1. Introduction.
2.
The problem of the definition of the phrase. The phrase and the
sentence.
3. Principles of the
classification of phrases.
a) Syntactic relations within
a phrase.
b) Morphological expression
and position of components.
1. Syntax is a part of grammar
which studies the combinability of words and the structure of
sentences. It also studies means of sentence connection and units
larger than a sentence.
Words within a sentence are
grouped into phrases (word-groups, word-clusters. word-combinations):
John
and
Mary
saw an old man crossing the street.
So
phrases are sentence constituents. But phrases can be also treated as
units built by combining words outside the sentence: a
man —
an
old man; old—very old.
Thus the combinability of words, or valency, can be studied both
under syntax and under morphology. We should distinguish between
grammatical combinability, lexical combinability or collocability and
lexico-grammatical combinability. Collocability is studied by
lexicology.
Lexicology
also studies non-motivated word-groups, or phraseological units.
Grammar studies free phrases, allowing the substitution of each
component.
2.
At present there are two approaches to the definition of a phrase.
According to a narrower definition a phrase is a unity of two or more
notional words. According to a wider definition any syntactic group
of words can be treated as a phrase. Consequently, phrases may be
built by combining notional words (an
old man),
notional and functional words (in
the corner), functional
words (out
of).
Notional phrases are more independent structurally and semantically,
other types function as part of notional phrases.
Like
a word, a phrase is a naming unit. Phrases name different phenomena
of the outside world: a
round table, yesterday morning, to speak fluently.
Like
a word, a phrase may have a system of forms. Each component of a
phrase may undergo grammatical changes without destroying the
identity of the phrase: a
young man
— younger
men.
The
naming function of the phrase distinguishes it from the sentence,
whose main function is communicative. Therefore the structure «N+V»
is traditionally excluded from phrases.
However,
another approach is possible. The structure «N+V» can be
regarded at two levels of syntactic analysis: the level of
combinability (phrase level, pre-functional level) and the level of
function (sentence level). At the level of combinability the
combination «N+V»‘ can be treated together with other types
of phrases, as it is a syntactico-semantic unity of two notional
words, naming certain events or situations. At the level of function
it differs essentially from other types of phrases, as it constitutes
the unit of communication, whereas other types of phrases are naming
units only, functioning as sentence constituents.
Thus a phrase is usually
smaller than a sentence, but it may also function as a sentence
(N+V), and it may be larger than a sentence, as the latter may
consist of one word.
3.
Phrases may be classified partly by their inner structure (syntactic
relations between the components, morphological expression and
position of components, or by order and arrangement) and partly by
their external functioning (distribution, functions of the
components).
The
first English scholar to concern himself with the study of phrase in
English was Ben Johnson, a well-known playwright (1573-1637). He
distinguishes different types of phrases according to their
head-words. The term “phrase” is not used in Ben Johnson’s
grammar, but his description of word-combinations clearly indicates
that he distinguishes noun-phrases and verb-phrases. Ben Johnson
believes that analytical tense forms should be discussed in syntax
equally with other verb combinations.
One
of the most influential English grammars in the 18th
century was Bishop Lowth’s “Short Introduction to English
Grammar” (1762). Dr. Lowth was the first to use the term “phrase”.
He distinguished 12 main patterns of phrases. To give a short sketch
of his classification, it can be represented by traditional symbols
widely used in modern linguistic papers:
1.
N+V I
am; Thomas is loved.
2.
V+N A
calf becomes an ox.
3.
V+A Life
is short.
4.
Vtr+N to
open a door
5.
Vf+Vinf boys
love to play
6.
N’s+N Milton’s
poems
N+of+N The
poems of Milton
7.
N+N King
George
8.
A+N a
wise man
P+N a
loving father
9.
A+Vinf worthy
to die
fit
to be trusted
10.V+adv read
well
11.
V+prp+N read
with care
12.
A(positive)+as+N white
as snow
A(comparative)+than+N wiser
than I
A(superlative)+of+N greatest
of all
Dr.
Lowth failed to see the importance of arranging his 12 types of
phrases on some principle, for example, listing first all noun
combinations, then verb combinations and so on.
The
19th
century grammars put forward no theory of phrase.
Of
all the books published in the first half of the 20th
century O.Jespersen’s grammatical studies present the most
interesting ideas on the theory of phrase structure. O. Jespersen
introduces the theory of three ranks based on the principle of
determination. Analysing the example terribly
cold weather,
O. Jespersen states “the words are evidently not on the same
footing” –
weather
is independent and is called primary, cold
is
secondary and terribly
is tertiary.
O.
Jespersen lists numerous cases of words used in the three ranks and
shows how words can function in ranks unusual for them. He believes
that adjectives can be used as primaries as in get the better of
something, the absent are always at fault. But in nearly all the
examples O. Jespersen gives cases with substantivized adjectives,
thus failing to prove his statement. O. Jespersen states that
substantives are often used as secondaries.
A
secondary may be joined to a primary in two ways: junction
and
nexus.
These terms are used to differentiate between attributive and
predicative relations (relations between the subject and the
predicate), or the relations of subordination and interdependence.
The components of the phrase
can be connected by different types of
syntactic
relations. H. Sweet stated that the most general type of relation is
that
of the modifier and modified (head-word and adjunct), or the relation
of subordination.
He
also distinguished the relation of coordination.
The
structural theory of word-groups, worked out by the American school
of descriptive linguistics, founded by L. Bloomfield, divides
word-groups into two main types: endocentric
(headed) and exocentric
(non- headed). The criteria for distinguishing between them are
distribution and substitution. Endocentric phrases are word
combinations in which at least one of the constituents can function
on a higher level:
An
old man
came in. —- A
man
came in.
Poor
John
ran away. —-
John
ran away.
The
distribution of an exocentric group differs from the distribution of
its components:
A man came in.
Beside John
With me
In the house
By running away
None
of the elements can be used to substitute the whole phrase at a
higher level.
L.
Bloomfield points out that in any language there are more endocentric
constructions than exocentric. Thus, it’s natural that he focuses
his attention on endocentric phrases. He distinguishes two kinds of
endocentric phrases: coordinate
and subordinative.
In coordinate phrases the elements constituting the phrase are on the
same footing – boys
and girls. Any of
its members can be used instead of the whole phrase.
The
structure of subordinative endocentric constructions is different –
only one element, which is called the head, can be used instead of
the whole phrase; the other elements in the phrase are subordinate to
the head — very
fresh milk.
Very quickly
Thus
we may single out 3 types of syntactic relations within word-groups:
subordination, coordination, interdependence. Accordingly, phrases
are usually classified into subordinate, coordinate and predicative.
Sometimes
a fourth type, appositive phrases, is mentioned: doctor
Brown, Mr. Campbell, the lawyer.
Apposition resembles coordination syntactically, linking units of the
same level, but appositives are co-referential and semantically their
relations are closer to subordination.
Phrases
may be also classified according to the morphological expression of
their members (N+V, Adv.+Adj., N+and+N), position of the components
(A+N, N+A) and the number of components (V+N,
V+N+N).
Subordinate phrases are
classified according to the morphological expression of the headword
into noun phrases, verb phrases, adjective phrases, etc. Further
division is based on the morphological expression and position of the
adjunct (modifier, tail). In noun phrases adjuncts in preposition, or
premodifiers, tend to be single words (A+N, N+N, Part+N), adjuncts in
postposition, or postmodifiers, tend to be phrases and clauses. There
are also phrases with multiple premodiflcation, adjuncts being
arranged in a strict order:
predeterminers,
determiners, postdeterminers, adjectives, nouns: All
the ten old red brick houses.
In
verb phrases adjuncts usually follow the head-word: V+N, V+Prep+N,
V+Verbals.
In adjective phrases pre- and
postmodifiers differ morphologically:
Adv+Adj., Adj+Inf.,
Adj+Prep+N.
The
syntactic head-word of a subordinate group is not always the semantic
one: a
problem to solve; to give a smile.
Patterns
of combinability of classes and subclasses of words are studied by
practical grammar. Their knowledge is essential for effective
communication.
Lecture Eight
SENTENCE
1.
General characteristics.
2.
Predicativity. Predication. Secondary predication.
3.
Classification of sentences. Syntactic categories and the
sentence-paradigm.
1.
A sentence is the largest and most complicated unit of language and
at the same time it is the smallest unit of speech, or the smallest
utterance. In speech sentences are not given ready-made; they are
created by the speaker. But they are built according to patterns
existing in the language. So concrete sentences belong to speech.
Patterns, according to which they are built, belong to language.
A
sentence has two basic meaningful functions: naming and
communicative. The communicative function of the sentence
distinguishes it from phrases and words, which have one function —
naming.
Compare
the following structures:
(1)
The
doctor’s arrival.
(2)
The
doctor arrived.
These two structures name the
same event, but (1) is not correlated with the situation of speech
and does not convey information about the reality or the time of the
event; (2) is correlated with the situation of speech and shows that
the event took place in the past.
Sentences
name situations and events of objective reality and convey
information, expressing complete thoughts or feelings. So the
sentence is a structural, semantic and communicative unity.
Accordingly, the three main aspects of the sentence are syntactic,
semantic and logico-communicative.
The syntactic structure of the
sentence can be analyzed at two levels:
pre-functional
(sentence constituents are words and word groups) and functional
(sentence constituents are parts of the sentence). There is no direct
correspondence between units of these levels.
John
wrote a letter. NVN
— SPO
John
had a snack. NVN
— SP
The
semantic structure of the sentence is a reflection of a certain
situation or event which includes a process as its dynamic centre,
the doer and the objects of the process and certain circumstances and
conditions of its realization.
The semantic structure of the
sentence is often called deep structure,
the
syntactic structure is called surface structure. There is no direct
correspondence
between deep and surface structure:
John
opened the door.
NVN
(SPO)
— doer (agent), action, object.
The
key opened the door.
NVN
(SPO) — instrument, action, object.
These
two aspects characterize the sentence as a unit of language. The
logico-conununicative aspect characterizes the sentence as a unit of
speech, or utterance. The sentence as a unit of communication usually
consists of two parts: the topic for discussion, i.e. something,
about which a statement is made and the information about the topic,
or the statement itself.
This
division into
two
parts, the theme and the rheme, is called the actual sentence
division, or the functional sentence perspective.
There
is one more aspect of the sentence as a unit of speech — the use of
sentences in social interaction, their function in particular
contexts of use. For example, the statement I
have
no cigarettes
can be interpreted in certain contexts as a command or request. So
sentences can be analyzed from the point of view of the intentions of
the speaker, the effect of the utterance on the interlocuter, the
appropriateness of the utterance in a given context. This aspect is
called pragmatic.
Different
aspects
of
the sentence are reflected in numerous definitions, which may be
logical, psychological, structural, etc. It is difficult to give an
all-embracing definition (see, for example, M.Y.Blokh).
The
following two definitions have been most often used in grammar books:
(1) A
sentence is a group of words that expresses a complete thought
and (2) A
sentence is a group of words that contains an unsubordinated subject
and predicate.
The first of these, a
“notional” definition, fails because it is wholly subjective.
There is no objective standard by which to judge the completeness of
a thought. On the other hand, the second definition is not more than
half truth, for it rules out all verbless sentences, which may be
just as “complete” and independent as the verb sentences.
According
to Khaimovich and Rogovskaya: The
sentence is a communicative unit made up of words (and
word-morphemes) in conformity with their combinability and
structurally united by intonation (structural form) and predicativity
(structural meaning of the sentence).
Predicativity
is the relation of the thought of a sentence to the situation of
speech. Predicativity has three main components: modality, time and
person, expressed by the categories of mood, tense and person. So the
predicate verb is the main means of expressing predicativity.
The
person component of predicativity is also expressed by the subject.
Thus predicativity is expressed by the subject-predicate group, or
predication. Predication constitutes the basic structure of the
sentence.
In
the sentence — He
thought over it for a moment – the
predication is he
thought.
He
indicates the person, thought
–
the tense and mood components of predicativity. In the sentence Show
it to me
there is one-word predication, show
containing the mood component of predicativity. The person component
is only implied.
Predicativity
is also expressed by intonation, which is the essential feature of
the sentence as a unit of speech.
The
simplest relation to the situation of speech can be found in a
sentence like Snowstorm
(Rain),
which when pronounced with proper intonation merely states the
phenomenon observed.
The
main parts of the sentence are those whose function it is to make the
predication. They are the subject and the predicate of the sentence.
Khaimovich
and Rogovskaya consider that it is essential to apply the same
principles to the subject and the predicate. The correlation between
the structural and the notional in the principal parts of the
sentence may be of four types:
-
the
structural and the notional are united in one word – Birds
fly; -
the
structural and the notional are in different units – It
is necessary to add; -
only
the structural is given in the sentence – Is
it raining?
– It
is; -
only
the notional is present – What
is he doing? – Sleeping.
In interrogative and negative
sentences the structural (part of) the predicate is usually detached
from the notional (part of) the predicate and is placed before the
subject or the negation.
Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]
- #
- #
- #
- #
- #
- #
- #
- #
- #
- #
- #
Definition of Distinguish
to recognize something or someone as being unique
Examples of Distinguish in a sentence
A police detective often finds himself in the position of having to distinguish between a lie and a truth.
🔊
Unfortunately the witness could not distinguish her attacker in the photo lineup.
🔊
The wine connoisseur is able to distinguish between a thousand different wines.
🔊
Because my mother’s speech was slurred after her stroke, I often found it hard to distinguish her words.
🔊
The piano teacher could easily distinguish a perfect performance from a flawed one.
🔊
Other words in the Learn category:
Most Searched Words (with Video)
Synonym: define, detect, dignify, honor, see. Similar words: anguish, distinct, distinction, distinctive, existing, assist in, consist in, testing. Meaning: [dɪ’stɪŋgwɪʃ] 
v. 1. mark as different 2. detect with the senses 3. be a distinctive feature, attribute, or trait; sometimes in a very positive sense 4. make conspicuous or noteworthy 5. identify as in botany or biology, for example.
Random good picture Not show
1 distinguish what is worth reading.
2 I can distinguish them at a distance.
3 We can distinguish between gold and silver.
4 It is important to distinguish between cause and effect.
5 He could no longer distinguish between illusion and reality.
6 Can you distinguish the twins apart?
7 We can distinguish five meanings of the word ‘mad’.
8 Sometimes reality and fantasy are hard to distinguish.
9 Can you distinguish right from wrong?
10 He can distinguish a genuine antique from a reproduction.
11 His attorney argued that Cope could not distinguish between right and wrong.
12 At what age are children able to distinguish between right and wrong?
13 How do you distinguish between a star and a planet?
14 Sometimes it is really hard to distinguish right from wrong.
15 He’s colour-blind and can’t distinguish between red and green easily.
16 People who cannot distinguish between colours are said to be colour — blind .
17 It was hard to distinguish one twin from the other.
18 Some people find it difficult to distinguish right from wrong.
19 What characteristics distinguish the Americans from the Canadians?
20 It’s important to distinguish fact from fiction.
21 A person with good eyesight can distinguish distant object.
22 We have to learn to distinguish fact from fable.
23 Can you distinguish the different musical instruments playing now?
24 There were cries,[www.Sentencedict.com] calls. He could distinguish voices.
25 It’s important to distinguish between business and pleasure.
26 I couldn’t distinguish between some of the French vowels.
27 It’s important distinguish fact from fiction.
28 She could not distinguish one child from another.
29 Can you distinguish between those two objects?
30 He was eager to get out of the ruck and distinguish himself in some way.
More similar words: anguish, distinct, distinction, distinctive, existing, assist in, consist in, testing, disturbing, dish, ring up, bring up, spring up, disturb, distant, burst in, instinct, distance, distress, district, distract, distribute, fishing, burst into, artistic, abstinence, clandestine, distribution, by this time, realistic.
The distinction between language and speech, which was first introduced by Ferdinand de Saussure (1857–1913) in his book on general linguistics, has become one of the cornerstones of modern linguistics. Most generally these two notions are understood in the following way:
– language is the system of units used in the process of speaking by all members of a community;
– speech is the process of using articulate (distinctly uttered) sounds to convey information.
Broader definitions of the notions are as follows:
Language is the system, phonological, lexical, and grammatical, which lies at the base of all speaking. It is a source which every speaker and writer has to draw upon (rely on) if he/she is to be understood by other speakers of the language.
Speech, on the other hand, is the manifestation of language, or its use by various speakers and writers of the given language. Thus any material for analysis we encounter, orally or in a written form, is always a product of speech, namely something either pronounced or written by some individual speaker or writer, or a group of speakers or writers. There is no other way for a scholar to get at language than through its manifestation in speech.
In the process of speech we use many language units to code the information we are going to convey, therefore any instance of speech is a particular realization of a language. As we are concerned with grammar only we will not dwell on the problem of language system in phonology and lexicology, but we will concentrate on the system of grammar and its manifestation in speech where, of course, it can never appear isolated from phonology and lexicology. Actual sentences pronounced by a speaker are the result of organizing words drawn from the word stock according to a pattern drawn from its grammatical system.
Thus, in stating that English nouns have a distinction of two numbers, singular and plural, and that there are several ways of expressing the category of plural number in nouns, we are stating facts of language, that is, elements of that system which a speaker or a writer of English has to draw on (to draw on – to make use of supply of smth.). But, for instance, a concrete phrase very fine weather, is a fact of speech, created by the individual speaker for his own purposes, and founded on knowledge, (a) of a syntactical pattern in question “adverb+adjective+noun”, and (b) of the words which he/she arranges according to the pattern [8; 6–7].
The basic units of language and speech are: the phoneme, the morpheme, the word and the sentence. The definitions of these units have never been generally agreed on, yet the following can serve as some brief functional characteristics.
The phoneme is the smallest distinctive unit. The phoneme [b], for instance, is the only distinctive feature marking the difference between tale [teil] and table [teibl].
The morpheme is the smallest meaningful unit. Un-fail-ing-ly, for instance, contains four meaningful parts, that is four morphemes.
The word is the smallest naming unit. Though the words terror, terrible, terrific, terrify contain more than one morpheme each, they are the smallest units naming a certain feeling, certain properties and a certain action respectively.
The sentence is the smallest communication unit which expresses a complete thought or an idea. It rains is a sentence because it communicates a certain particular idea. Though a sentence contains words, it is not merely a group of words (or other units), but something integral, a structural unity built in accordance with one of the patterns existing in a given language. All the sounds of a sentence are united by typical intonation. All the meanings are interlaced according to some pattern to make one communication. And a communication is a directed thought [24; 11, 220]. It is exactly the ability to express the complete idea or some meaningful thought that makes a sentence a sentence and distinguishes it, for example, from a phrase.
The mentioned units (the phoneme, the morpheme, the word and the sentence) are units of different levels of language structure. The phoneme is a unit of the lowest level, the sentence – of the highest. A unit of a higher level usually contains one or more units of the preceding level. But the higher unit cannot be reduced to the sum of those lower units since it has a quality not inherent in the units of the lower level. For example, the naming power of the word length is not inherent in the two morphemes it contains. The communicating power of the sentence It rains is not inherent in the two words it contains.
Vice versa, a combination of units of a certain level does not make a unit of a higher level unless the combination acquires the properties of the units of that higher level. The combination of morphemes -ing-ly is not a word since it names nothing. The combination of words of the teacher is not a sentence as long as it communicates nothing [24; 7–8].
The units of each level can be analyzed as to their inner structure, the classes they belong to in the language system (otherwise, their paradigmatic relations), and the combinations they form in speech (or their syntagmatic relations). In the light of all the above mentioned we shall assume that the structure of various units and the classes they form (paradigmatic relations) are the sphere of language, while the combinations the same units form in the process of communication (syntagmatic relations) are the sphere of speech.
It goes without saying that language and speech are interdependent and interpenetrating. The combinability of every unit depends upon its properties as an element of the language system. On the other hand, the properties of every unit develop in the process of speech. Combinations of units may become stable and develop into new units, as in the case of motor-bicycle, has written, at last etc. [24; 9–10].
The structure, classification and combinability of phonemes is studied by a branch of linguistics called phonology.
The structure, classification and combinability of words is the object of morphology.
Syntax deals with the structure, classification and combinability of sentences.
Morphology and syntax are both parts of grammar. Morphology is a part of grammar that treats meaning and use of classes of words – parts of speech, as they are traditionally referred to. Syntax is another subdivision of grammar that deals with the structure of speech utterances that makes a sentence or a part of a sentence.
The term grammar is used to denote:
1) the objective laws governing the use of the word classes, their forms and their syntactic structures based upon their objective content;
2) the laws of a language as they are understood by a linguist or a group of linguists.
In other words, grammar (Wikepedia Internet Source) is the study of rules governing the use of language. The set of rules governing a particular language is also called the grammar of the language; thus, each language can be said to have its own distinct grammar. Grammar is a part of the general study of language called linguistics. The subfields of modern grammar are phonetics, phonology, morphology, syntax, and semantics. Traditional grammars include only morphology and syntax.
There can also be differentiated several types of grammar. Thus, we may speak of a practical grammar and a theoretical grammar. A practical grammar is the system of rules explaining the meaning and use of words, word forms, and syntactic structures in a way as understood by its author or authors. A theoretical grammar treats the existing points of view on the content and use of words, word forms, syntactic structures and gives attempts to establish (if necessary) new ones.
2. Word as a basic language unit. The structure of words
One of the main properties of a word is its double nature. It is material because it can be heard or seen, and it is immaterial or ideal as far as its meaning is concerned. Therefore, the material aspects of the word (written and oral) will be regarded as its forms, and its meanings (ideal or immaterial aspects ) as its content. When defining the word as “the smallest naming unit” the reference was made primarily to its content, whereas in pointing out the most characteristic features of words we deal chiefly with the form.
The word books can be broken up in two parts: book — and — s. The content of the first part can be rendered as “a written work in a form of a set of printed pages fastened together inside a cover, as a thing to be read” and the meaning of the second part is “plurality”. So, each of the two parts of the word books has both form and content. Such meaningful parts of a word are called morphemes. If we break up the word in some other way, e.g. boo-ks, the resulting parts will not be morphemes, since they have no meanings. The morphemes book — and — s differ essentially:
1) In their relations to reality and thought. Book — is directly associated with some object of reality, even if it does not name it as the word book does (compare bookish). The morpheme — s is connected with the world of reality only indirectly, through the morpheme it is linked with. In combination with the morpheme book — it means “more than one book”. Together with the morpheme table — it refers to “more than one table”. But alone it does not remind us of the notion “more than one” in the same way as, for instance, the morpheme plural — does.
2) In their relations to the word which they are part of. Book — is more independent than — s. Book — makes a word book with a zero morpheme, with the meaning of “singular number”, added, whereas — s cannot make a word with a zero morpheme. It always depends on some other morpheme.
3) In their relations to similar morphemes in other words. The meaning of — s is always relative. In the word books it denotes “plurality”, because books is opposed to book with the zero morpheme of “singularity”. In the word news – s has no plural meaning because there is no “singular” opposite to news. Compare other examples, the morpheme -s shows the meaning of “present tense” in relation to the morpheme — ed in wanted, but at the same time it shows the meaning of the “third person, singular” in relation to the zero morpheme of want. Now we cannot say that book — has one meaning when compared with chair — and another when compared with table -.
Summing up, we can state that, the meanings of the morphemes -s, -ed, being relative, dependent and only indirectly reflecting reality, are grammatical meanings of grammatical morphemes.
Morphemes of the book- type and their meanings are called lexical.
It is a common phenomenon in English that the function of a grammatical morpheme is fulfilled by an apparent word standing separately. The lexical meanings of the words invite, invited and the combination shall invite are the same. The main difference in content is the “present” meaning in invite, the “past” meaning in invited and the “future” meaning in shall invite. These meanings are grammatical. By comparing the relations of invite – invited and invite – shall invite we can see that the function of shall is similar to that of the grammatical morpheme — ed. Thus, being formally a word, since it is characterized by a separate loose position in a sentence (e.g. I shall come tomorrow.), in regard to its content shall is not a word, but a grammatical morpheme. Therefore, since shall has the properties of both a word and a grammatical morpheme, it can be called a grammatical word-morpheme.
Let us now compare the two units: invites and shall invite. They contain the same lexical morpheme invite — and different grammatical morphemes — s and shall. The grammatical morpheme — s is a bound morpheme: it is rigidly connected with the lexical morpheme. The grammatical morpheme shall is a free morpheme or a word-morpheme: it is loosely connected with the lexical morpheme. Owing to the difference in the forms of the grammatical morphemes, there is a difference in the forms of the units invites and shall invite. Invites has the form of one word, and shall invite that of the combination of words.
Units like invites, with bound grammatical morphemes, are called synthetic words. They are words both in form and in content.
Units like shall invite, with free grammatical morphemes, or grammatical word-morphemes, are called analytical words. They are words in content only. In the form they are combinations of words.
Since the difference between synthetic and analytical words is a matter of form, not content, we may speak of synthetic (синтетична або проста форма) and analytical (аналітична або складена форма) forms.
Analytical forms are much more characteristic of English than of Ukrainian. Especially rich in analytical forms is the English verb where they greatly exceed the synthetic forms in number.
Owing to the prevalence of analytical forms, English is usually spoken of as an analytical language, and Ukrainian, Russian, Greek, Latin etc., in which synthetic forms prevail, as synthetic languages.
Besides lexical and grammatical morphemes there exist some intermediate types.
The first morphemes in the words de-part, for-give, and the second morphemes in the words fly-er, home-less resemble grammatical morphemes in their dependence on the lexical morphemes. But they differ from grammatical morphemes in not being relative. Thus, for example, in pairs merciful – merciless, and homeless, jobless, etc., -less retains its meaning (“the absence of smth.”) even if it is not contrasted. Like grammatical morphemes, de-, for-, -er, -less are attached only to some classes of lexical morphemes, but like lexical morphemes they determine the lexical meanings of words. Compare: part and depart, job and jobless. Thus, owing to their double or intermediate nature, they will be called lexico-grammatical morphemes.
De-, for-, -er, -less are bound morphemes. English also possesses free lexico-grammatical morphemes, or lexico-grammatical word-morphemes.
Units of the type stand up, give in, find out resemble analytical words in each having the forms of a combination of words and the content of a word. But there is an essential difference between shall give and give in. Shall does not introduce any lexical meaning, while in does. Shall give differs from give grammatically, while give in differs from give lexically. In this respect give in is similar to forgive. Thus, in is an example of a lexico-grammatical word morpheme.
A word has at least one lexical morpheme. It may also have grammatical and lexico-grammatical morphemes. The lexical morpheme is regarded as the root of the word, all the other bound morphemes as affixes: prefixes, suffixes and infixes.
Position is not the only difference between prefixes and suffixes. Suffixes play a much greater role in the grammatical structure of both English and Ukrainian languages. Firstly, they include grammatical morphemes besides lexico-grammatical ones, whereas prefixes are only lexico-grammatical. Secondly, the lexico-grammatical suffixes are more closely connected with grammatical morphemes than prefixes are. Adding a suffix to the root mostly changes the set of grammatical morphemes attached, which is not typical of prefixes.
Words without their grammatical morphemes (mostly suffixes, often called endings or inflections) are known as stems. In accordance with their structure the following four types of stems are usually distinguished:
1. Simple (прості основи), containing only the root, as in day, dogs, write, wanted, etc.
2. Derivative ( похідні основи), containing affixes or other stem-building elements, as in boyhood, rewrite, strength, etc.
3. Compound (складні основи), containing two or more roots, as in white-wash, pickpocket, appletree, motor-car, brother-in-law, etc.
4. Composite (складені основи), containing free lexico-grammatical word-morphemes or otherwise having the form of a combination of words, as in give up, two hundred and twenty five, at last, in spite of, etc. [24; 12–18].
|
Практические расчеты на срез и смятие При изучении темы обратите внимание на основные расчетные предпосылки и условности расчета… |
Функция спроса населения на данный товар Функция спроса населения на данный товар: Qd=7-Р. Функция предложения: Qs= -5+2Р,где… |
Аальтернативная стоимость. Кривая производственных возможностей В экономике Буридании есть 100 ед. труда с производительностью 4 м ткани или 2 кг мяса… |
Вычисление основной дактилоскопической формулы Вычислением основной дактоформулы обычно занимается следователь. Для этого все десять пальцев разбиваются на пять пар… |
