes meanings that correspond to different relationships between speaker, addressee and utterance, i.e. not the reported situation, but the situation of speech. Various modal particles are widely used for this purpose. Well, how are you going to do it?

The modality of a sentence is the subjective-objective relation of the content of the statement to reality (reality, hypotheticality, desirability, etc.) from the point of view of the speaker.

Ways of Expressing Syntactic Relations

Ways of expressing relationships between words in a phrase and in a sentence. These include:

1) the form of the word. With the help of the ending, a connection is drawn up and relations between the components of the phrase and between the members of the sentence are expressed. Making a plan, devotion to duty, passion for music, useful book, second generation, solve a problem worthy of a reward;

2) service words:

a) prepositions (together with the form of the word a). A non-smoking car, a trip out of town, a picture book, dreams of the future;

b) unions (only in a sentence). Pencil and pen, spring or summer;

3) word order (only in proposed and and) „ An interesting book (attributive relations) - an interesting book (predicative relations). ten people (expression the exact amount) - ten people (an expression of an approximate number).

Tired children returned (the adjective definition indicates a sign) - the children returned tired (the adjective indicates a state and is part of the predicate);

4) intonation (only in a sentence). You will come home, change your clothes (the intonation of the enumeration indicates a relationship of homogeneity). You will come home - you will change clothes (the intonation of conditionality indicates a temporary relationship).

Dictionary-reference book of linguistic terms. Ed. 2nd. - M.: Enlightenment. Rosenthal D. E., Telenkova M. A.. 1976 .

See what "ways of expressing syntactic relations" are in other dictionaries:

The term "nexus" has other meanings. Nexus and junction in linguistics: two possible correlations between the directions of semantic and syntactic valences. A nexus is a situation of correspondence between semantic and active ... ... Wikipedia

Agreement is one of the three main types of subordinating syntactic connection (along with control and adjacency). It consists in likening the dependent component to the dominant one in similar grammatical categories(in a way, ... ... Wikipedia

Jabbar Manaf oglu Mammadov (Azerbaijani Cabbar Manaf oğlu Məmmədov) is an Azerbaijani scientist, Doctor of Philosophy. Author of several theories. Nominee for a special presidential scholarship "For valuable contributions to Azerbaijan science and education." ... ... Wikipedia

This term has other meanings, see Congruence. Congruence in linguistics: the morphological dependence of an anaphoric pronoun on its antecedent (nominal phrase), which takes place in the absence of a syntactic ... ... Wikipedia

GRAMMAR- (from the Greek gramma - a written sign, line, line). 1. A system of rules objectively operating in the language for changing words, forming word forms and combining words into phrases and sentences. 2. A section of linguistics containing the doctrine of forms ... ... A new dictionary of methodological terms and concepts (theory and practice of teaching languages)

Syntax- (from the Greek σύνταξις construction, order) 1) means and rules for creating speech units characteristic of specific languages; 2) a section of grammar that studies the processes of speech generation: compatibility and order of words within a sentence, and ... ...

Linguistics, linguistics, the science of Language. The object of linguistics is the structure, functioning, and historical development of language, language in the entire scope of its properties and functions. However, as a direct subject of Ya. in different eras were put forward ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia

Typology- linguistic (from the Greek τύπος imprint, form, pattern and λόγος word, teaching) comparative study of the structural and functional properties of languages, regardless of the nature of the genetic relationship between them. Typology is one of two main ... ... Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary

orthology- units Section of linguistics, the subject of which is the description of the theory of correct literary speech. The concept of associated with mastering the norms of oral and written forms literary language, i.e. with the study of the normative component of the culture of speech. ... ... Educational dictionary of stylistic terms

GOST R 52292-2004: Information technology. Electronic information exchange. Terms and Definitions- Terminology GOST R 52292 2004: Information technology. Electronic information exchange. Terms and definitions original document: algorithm ... ... Dictionary-reference book of terms of normative and technical documentation