The central grammatical unit of syntax is the simple sentence. This is determined by the fact that a simple sentence is an elementary unit intended for the transmission of relatively complete information, which has such linguistic properties that make it possible to attribute what is reported to one or another time plan. In addition, a simple sentence is the main unit involved in the formation of a complex sentence, as well as any extended text. A simple sentence, further, is the construction in which, first of all, the phrase and the form of the word find their constructive application.
A simple sentence as a syntactic unit has its own grammatical characteristics. It is formed according to an abstract grammatical pattern specially designed for this (the structural scheme of a simple sentence, it has its own linguistic meanings, formal characteristics, intonation pattern, as well as the ability to modify - both strictly formal and those associated with the execution of the same sentence various communicative tasks.A simple sentence has a branched circle of functions.All this forms a special area of syntax - the syntax of a simple sentence.
In speech, in the process of communication, a simple sentence functions along with such reporting units that are not grammatical sentences, i.e., do not have all those syntactic characteristics that are listed in the previous paragraph. Under certain conditions of the context or situation, this or that information can be conveyed by an appropriately intonation-shaped individual word form or a combination of word forms, a particle, an interjection, even a conjunction or a preposition (in colloquial speech: Finally!; Ege!; Where from?; - Where are the skis , behind the closet? - Not for, but on). Such an intonation-shaped reporting unit can be called an utterance.
The statement in any case informs about something or contains a question. However, it does not have a grammatical design specifically designed for a message unit, and, consequently, the whole complex of corresponding grammatical characteristics. Such a special design and such a set of characteristics have only those reporting units that are above called sentences.
Note. The term "statement" can be used in a broad or narrow sense. In the broad sense of the word, an utterance is any reporting unit - both a grammatically formed sentence, and (with the appropriate intonational design) a unit that is not a grammatical sentence. In the narrow sense of the word, an utterance is a reporting unit that is not a grammatical sentence (see examples in the previous paragraph). In "Russian Grammar" the term "sentence" is retained for reporting units specially designed by the language to convey relatively complete information and having the grammatical characteristics listed above; in relation to statements that do not have such special grammatical characteristics, the term "sentence" is not used.
The linguistic characteristics of statements that are not grammatical sentences are established on the basis of comparison with the characteristics of the sentence. Such statements have a number of essential features that bring them closer to the proposal; this is a function of a relatively complete message, intonation formality, the ability to spread (though more limited than that of a sentence), the ability to include indicators of a subjective attitude (particles, interjections), the ability to participate in the formation of a complex sentence and more complex, detailed fragments text.
On the other hand, such utterances differ from the sentence by the absence of a special abstract grammatical pattern behind them, the absence of form change (the utterance is able to take into its composition individual indicators of objective-modal meanings, but it does not have a system of forms characteristic of a simple sentence), the absence of regular opportunities for introducing copulas or semi-significant verbs; the structure of the linguistic meaning of the non-sentence utterance does not coincide with the structure of the linguistic meaning of the sentence.
Simple sentences (often in their incomplete implementations) in speech are organized in certain sequences, i.e., in a text. The elementary unit representing such a sequence is a complex sentence. A complex sentence is a holistic syntactic construction in which, according to grammatical rules, two simple sentences are connected, connected with each other by syntactically expressed relations.
This connection is formalized by unions, allied words or allied particles - in combination with intonation, often also with the support of vocabulary. Different types of compound sentences, their formal organization and meanings, their systemic relationships with constructions of another grammatical organization constitute the domain of the syntax of a complex sentence. Close to this area is also the area of syntax, which covers the simplest non-union fragments of the text, which, by the nature of the relationship of their parts, are correlative with one or another type of complex sentence.
Russian grammar.
46. Sentence as the main communicative and structural unit of syntax: communicativeness, predicativity and modality of the sentence.
The sentence as a unit of syntax. The sentence in modern linguistics is considered as the basic unit of syntax, opposing it to the word and phrase in form, meaning and function. Underoffer in the most general sense, they understand any message about something in oral or written form, which has relative independence. Formally, this independence is manifested in the ability of a sentence to be separated from its own kind by pauses of any duration in oral speech, in written speech - by appropriate punctuation marks.
One of the main features of the proposal is considered to be communicative character , that is, the ability to serve as the main means of communication and expression of thought. Neither phonemes, nor morphemes, nor even individual words and phrases are used as communicative units on their own, outside the sentence. Only the sentence performs an independent communicative function. Words, phraseological units, phrases are the names of objects, signs, actions, performing a nominative function in the language. Communication - this is the property of the sentence to reflect some specific situation. According to its content between the word, for example, winter and a single sentence Winter! - huge difference. Word winter simply names a certain class of real phenomena, while the sentence Winter!- is no longer just a name, but a statement about the presence of this phenomenon at a given moment in time and in this particular situation. This statement in the sentence is also accompanied by certain emotional connotations. It is believed that the external, formal expression of communicativeness is primarily intonation.
The sentence acts as a minimal communicative unit. In terms of size, the sentence can be as a separate word - Night. It's evening. Cold. It's getting light and a detailed syntactic construction, including a large number of words: A copper lance over his very back swept and pierced into the ground, burning with a desire to satiate himself with human flesh.(Homer).
The second main feature of the proposal is predicativity. This concept is ambiguously interpreted in different grammatical concepts, but in any of them it plays a significant role. A.A. Shakhmatov noted that the simplest communication consists of a combination of two representations into a predicative, that is, a dependent, causal, genetic connection. In the most general sense predicativity is defined as the relation of the information contained in the statement to reality. Some authors believe that predicativity is manifested and revealed in grammatical categories. modality, time and faces. Others believe that predicativity is expressed mainly through two categories - tense and person, highlighting modality as a separate, independent feature of the sentence. In any case, predicativity is correlated with modality, since in real statements all categories - communicativeness, predicativity, modality - exist together, forming one of the central units of syntax - a sentence.
Category time in syntax it is interpreted as the correlation of the content of the utterance with the moment of speech. With the help of verb forms, time can be indicated as preceding, congruent orsubsequent to the moment of speech : The sea was noisy. The sea is noisy. The sea will be noisy tomorrow.Category faces is defined as the relation of a communicative situation to the speaker. The category of a person is manifested either in the direct attribution of the situation to the speaker, or in its relation to the interlocutor (interlocutors) or a third person (persons), or in the comparison of an impersonal grammatical subject with the speaker. In a sentence, the syntactic category of a person is expressed using personal pronouns and/or personal forms of the verb. The negative (zero) form of the person (not-I) is expressed using various parts of speech that occupy the position of a grammatical subject. Thus, the communicative content of the utterance I'm writing a letter relates to the speaker You are writing a letter with the speaker's interlocutor, He writes a letter- with a third party. In a statement It's raining impersonal subject rain (not-me) opposed to the speaker as the subject of speech.
Predicativity is sometimes interpreted as a property of a predicate included in a two-part sentence. Predicative connection or predicative relations are then called relations connecting the subject and the predicate, as well as the logical subject and the predicate of the judgment. Predicativity in such usage is already comprehended not as a category inherent in the sentence as such, but as a feature inherent in such sentences in which the subject and the predicate can be distinguished.
Modality considered as a category expressing the attitude of the speaker to the content of the statement. The speaker can affirm or deny something, desire or demand, suggest, induce, request, etc. Modality is expressed mainly in the verb forms of the mood. In the Russian language, in the forms of the indicative mood, the modal meaning of reality is fixed, expressing the correspondence of the content of the statement to reality: The boy went to school. The boy goes to school. The boy will go to school. In the forms of the imperative and subjunctive moods, the modal meaning of irreality is expressed, that is, the discrepancy between the content of the statement and reality. Interrogative intonation expresses unreality, regardless of the form of mood. The communicative situation in such statements appears as possible, desired, required: You should go to the cinema. Let him go to the movies. Bring me a book. Where is the boy?
The problem of the sentence and its definition in grammar
The sentence, along with the word, is one of the two basic units of language. The study of the sentence and its categories deals with syntax, which studies the patterns of word combinations and the construction of sentences, the patterns of inclusion of sentences in a unit of a higher level. The sentence as the basic unit of syntax is a communicative unit, i.e. aimed at communication in a particular situation. Therefore, all the problems that reflect the patterns of speech construction are connected with the sentence. There are different approaches to the study of the sentence: 1 - structural, 2 - logical, 3 - semantic. They are determined by which of the three factors reflected in the proposal is taken as a basis: the linguistic form, the form of thought, or objective reality. One of the most difficult problems in syntax so far has been the definition of a sentence as a basic syntactic unit. At present, it is customary to single out the main features of a sentence as a syntactic unit. These features include: 1 - the communicative function of the sentence, 2 - its predicativity, 3 - its modal characteristics, 4 - the relative completeness of its content and 5 - its grammatical and intonation structure. In addition to these five features, VG Admoni identifies seven main aspects of the proposal, which in general must be taken into account when characterizing it.
NOMINATIVE AND COMMUNICATIVE ASPECTS OF THE OFFER
The complexity of the problems associated with the sentence as the main syntactic unit of the language is due to the fact that the sentence is a multifaceted formation, which reflects three fundamental elements: the linguistic structure, objective reality and the person speaking, with his thoughts and feelings, emotions and relationships. Already at the beginning of the 20th century, the problem of the interaction and relationship between the nominative and communicative aspects of a sentence was outlined in grammars, which revealed its sharpness especially in the light of the question of the relationship between language and speech. One of the first who proposed to distinguish between constant and variable elements in a sentence was the famous French linguist C. Bally, who introduced the concepts of dictum and modus.
The problem of modeling in syntax arose in the middle of the 20th century and was largely determined by purely applied needs. In linguistics, numerous works have appeared in which these problems are associated with the identification of sentence patterns. The main features of the proposal model were formulated. At the same time, in a number of works it was noted that the traditional theory of sentence members actually acted as the first attempt at modeling. An important role in the modeling process was played by the theory of verb valency, which was the basis of the German sentence model. To date, many modeling issues remain debatable. A great contribution to the development of this issue was made by O.I. Moskalskaya, who was the first to propose a definition of a semantic model and outlined ways to solve many controversial issues in this area of linguistics.
One of the important questions of theoretical grammar has always been the question of the classification of sentences. Already in traditional grammar we find a variety of approaches to the classification of a simple sentence, which were based on different criteria. So, according to the purpose of the statement, traditional grammar distinguishes between declarative, interrogative and imperative sentences. According to the composition of the main and secondary members, all proposals can be divided into two-part and one-part, which in turn are not a homogeneous group. By the presence of members of the proposal, non-common and widespread proposals are distinguished. According to the type of predicate, sentences with a simple verb, complex verb, nominal predicate are distinguished, according to the type of subject - personal, impersonal sentences. In a special group, some authors distinguish indefinitely personal sentences.
The concept of predicativity is basic for all theoretical grammar. This is one of the most important syntactic categories, which, together with the categories of time and modality, forms a sentence as an actualized unit of speech - an utterance. Various points of view have been expressed on the issue of predicativity in linguistics throughout its development, in the works of leading domestic and foreign linguists we find different interpretations of this concept. One of the most difficult issues in this problem is the question of the relationship between such close concepts as predicativity and predication. Most authors consider predicativity to be a grammatical expression of predication, which, in turn, establishes a connection between the subject and feature of a given sentence and a specific situation. The ways of expressing predicativity in each language differ in their originality and specificity. Thus, in German, the linguistic expression of predicativity is the categories of person, tense, and modality. An important issue is the difference between predicative relations and other types of syntactic relations in a sentence. In addition to the central concept of predicativity, in theoretical grammar there are also the concepts of polypredicativity, semipredicativity and latent predicativity, which also reveal specificity in each particular language.
The order of words in a particular language is directly determined by the presence or absence of inflectional elements in a given language, and therefore is directly related to the type of language. There are the following forms of word order: 1) contact - distant; 2) prepositive - postpositive; 3) fixed - non-fixed; 4) original (normal) - modified (shifted). In each language, the word order developed throughout the entire historical development, reflected the main features of this language, and changed depending on changes in the morphological system. The peculiarities of the word order of the German sentence are primarily associated with such a phenomenon of German syntax as the frame construction.
MODALITY OF THE OFFER, ITS TYPES AND WAYS OF EXPRESSION
Modality is one of the most important features of a sentence. Questions related to modality, as well as questions related to predicativity, have always been at the center of attention of grammar theorists. Points of view on modality as a syntactic category in the works of domestic and foreign linguists differ significantly. Academician VV Vinogradov made a great contribution to the development of this problem. In accordance with his concept, three aspects of the modality of a simple sentence are distinguished, among which one stands out - mandatory for the formation of a sentence, the other two are optional, i.e. may or may not be present in the proposal. Like no other syntactic category, modality reflects not only the specifics of the language system, but is also directly related to the sociocultural characteristics of the society that speaks the given language. An important function in the formation of this syntactic category is performed by modal verbs, whose role in expressing varieties of modality in modern German is extremely significant. This is due, not least, to the distinction in the German language system of primary and secondary meanings of modal verbs, which leaves an imprint on their attitude to the implementation of one of the types of modality.
COMMUNICATIVE MEMBER OF THE OFFER
The problems of communication have become in linguistics, and in particular in theoretical grammar, especially relevant with the development of a functional approach to the study of linguistic phenomena. The result of numerous studies in this area was the theory of communicative (actual) division of the sentence, which received full coverage in the works of domestic and foreign Germanists. In German grammar, the origins of this theory go back to the works of G. Paul, who, one of the first German grammarians, drew attention to the role of the listener in the communication process. His ideas were further developed in the works of K. Boost, E. Drach, which, in the end, led to the creation of the theory of communicative division of the sentence. These authors consider the German sentence as a dissected field, while emphasizing the role of the first place in the German sentence. The concepts of "theme" and "rheme" of the sentence introduced in the theory of communicative division of the sentence can be considered as fundamental for the entire further development of the theory of communication. Important in this topic is the question of linguistic means of expressing the thematic-rhematic articulation of a sentence, which in each language has its own pronounced specificity.
DIFFICULT SENTENCE
Compound sentence and its classification
A complex sentence is a polypredicative structure, i.e. it consists of at least two (or more) predicative relations. Traditionally, two types of complex sentences are distinguished: 1) a compound sentence (parataxis) and 2) a complex sentence (hypotaxis). With regard to a compound sentence, the problem arises of delimiting it from a successive series of simple sentences. At the same time, autosemantics and synsemantics of the components of such a complex whole are important. The theory of autosemanticity and synsemanticity was most fully developed by E.V. Gulyga, who presented a complete system of such types of complex sentences. The modern theoretical grammar of the German language offers various classifications of semantic links within parataxis: 1) connecting; 2) adversative; 3) separating; 4) causal; 5) investigative; 6) explanatory, etc. The opinions of linguists on the number and nature of semantic links between the elementary sentences of parataxis differ significantly.
Complex sentence in traditional and
modern grammar
A complex sentence (hypotaxis) is one of those types of complex sentences that until now remains the focus of attention of grammarians. Traditional grammar offered various types of classification of subordinate clauses, such as: a) according to the place of the subordinate clause in the hypotaxis; b) by type of connection with the main sentence; c) according to the degree of dependence on the main sentence; 4) according to the function that the subordinate clause performs as part of the hypotaxis. Of greatest interest and the greatest discrepancy in points of view is the last classification, according to which theoretical grammar singled out subjective clauses, predicative clauses, additional, attributive and various types of adverbial clauses (subordinate clauses, tenses, purposes, reasons, etc.). In the middle of the 20th century, repeated attempts were made to revise this classification, however, in general, the results of new theoretical searches were reduced to the same basic semantic-syntactic types.
The text as a unit of syntax is a relatively new object of study for grammar. The novelty for the theoretical grammar of the text as a subject of research has put on the agenda the problem of determining the place of the text in the system of syntactic units. As a result, the formation of text linguistics as a specific section of grammar took place, due to which many traditional problems received new coverage. One of the most controversial issues during the formation of text linguistics was the issue related to different approaches to the definition of the term "text". This issue remains controversial to this day. Numerous works are devoted to the study of text-forming elements of the language, among which anaphoric and cataphoric elements stand out. Much attention is paid to such an issue as the composition of the text. Intermediate forms between sentences and the whole text are distinguished, among which are such super-phrasal units as a paragraph, paragraph, chapter, etc.
Lexicology
The complexity, multidimensionality of the proposal makes it difficult to develop its definition. There are many definitions of this syntactic unit, to which new ones continue to be added. An adequate definition should contain an indication of the generic affiliation of the phenomenon being defined, and, at the same time, it should mark those of the many properties inherent in it that determine the specifics of this particular phenomenon, thus constituting its essence.
In the history of the development of Russian syntax, one can note attempts to define a sentence in terms of logical, psychological and formal grammatical. The representative of the first direction, F. I. Buslaev, defined the sentence as "a judgment expressed in words." [Buslaev, 1959, p.258] Buslaev also believed that "in the language, the exact reflection and expression of logical categories and relations find their expression." [Buslaev, 1959: 270]. Proceeding from the fact that “a grammatical sentence is not at all identical and not parallel with a logical judgment,” the representative of the second direction, A. A. Potebnya, considered the sentence as “a psychological (not logical) judgment with the help of a word, i.e., a combination of two mental units: explained (psychological subject) and explaining (psychological predicate), forming a complex sentence. He considered the presence of a verb in a personal form in it as an essential feature of a sentence. [Potebnya, 1958, p. 81-84]. F. F. Shakhmatov built his sentence theory on a logical and psychological basis and defined the sentence as follows: “A sentence is a unit of speech perceived by the speaker and listener as a grammatical whole that serves to verbally express a unit of thought.” Shakhmatov considered the combination of representations in a special act of thinking to be the psychological basis of the sentence [Pospelov, 1990, p. 127]. The founder of the formal grammatical direction F. F. Fortunatov considers the sentence as one of the types of phrases: “Among the grammatical phrases used in full sentences of speech, those phrases that we have the right to call grammatical sentences are dominant in the Russian language, because they contain, as parts, a grammatical subject and a grammatical predicate.
The members of the sentence by representatives of this direction were determined from a morphological point of view, that is, they were characterized as parts of speech. [Fortunatov, 1956: 188-189]. V. V. Vinogradov takes the structural-semantic principle as the basis for the definition of a sentence: “A sentence is an integral unit of speech grammatically designed according to the laws of a given language, which is the main means of forming, expressing and communicating thoughts.” [Vinogradov, 1955: 254]. In order to give an operationally applicable definition of a sentence, one should proceed from its formal or functional features. In academic linguistics, we find the following definition of a sentence: “A sentence is the minimum unit of human speech, which is a grammatically organized combination of words that has a certain semantic and intonational completeness. Being a unit of communication, the sentence is at the same time a unit of formulating and expressing thoughts; the unity of language and thinking finds its manifestation in it. A sentence can express a question, an impulse, etc. The grammatical basis of a sentence is formed by predicativity, which consists of the categories of time, person, modality, and intonation of the message. [Rosenthal, 1976, p.311]. We consider it possible to dwell on this definition as the most objective and conclusive. Although we cannot fail to notice that there is still debate about the definition of a syntactic unit, which once again proves that a sentence is a complex unit in its structure. There is no consensus on the definition of a complex sentence. If a simple sentence is a monopredicative unit and it expresses “a single correlation with the speech situation, the speaker’s assessment of the entire objective content at once” [Beloshapkova, 1981, p. , the speaker's assessment of the objective content in parts. [ibid].
The predicative units of a complex sentence, although built according to the models of a simple sentence, are in such close interaction in semantic and grammatical terms that it is mostly impossible to divide complex sentences into separate independent simple sentences, since the parts of a complex sentence are united both structurally and in meaning. , and intonation. This opinion is shared by such scientists as F. I. Buslaev: “From the combination of two or more sentences, a complex one is formed, the so-called, in contrast to a simple one, not connected with another.” [Buslaev, 1959: 279]. "Syntactic whole" calls V. V. Vinogradov complex sentences. [Vinogradov, 1955: 287]. D. E. Rosenthal gives a broader definition of a complex sentence: “Complex sentences are sentences consisting of two or more parts, similar in form to a simple sentence, but forming a single whole, semantic, constructive and intonational whole.” [Rosenthal, 1976, p. 432]. In Germanistics, the following definition is given: “A complex sentence in structure is opposed to a simple one, it is polypredicative, i.e., a predicative relation characterizing the mutual relations of the subject and the predicate is presented in the sentence two or more times. The components of a complex sentence are traditionally considered also as sentences. Perhaps, however, this is simply not the perfection of terminology. (Thus, in English, the term “clause”* is used to designate a polypredicative unit). “The subordinate clause is not a sentence, just because it is devoid of independent communicative significance.
It is used in the process and for the purposes of speech communication only as a component of a larger syntactic unit - a complex sentence. Even parts of a compound sentence are inadequate as units of communication. Often their mutual relations of cause - effect, a certain temporal organization, etc., and to break them, to single out each of the parts of a complex sentence into an independent sentence, means to weaken or break the syntactic and semantic links existing between them. In addition, the unfinished parts of a complex sentence can convey their syntactic connection with their own kind and intonation. Being isolated from the rest of the complex sentence, such constructions turn out to be intonationally different from the sentence. The connection between the parts of a complex sentence is carried out through conjunctions, demonstrative words (pronouns), other special words (adverbs, introductory words, etc.), structural incompleteness of any part and common to all parts of the predicative unit. “The order of the predicative unit in a complex sentence can be relatively free or closed:
